AN vs. JIC

Discussion in 'General Tech' started by Red98422, Jul 2, 2018.

  1. Red98422

    Red98422 Active Member SUPPORTING MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2018
    Messages:
    144
    Likes Received:
    40
    Location:
    Washington state
    Ok first off not trying to start a “flame war”. so I know quite a few people on this fourm know what I’m talking about with this subject let me break it down for some of the first timers and new to custom build guys. Basically I’m talking about fittings, the ones that get a “-“ size. There are two different “standards” one is the well known and quite expensive (IMHO) AN fittings. Most speed shops and online retailers will use this in the lingo to designate it as a 37deg flare fitting, usually made of aluminum (“needs” special wrenches) with quite a large selection of colors. On the other side of the scale you have JIC fittings which are also a 37deg flare, they aren’t nearly as well known...and some say they aren’t “good enough” (not my opinion). They’re usually MUCH cheaper....like 75% or more....downsides include they only come in one of three flavors. Brass, plated steel and stainless($). I personally use JIC on all my hydraulic equipment (2 cranes a forklift and three drive pumps) I also use them on my diesel engines fuel systems. Just wanted to see what everyone was running and their reasoning one way or the other, mainly wanting to throw the information out there for everyone to see and help people make informed choices. (IE running e85 it might be better to run a SS JIC than an alum AN for fuel)
     
  2. PJ McCoy

    PJ McCoy Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2015
    Messages:
    999
    Likes Received:
    206
    Location:
    Outter Banks NC
    Thanks for the post Red. I will look this JIC fittings up. will post back soon as I have never heard of them before.:thumbup:
    PJ
     
  3. Red98422

    Red98422 Active Member SUPPORTING MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2018
    Messages:
    144
    Likes Received:
    40
    Location:
    Washington state
    You will find them in hydraulic supply places. They share “dash” sizes with their AN counterparts
     
  4. Darius

    Darius Well-Known Member SUPPORTING MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2004
    Messages:
    3,888
    Likes Received:
    422
    upload_2018-7-2_14-47-48.jpg AN 37° Flare vs Industrial 37° Flare Fittings: What's the Difference?

    Posted by TechConnect Team on Wednesday, April 19, 2017

    Over the years, we have received quite a few inquiries regarding "AN" fittings. AN (Air Force - Navy Aeronautical Standard) and AND (Air Force - Navy Aeronautical Design Standard) are standards used by the U.S. Military in aviation applications. AN fittings are manufactured to meet above standards. These fittings include the 37° flare, flareless, hose connections, "banjo" type fittings, specialized flange fittings, pipe fittings and other types of connections.There are many frequently asked questions about AN 37° flare fittings and how they relate to their industrial 37° flare counterpart, the SAE/ISO 37° flare fittings, so I thought I would share the background and differences between these fittings.

    History

    Parker actually pioneered the flare fitting technology in the 1920's with the introduction of the inverted flare fitting followed by the Parker Triple Fitting in early 1930's. They were adopted by Air Corps, a part of the U.S. Army at that time, as AC-810 and AC-811. As the operating pressures increased, inverted flare did not perform as well as the Triple Fitting, and its use started declining. The ease of manufacture of Triple Fitting provided additional advantage that resulted in quick acceptance of it in various industrial and military applications. The Triple Fitting was a patented three-piece design similar to current Parker Triple-Lok 37° flare fitting, except it had 30° flare angle instead of the 37°. This fitting design was the forerunner of the current AN and SAE 37° flare fittings.

    The U.S. Air Force, with help from Wright Patterson Air Force base, developed a fitting with 37° flare angle, before WWII, which became known as the "AN" fitting. This fitting had precision 3A/3B threads. The use of "AN" fittings proliferated from the 1930's through the 1960's to include most branches of U.S. Military, Military Contractors, General Aviation and Commercial Aviation. These fittings were even adopted for use in many land and sea applications of the U.S. Military as well, leading to confusion between AN and its industrial counterpart, the SAE 37° fitting. After the war, several versions of 37° flare fittings flooded the industrial market, creating a nightmare for the users. The Joint Industry Conference (JIC), an organization of manufacturers, decided to standardize on the "AN" design, except with 2A/2B thread class for ease in manufacturing. These fittings came to be known, throughout the world, as "JIC" fittings. The JIC wanted the prestige of SAE for the fitting standard. They convinced SAE to take on the task and helped in the development of the standard. Thus, the SAE standard 37° flare fitting became part of SAE J514 in 1950. The fitting became an ISO standard, ISO 8434, in 1986, replaced by ISO 8434-2 in 1996.


    upload_2018-7-2_14-47-48.jpg


    AN Fittings Today

    AN fittings remain prevalent today. However, the U.S. Military is canceling many of the true AN/AND standards and replacing them with AS (Aerospace Standards) standards developed, again, by SAE. Many aircraft/aerospace applications are moving towards aluminum and titanium for optimized weight-to-strength parameters.

    Differences Between AN 37° Flare and Industrial 37° Flare Fittings

    There are several differences between "comparable" industrial 37° flare (SAE/ISO) and AN 37° flare style fittings. Some include:

    Threads:

    • AN 37° Flare: Male and female, Class 3A/3B UNJ/UNJF (radiused root threads)

    • SAE/ISO 37° Flare: Male and female, class 2A/2B, UN/UNF series threads

    • Reason: Tighter tolerances and better fatigue life for aircraft, aerospace, military applications

      Military Conformance Standards:
    • AN 37° Flare: AN flare fittings conform to MIL-F-5509 specifications, and also AS4841

    • SAE/ISO 37° Flare: Some fittings conform to MIL-F-18866 as shown on MS51500 through MS51534

      Industrial Conformance Standards:
    • AN 37° Flare: Meets SAE Aerospace (AS) standards

    • SAE/ISO 37° Flare: Meet the applicable dimensional and performance requirements of SAE J514/ISO 8434-2

      Materials:
    • AN 37° Flare: Available commonly in carbon steel, stainless steel (CRES), aluminum, titanium and copper-nickel

    • SAE/ISO 37° Flare: Available commonly in carbon steel, stainless steel, and brass

      General: In addition to the above noted differences, drop lengths, hex sizes, hex widths may also vary between "comparable" AN 37° flare and industrial 37° flare fittings in some sizes.

      Interchangeability

      AN 37° flare and industrial 37° flare fittings function identically. In many cases they appear to be functionally interchangeable, but they are not. What this means is that while the products may look similar, you must not use an industrial 37° flare fitting design as a direct substitution.

      Note: Parker Triple-Lok 37° flare fittings (or other TFD products) are not for use in Aerospace, General Aviation, Commercial Aviation or Military Aviation applications.
     
    SHAKEDOG likes this.
  5. Red98422

    Red98422 Active Member SUPPORTING MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2018
    Messages:
    144
    Likes Received:
    40
    Location:
    Washington state
    Bro D. What is your personal take on the subject at hand? For me personally I would use JIC for anything other than 90deg connections (AN have a big radius and JIC have a literal 90deg) I have never had a problem with leaks or issues with strength But I’ve never tried to mix them....with AN creeping up to $10-20 a fitting I think it’s a viable alternate to Speed shops... which brings up a point are speed shops actually selling true AN? Has anyone tested this?
     
  6. Darius

    Darius Well-Known Member SUPPORTING MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2004
    Messages:
    3,888
    Likes Received:
    422
    Components for my dash-10 (AN?) fuel system were purchased long ago along with the pumps, filters and pressure regulator; and they were NOT cheap! Like you, with any new purchase I'll be open to the JIC fittings IF there is a significant cost savings to be had. However, the advice given in the above posting to NOT mix the two standards will be heeded.

    In the past I've generally gone with local distributors such as "House of Hose" or "Hose Products" and have simply asked for AN type fittings. The questions next time will be, "what fittings do those companies provided - or do they offer both standards (AN 37° Flare - SAE/ISO 37° Flare)?" Those questions should get answered fairly soon as there are oil lines to be sourced for the two remote mounted turbochargers, along with lines for the HIGH pressure water/ethanol injection system dash-3 fittings.

    Call it sticker shock but the AN type fittings for the Studebaker project have actually costed me more than was paid in the long ago past for an entire car!! o_O

    Best,

    bro. d
     
  7. nosgood

    nosgood Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2016
    Messages:
    217
    Likes Received:
    58
    Location:
    Dawsonville, GA
    My entire car is outfitted in Jegs brand AN fittings. Fuel, oil, cooling; you name it. I went with Jegs brand because of their vast selection, and the significant price savings between their stuff and the name brands' (Earl's, Russell, etc). Until just now I had never heard of JIC fittings, but at this point I've amassed quite a collection of AN stuff and since they're not compatible, I think it would be a massive chore to convert.

    As far as the special tools, I invested in a set of the "Kool Tools" assembly aids:

    https://www.summitracing.com/parts/...MIi8Tk2fGU3AIViVYNCh1O6gfhEAQYASABEgLiffD_BwE

    and a nice set of cable cutters from Home Depot:

    https://www.homedepot.com/p/Klein-T...BEgLNqPD_BwE&dclid=CKL4lcnylNwCFY53wQodKOAB0Q
     
  8. CanadianC10

    CanadianC10 Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2011
    Messages:
    792
    Likes Received:
    36
    Ive used a mix of both on my truck - they are compatible - ive done it - threads to not gal and they seal.

    Maybe I wouldnt mix the 2 on 3000+ PSI but really were talking a max a 100psi anywhere on the car.
     

Share This Page