Hello PrairieDawg, Joe described the physical description of the weld bead that the 6013 would leave. I might expand slightly to say that there will also be less spatter generally when using the 6013 as opposed to the 6011 and the slag will generally clean off easier with the 6013. A couple of other items for you to consider, 6011 might possibly weld on painted, rusty, oily, uncleaned surfaces slightly better than the 6013. So if this is a consideration keep a bit of the 6011 for instances where you encounter those sorts of conditions. These two rods might be run slightly different with regard to rod manipulation, many folks will oscillate the 6011 rod and not the 6013 rod, although, I have run the 6013 with a bit of movement also and had good results. 6011 and 6013 are both really good general purpose smaw electrodes, they can be run in any position and depending on how they are manipulated, either rod can be run uphill or downhill on vertical joints with reasonably good results. If you have the opportunity, get some of each of these rods and play a bit, you'll likely decide rather quickly which one you prefer and as Joe also mentioned their strength ratings are the same.
If you are welding on structural steel in the true sense, for any reason, these would not be acceptable electrodes for this use because of their strength classification, structural applications require a minimum of 70 series rod for this purpose. Hope this information is of some use to you, forgive me if you are already aware of this sort of thing. Best regards, aevald
Hello Dave, your experience tells you correctly. I should have included that the 6013 is classified as a shallow-penetration electrode and the 6011 is likely classified as a medium-to-deep penetration electrode. Having made that statement, it would certainly support easier welding on gauge material with 6013 as opposed to the 6011, due to the greater possibility of burn-through with the 6011. Thanks for reminding me of that. Best regards, Allan
I concur with that......6011 is for burning it in there. 6013 is much more sheet metal friendly if a bit slower. Its easy to trap flux with 6013 too...don't weave it...get your heat right before the flux starts to cook and run stringers
My $.02
Tommy
thanks all that helped me understand the characteristics of both alot better
"Perhaps a better man wouldn't find a difference."!!!!
cmon Dave you know what you know....I am SURE you could teach me a thing or two about welding, machining, engine building, electrical or any number of things.
Tommy has a really good point, 6013 does have a chance of slag inclusions. It you have to bridge a gap, or have some areas of poor fit-up, the heavy flux will fill the gap and the molten puddle will not burn into the part well. As Allen suggest, keep some 6011 handy for specific areas of concern. Other than that, 6013 is a great sheet steel rod.
6011 on STRAIGHT polarity downhill. The negative polarity really tames down the penetration.
Tommy, poor choice of words on My part, should have said "better welder". This site is full of people who can weld better than I can.
Forum
