[taylorkh]

I took a TIG course at the local Community College several years ago. Gas lens collet bodies were treated as something exotic, expensive and something they did not have except for a few random pieces of CK Worldwide gas savers which were in the junk box. When I purchased my Diversion 165 back in 2009 I discovered that gas lens collet bodies were common, inexpensive and saved enough gas to be worth while. Since then I have used them almost exclusively. Medium size on the WP17 and the small ones for the WP9.

Recently, thanks to a couple of Jody's recent videos, I learned about the stubby gas lens collet body for the WP17 family of torches. I purchased a couple and all I can say is WOW! Light weight, small size for ease of access in tight places, why use anything else?

So my real question is... Is there any application where the old, non gas lens type of collet body would be preferred?

TIA,

Ken

p.s. If you have a CK Worldwide FlexLock torch (another one Jody "sold" me and want to install a stubby gas lens you need a special CK insulator/heat shield. The special Weldcraft insulator/heat shield (17GLG20) which fits every other WP17 family torch on the planet to a stubby gas lens will not fit the FlexLock. The CK part number for the FlexLock 150 heat shield is 4GHS. The Weldcraft stubby gas lens (17GL332 ), collet (10N24S) and standard 53N cups used for the WP9 will all fit the FlexLock 150 just fine.

[BDoubleU]

I had a similar experience when learning to TIG weld. In many industries you'll find people who have adopted gas lenses because they improve weld quality and save gas by allowing you lower the flow rate and still get good coverage. However, most welders I've seen use gas lenses for a specific reason. I prefer a gas lense - but that's because I spent years working with the aerospace industry and have seen the advantages. However, others may only try a gas lense with presented with the following challenges:

1. Welding a highly reactive metal - whether stainless steel or even titanium - you need a larger envelop of coverage. Stainless can discolor without proper shielding and titanium can be damaged beyond repair. So in these critical applications, it's worth any extra cost (in my mind) to use the best consumables you can get.

2. Extra-long stickout applications. A rule of thumb with standard torch consumables is to keep your stickout less than the cup diameter. Extend much further, even if you crank the gas flow ... and you'll likely see your tungsten turn blue or black from atmospheric contamination. However, using a gas lens allows you to use 3-5X the stickout and still get good gas coverage and a sweet weld. If you're welding in a hard to reach area, using gas lens is the way to go.

Most industries have a "get 'er done" mentality and some have never needed anything but standard consumables to get acceptable results. But, you bring up a good point ... and I think more people could definitely benefit from using a gas lens.

Brent

[nova_70_383]

there are times when a standard collet body is better. in a situation where spatter, or contaminated material pops back. welding aluminum in a repair weld situation where i has been in service is a good example. many times no matter how well u clean the material it still gives you trouble. another example would be welding copper, bronze and brass. the splatter ends up on the nozzel or cup, but it also ends up on the gas lens if your using one. this can ruin it. sometimes you can brush it off but more often then not, you ruin it.

[ajlskater1]

There situations were space is a issue and you can't just pull your tungsten out to get at it, that's why they make like a long neck number 3 or 4 cup for the standard collets.

[taylorkh]

Thanks for the great replies! I have considered the spatter issue. Usually just after welding something which I intentionally did not clean as well as I should and finding spatter on my gas lens I try to remember to switch to a standard collet body for these sort of exercises.

And as for reach... I do have some long nozzles for my medium gas lens collet bodies. I did use one to add a couple of blobs of weld buildup to the inside of the receiver of an old single barrel shotgun. With a little Dremel machining and a replacement ejector pin made from a drill bit the old blaster will pop an empty shell out like it was new! I trust that one day Jody will post a video showing the CK Worldwide micro torch in operation. Then I will just have to get one for those hard to reach spots

That said, perhaps I need to expand my question with a second question... Is there an advantage of the standard collet body over the stubby collet body on the same torch?

Ken

[ajlskater1]

In air cooled torches there is, because everything is bigger it help dissipate heat faster and will usually hold up better. In a big water cooled no they are huge and get in the way LOL.

[taylorkh]

Thanks ajlskater1,

I suppose a larger collet body could dissipate more heat but I am not sure where it would dissipate it to. There will be a little more surface area to radiate heat or pass the heat to the shielding gas. The larger amount of copper would soak up a slug of heat initially but I suspect it would get about as hot as the stubby collet rather quickly. Is the amperage rating of the torch de-rated when a stubby collet is used? I have not been able to find any good references in that regard.

Thanks again,

Ken

[ajlskater1]

In my experience with air cooled torches with the stubby gas lens I have not noticed any difference other than I junked a few collets from the heat. I don't have a lot of experience with air cooled torches I prefer water cooled, which is what I have at my home shop and real job. My buddyhas a air cooled torch with the stubby kit. But than again standard collets warp a lot, I have never tried a wedge style in my buddies torch to see if that would stop the warping.