# The new nickel colored canning lids



## LonelyNorthwind (Mar 6, 2010)

Has anyone else experienced terrible sealing percentages with the new nickel colored canning lids? I've been canning 45 years and have never had so many jars not seal. I'm getting furious. I finally called Azure where I order them by the case and all they could do was give me the Ball's email. I asked if they thought I'd have any better luck with Kerr and they were honest enough to tell me they've had tons of complaints about the Kerr lids, sheesh.
I'm wondering if I'm the only one before I contact Ball. Thanks!


----------



## SoINgirl (Aug 3, 2007)

I have heard that several people do not like the new lids for the same reason. I haven't used any yet so I can't say from experience.


----------



## Old Swampgirl (Sep 28, 2008)

I haven't had any problems with them, but did notice that they were "softer" than my regular colored. Like easier to bend.
Wondering what Ball will have to say. I've heard that they own all the jar/lid, etc. business now.


----------



## Pelenaka (Jul 27, 2007)

I've used the new nichel colored lids a few times no issues, but a always dip my lids in the canner of hot water before I place them on the jar rim. I still have them simmering before I do the dip. 

~~ pelenaka ~~

P.S. not having lids that seal are enough to make a gilr go back to wire bail ...


----------



## Lucy (May 15, 2006)

No problems with any of the lids. Are you only heating them in water no hotter than 180 degrees ?


----------



## upnorthlady (Oct 16, 2009)

I've been canning for many years, and I, too, have had many, many seal failures with those new lids. They are so thin and there's a very small amount of sealing rubber around the edge. I liked those old Kerr gold lids from the 70's that had tons of rubber and were nice and thick! It seems all companies are trying to make things cheaper these days to save money. I have already complained to the Ball company, but they never answered me. Not only do I hate the new lids, but I don't like the way new jars are packaged these days. They put the lids right on the jars and twist the rings on. By the time you go to use the jars, the lids are already "used" in my opinion. I complained to the Ball company about this, too. They said the lids "recover nicely" in hot water. Ya, right. You can still see a line in the rubber. I have even boiled the lids, and you can still see a line in the rubber. The new nickel* rings* are very nice, though..............they don't rust. At least there's one improvement.


----------



## PixieLou (May 1, 2010)

Which is one reason why I reuse my old lids.


----------



## Macybaby (Jun 16, 2006)

I've had no problems with the new lids compared to the old lids. I put up several hunderd jars last year, and didn't find the nickle to have an difference in failure rate (both very low).

I know this has been discussed a lot as many people do have problems, but if I recall correctly, there seemed to be a correlation between how people tighten the rings and success/failure rates with the new lids. Unfortunalty I don't recall which way it was decided, but since I wasn't in the group having problems, I didn't change the way I do them.


----------



## beaglebiz (Aug 5, 2008)

I like the old ones. I had a zero failure rate with them.
I also hate the way they dont match my gold rings (mostly gifts)


----------



## Paquebot (May 10, 2002)

For those who think that the new flats are lighter or thinner, they are not. They are the exact same weight as Ball or Kerr from 10-15 years ago. I've only used those which come with new jars and so far have had no problems. 

Martin


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

Martin, do you have a source for that info, because I could also swear they are lighter.


----------



## Paquebot (May 10, 2002)

Karen said:


> Martin, do you have a source for that info, because I could also swear they are lighter.


Triner USPS balance postal scale in my office.

Martin


----------



## upnorthlady (Oct 16, 2009)

Martin, with all due respect, I think we shall have to agree to disagree. The new lids are much lighter and bendable. The old gold lids from the 70's and 80's were much heavier, and they had rubber - lots of it - on them! Perhaps your balance scale isn't accurate enough to pick up differences. With the new lids you can pop the center back and forth with your thumb and fingers. With the old gold lids, you couldn't do that.


----------



## Paquebot (May 10, 2002)

If 10 gold ones weigh the exact same weight as 10 silver ones, what does that tell you? Doesn't matter if my scale is off a single milligram, the error would be constant and the balance point would be the same. Weight has nothing to do with any alleged differences in flexibility or metal thickness. So far, many here are only working from memory or suggestions from others, the placebo effect. Weigh them yourself and see what you get. Then get a micrometer and check the thickness of the metal. Of course, only possible if you have the Ball or Kerr flats from the 1990s to compare with. 

Martin


----------



## Paquebot (May 10, 2002)

I'm probably the only one here who could do this but I just weighed 5 sets of lids. The gold ones were Ball, Golden Harvest, Kerr, and Gardener's Kitchen. The silver ones were Ball. 10 of all 5 brands weigh the same. Nothing more that I can say other than report the facts. 

Martin


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

That doesn't sound right since the silicone sealer alone weighs less than rubber. But either way, even if they do weigh the same, the newer materials are more flexible and do bend easier; so weight would be irrelevant.


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

Lucy said:


> No problems with any of the lids. Are you only heating them in water no hotter than 180 degrees ?


I'm sitting here thinking, holy cow, now we have to take the temperature of our lid water on top of everything else? LOL! :hysterical:

But there's another point. Years ago, you could boil the tarnation out of lids and there would be no problems. I want rubber back!!


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

I've had problems, heck even had one that got puckers in the lid from the vacum of sealing.


----------



## Macybaby (Jun 16, 2006)

I happen to have a bunch of old gold lids. My SIL got several boxes of old jars (unused) at garage sales and gave them to me. One box is from 1986. I was impressed with the way they were boxed, way, way nicer (and I'm sure way more expensive) than how they are done now. 

I'll have DH weight them (he has a sensitive scale for reloading) and see what he thinks about bend ability and all that. 

The one thing that is noticeably different - the old lids have at least twice the sealing compound on them.


----------



## upnorthlady (Oct 16, 2009)

7thswan said:


> I've had problems, heck even had one that got puckers in the lid from the vacum of sealing.


Yep - this has happened to me, too. I firmly believe the new lids are constructed differently, with thinner centers, and less sealing rubber. What they weigh is not a factor. They are constructed cheaper and thinner and have less of a ring of sealer on them. If you hold up a new lid and an old one and tap them with something, like a pen or spoon or something, you get a different ring sound. The new ones give you a higher pitched sound.


----------



## Paquebot (May 10, 2002)

Karen said:


> That doesn't sound right since the silicone sealer alone weighs less than rubber. But either way, even if they do weigh the same, the newer materials are more flexible and do bend easier; so weight would be irrelevant.


An ounce of latex and an ounce of metal is still going to weigh exactly an ounce and that's all that I've said from the beginning. Weight has nothing to do with tensile strength of the metal. To get an entirely accurate measure of the metal in the different lids, one would have to remove all of the sealant. To determine thickness, a micrometer would have to be used. So far, nobody has reported either result anywhere that I have found and I ain't going to do it.

Martin


----------



## Macybaby (Jun 16, 2006)

I think my husband had fun with this - and my goal is not to prove anyone wrong, but to help those that are having problems with the new lids. I am not, and I know a lot of people who are not, but plenty of people are.

So the goal is to help figure out what is different, so those that are having problems can join the ranks of those without problems, cause one this is certain, we don't have a lot of choices for lids to use.

Dh used his reloading scale, it measure in grains, which is 1/7000 lb. Then we took a lid out of the middle weight and cut it to measure the thickness with a micrometer.  




















1. Kerr Silver- 91.9,92.1,92.4 (ave .0132 lb)
2. Kerr Gold (OLD)- 106.8, 108.5,110.5 (ave .0155 lb)
3. Ball Silver - 92.9, 95.2, 97.1 (ave .0136 lb)
4. Ball Gold (new) - 93.4,93.9, 94.8 (ave .0134 lb)

and since I had these (but I only did one)

5. Ball WM gold (new) 150.4
6. Kerr WM Gold (older) 147.6 

Cut them with craft scissors, didn't notice any difference in ease of cutting

Thickness (this is inches)

1. .0075
2. .0077
3. .0075
4. .0072
5. .0073
6. .0070

The ONLY noticable difference was the amount of sealing compond, and I would attribute the weight difference of the regular lids to that - here are a few pictures



















And for some fun - the old boxes.





































This was in one of the boxes - it's got a warning about only using Open Kettle on jams if you are going to seal with paraffin . . .










What is very interesting is between #3 and #4, a gold lid purchased in 2009 and a silver lid purchased in either 2009 or 2010 (I know they are not older as that is when I started buying lids). 

#4 (gold) measures both lighter and thinner than #3 Silver. HOWEVER this amount is so small that it is doubtful it would be considered significant for practical purposes. Now the composite of the metal could be such that thickness and weight have no correlation to flexibility. Could not tell visually if the compound is any different between the two.

Hopefully someone will find this useful, or at least interesting so I won't have sacrificed 6 lids for nothing


----------



## Paquebot (May 10, 2002)

Macybaby's report has just exactly what was needed to dispel the "thinner" claim. The miniscule differences are well within normal coil or sheet metal tolerances. What does make a big difference is the center embossment. Many older lids have a defined round crease. Just as with forming the fenders of your vehicles, thin metal is strengthened by the way that it is pressed. The silver Ball lids have only a slight impression rather than an embossed indentation. That is the only factor in how much force it takes to bend them. 

Martin

(Retired metal fabricator, 27 years.)


----------



## Ms.Lilly (Jun 23, 2008)

No problems with the silver lids here. I have heated them above and beow 180 degrees. Thanks for the info Macybaby is was interesting.


----------



## upnorthlady (Oct 16, 2009)

Macybaby - what a great experiment! Interesting data! You should submit this to the Ball Co. Thanks for doing this. 
Martin - Hope you didn't think I was trying to offend you. I know that you are an expert in matters of gardening, etc. I guess I am still wondering how come I have had more seal failures using new lids in the past several years, as well as puckers in the new silver lids. I will have to talk with the Ball folks about this, and tell them some of the data shown here on HT. See what they have to say. I am not doing anything different than what I used to do, but the number of seal failures has increased. Last year I had 5 instances of lid puckering, which I never had before, ever! Perhaps it has to do with the metal itself, i.e. more nickel, more aluminum? Some different make up of the metal. 

Well, so ok. the lids might weigh the same, but for many folks, they are not sealing, whereas they were before. So from a customer review point of view, why is this? Perhaps the problem is with the formula of the sealing compound and the puckering is from how it "grabs" the jar. Again, from curiosity, I will have to ask the Ball folks if the sealing compound has changed from what it was years ago. (If they would even tell me!). I used to be a chemist in my younger days, but wouldn't remember much these days! I think it would take a chemist and a well equipped lab to analyze the sealing material on the lids........


----------



## beaglebiz (Aug 5, 2008)

My favorite lids of all are the oldies with the gray sealant on them.


----------



## Vickie44 (Jul 27, 2010)

That was awesome, gotta love a science project .Thanks Macybaby


----------



## Lucy (May 15, 2006)

Karen said:


> I'm sitting here thinking, holy cow, now we have to take the temperature of our lid water on top of everything else? LOL! :hysterical:
> 
> But there's another point. Years ago, you could boil the tarnation out of lids and there would be no problems. I want rubber back!!


Yeh, if you boil that new stuff it can just about melt it before it goes on the jars. The boxes do say to use 180 degree water. 
Why does everything have to be more complicated ? 
Can hardly get a package of anything open any more. Especially those clear plastic hard things. You need a box kife to cut stuff open.


----------



## Paquebot (May 10, 2002)

I think that a lot of people are looking at the wrong thing to fault for failures. Older jars used to have a flat lip a full 1/8" wide. Gradually it was decreased to 1/16th and some were even slightly rounded. Look at your jars from about 10 years ago and you'll see that, especially in Ball and Golden Harvest. We gain a new Kerr pint every 3 weeks since that's how much honey the wife and I go through. They seem to have remained fairly consistent with the width of the sealing area at about 3/32". But then, I picked out two Kerr widemouth pints to compare and one would be about 3/32" but the other barely 1/16". One was purchased perhaps 15 years ago and the other last year. Combine a narrower jar lip with a shallower sealant thickness and chance for failure automatically increases. Since myself and a lot of others report either zero or minimal failures with the new metal, it's obviously something else and that could only be the jars if all other steps were observed properly. 

Martin


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Well, for me it could certianly be the jars, all ages and kinds are used arround here.


----------



## TNHermit (Jul 14, 2005)

One might also consider the silicone seal. Silicone comes in all kinds of flavors. (At least for woodworkers  ) Depending where they were made and who was the supplier all kinds of things could be happening during the heat and cold cycle of the silicone.
It might be interesting to compare how people go aout the sealing of their lids even though it may pretty much be the same.


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

Great experiment, Macybaby! Thanks!! :goodjob:

Martin, what I was saying was that different types of metal can weigh the same but the flexibility (or should I say 'bendability') between them can be quite different. That's what I'm wondering about the newer ones; they do "seem" to bend very easily. 

I especially notice that when opening up jars. The lids don't break away clean and flat like they use to; rather many bend when coming off.

But I'm still willing to bet the failures are due to the sealing compound and not the jars or metal in the lids. I feel pretty certain it isn't the jars because I haven't bought a jar in 20 years; yet ever since the silicone lids came out, I have many more failures. Almost never had one with the rubber ones and you could also use them twice.

Regardless, there's something about them that isn't as good as they use to be. That I have no question about. I'm glad it came up because this sure has been an interesting discussion!


----------



## Karen (Apr 17, 2002)

Lucy said:


> .....Especially those clear plastic hard things. You need a box kife to cut stuff open.


Oh don't you know it!! With my arthritis, I have to have someone else open them.


----------



## Paquebot (May 10, 2002)

Embossing is what strengthens the metal. Milk cooler covers were always 16 gauge metal which is .060 and would not even support itself in a 4' span. Add a 10Âº cross break and it would support a heavy man. Same with you car fenders. Any canning lid with an embossed center is going to be much stronger than one without despite being the same metal. 

Martin


----------



## oregon woodsmok (Dec 19, 2010)

The easier bending is probably deliberate. If you can't get the lid off without bending it, then you can't reuse it and you will have to buy more.


----------



## Lucy (May 15, 2006)

So, the ones with a raised little button in the center of the lids are stronger ? 
I have over 2,300 of them. Gold ones from Lehman's this year. Red sealing compound. They have to work !! Spent a lot on them.


----------



## Paquebot (May 10, 2002)

Lucy said:


> So, the ones with a raised little button in the center of the lids are stronger ?


Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes,.....!

Martin


----------



## Lucy (May 15, 2006)

Whew ! I am glad to read that.


----------



## Paquebot (May 10, 2002)

Lucy said:


> Whew ! I am glad to read that.


Embossing or otherwise forming metal adds tremendous strength. Note that the thickness of lid material is a little over .007. Without the outer rim, and center embossing, the lid would be little more than a shiny Christmas tree decoration not even as thick as a tin can. You could easily wrap it around a pencil. You've all seen the self-storage complexes which are everywhere. Look at those strong roll-up doors. They are 26 gauge and just a little over twice as thick as our canning lids and about on a par with tin cans. They are embossed with ribs which make them just as rigid as if they were 1/8" plate. Hard for the average person to believe but quite true. 

Also, a defined center embossing has not always been the case of canning lids and not needed. Ball and Bernardin merely pressed the entire center deeper with their #63s. When those seal, the entire neighborhood knows it! Kerr was the fanciest and only embossed their name while Gardener's Kitchen was the only manufacturer with a round center embossing. 

Martin


----------



## Lucy (May 15, 2006)

They won't say who makes these, only they are USA made lids. I asked but they won't say.


----------



## Paquebot (May 10, 2002)

Lucy said:


> They won't say who makes these, only they are USA made lids. I asked but they won't say.


Inasmuch as they appear to have showed up shortly after Gardener's Kitchen ceased operations, one can only speculate as to where the equipment went.

Martin


----------



## Goldielocks (Jan 1, 2010)

I've canned over 100 jars in the last two weeks using my new Tattler lids with every single one of them sealing. water bath and pressure canning. Don't plan on buying tin lids again.


----------



## beaglebiz (Aug 5, 2008)

Goldielocks said:


> I've canned over 100 jars in the last two weeks using my new Tattler lids with every single one of them sealing. water bath and pressure canning. Don't plan on buying tin lids again.


There have been multiple complaints about these lately...from the food tasting like rubber, to the lids being damaged affter one use.


----------



## Sparkey (Oct 23, 2004)

I bought several boxes of the silver lids last summer. I canned 20 pints of green beans in my pressure canner using the silver lids. Next morning I had one jar that hadn't sealed. I just now went to my basement & checked the remaining 19 jars. All the lids were tight. 

Charlie


----------



## Gladrags (Jul 13, 2010)

I haven't had any problems this past season, but had dozens of failures with the anniversary silver lids. Drove me to distraction, if not worse.



Paquebot said:


> it's obviously something else and that could only be the jars if all other steps were observed properly.


Shouldn't Ball make a lid that fits _all _standard Mason jars properly, even if they are 50 years old? One would think. Unless this is all part of a nefarious scheme to get us to buy new jars. Which wouldn't surprise me (nothing like a good conspiracy theory, I always say ...).


----------



## Paquebot (May 10, 2002)

It's not the jars which are 50 years old that are potential problems. Those are the one with the widest lips and present the greatest sealing surface. That width decreased considerably about 10-15 years ago. It began with the Golden Harvest jars and the other two followed suit. Now that lip is getting slightly wider again. As in every other home product, there is the need to make everything "idiot proof" but even that often isn't sufficient. 

Martin


----------



## sweetwaterbob (May 20, 2011)

We're just getting started into canning. This is a very interesting thread and a subject I never thought about, but it makes perfect sense. I guess I always thought a Kerr jar was a Kerr jar (ditto Ball and others), just like the ones from when we were kids. I guess not.

Anyway, any thoughts on those plastic lids with the separate o-ring seal they sell at Lehmans?


----------

