[Pelican]

I had a problem with efflorescence on one job and got some of Unilock's cleaner for this problem. In using it, it looked, smelled and reacted like muratic acid. Is that all it is? I sure could have saved a few bucks by going to the hardware store if so.

[steve lester]

no, it's different, i beleive it's a cemical reaction.. the cleaner does work for minor problems, you need a good stiff broom and alot of elbow grease, if there is bigger problems use it on the area that needs it at a stronger rate and wash it off real good may need multiple times to get it all.

read the label it says what type of acid it is, if you use muratic it will fade the color of the brick.

[Stonehenge]

Pelican, that's been my experience as well, with other brands of eff. cleaner. So I just stick to the muriatic at $2 a bottle when I need to.

[Pelican]

Originally posted by steve lester
if you use muratic it will fade the color of the brick.

Well that's exactly what the Unilock cleaner did. I used the cleaner exactly according to directions and as I rinsed the walk I watched some of the coloring wash away in the rinse. It did what I needed it to do, I added on to an older job and there was a pretty dramatic difference in the colors of the old and new, plus some efflorescence. The cleaner made the new bricks look older and blended them closer to the originals.

Thanks for the second opinion Jeff, maybe it will save the members a few bucks.

[Uni Bob]

I know this is an older thread I appologize for getting in late.

I don't disagree with Stonehenge. In fact whatever takes care of it is fine by me. Make sure when working with the acids in general to rinse..then rinse, perhaps another rinse or two after that. If some is left to dry on the brick it will destroy it without fail.

I would add that I am not a fan of chemical solutions until it is a last resort.

If the effloresence isn't heavy it will go away through about a winter or so, sometimes quicker.

A point of interest..sometimes the manufacturer will throw in the cleaner if they are asked nice and it is a pretty bad issue. (again..please read my disclaimer!)

[Stoneage3000]

Originally Posted by Stonehenge

Pelican, that's been my experience as well, with other brands of eff. cleaner. So I just stick to the muriatic at $2 a bottle when I need to.

Whatever you use, never use muriatic acid to clean pavers, it can stain the pavers.

[Stonehenge]

Stoneage - how long have you been doing paver work?

[Stonehenge]

Stoneage - Please reconcile your comment with these two pieces of information: This and this.

[Stoneage3000]

It is my understanding that muriatic acid (as packaged and purchased today) is a by-product of other processes - leather tanning for one. This results in contaminants mixed in with the muriatic acid. Some of these contaminants can cause staining (although admittedly I am not aware of this happening often). Another muriatic negative is that the dilution apparently varies quite a lot, meaning even though you dilute it at the same ratio every time, you may get a wide variation of acid strength. If it's too strong, it could etch the pavers; too weak and it won't clean. These are a couple reasons why muriatic acid is so cheap. The hydrochloric acid used in (some?, most?, all?) efflorescence cleaners (products made specifically for pavers) is uncontaminated; a purer form for lack of a better word. The actual amount of hydrochloric acid in these products is also likely to be much more consistant.

If you use muriatic acid with success, keep on using it. I didn't mean to sound as though such use was a sin.

[Stonehenge]

Muriatic acid is a synonym for hydrochloric acid, and while hydrochloric acid is used in tanning, it is not a by-product of tanning. HCl is made by mixing hydrogen chloride and water, and millions of metric tons are manufactured each year (you should read that wiki article I linked to in my previous post). It's true that you can purchase HCl (muriatic) at varying strengths, but I'm unaware of any variances in strength from one bottle to the next. Operator error when diluting or over/under exposure tend to be the culprits in poor performance.

Muriatic acid is not Hydrochloric acid with bits floating in it. It's HCl and water. That's it. If it's 38% HCl, then 38% of the contents of the bottle are HCl, the other 62% is water. I've just checked the MSDS on 4 different sellers of muriatic, and they're all the same. HCl + water. Now I suppose we could debate which water is cleaner, because there's no ready info on the purity of the water for either chemical I linked to in my previous post. But I might suggest that the difference there is negligible. But if you can provide some hard data from early on in the supply chain showing that one muriatic/HCl is better than another, I'd love to see it.

In quoting my post and telling folks to "never do" what I was recommending, you've forced me to defend my position. But I believe the shoe is now on the other foot.