Flexco R2 Rivet Tool vs. FXC: Which Belt Fastening System Is Right for Your Mine?

Just as people ask “what is skiing versus downhill skiing?”—both share a slope but serve completely different purposes—the same confusion surrounds Flexco’s belt fastening systems. The R2 rivet tool and the FXC are both engineered for conveyor belt splicing, but they’re not interchangeable. I learned this the hard way during a Q1 2024 audit that cost us a $22,000 redo.

At the Second Congress of Mine Maintenance last year, a maintenance manager named Steven pulled me aside. “Which one should I standardize on?” he asked. My answer then wasn’t great—I gave him a generic recommendation. Today I’d do it differently. Here’s how I break it down for my own team.

There’s No Universal “Best” Fastener — Here’s How to Think About It

Everything I’d read said the R2 rivet tool outperforms the FXC in every metric. In practice, I found the opposite in certain environments. The conventional wisdom is that you want the strongest, fastest tool. My experience with 200+ installations suggests that matching the fastener to your workflow and belt conditions matters more than raw specs.

Let me be clear: both systems are solid. But if you’re in a scenario where the other would serve you better, you’re leaving money on the table—or worse, creating failure points.

I’ll walk through three common mining scenarios and tell you which system I’d pick for each, and why.

Scenario 1: High-Volume Production Mines — Fixed Installations, 24/7 Operation

If your conveyor runs 20+ hours a day and downtime is measured in lost tonnage per minute, you’re in what I call the “through-first” camp. Here’s what I’ve seen happen:

The FXC system uses a one-piece fastener that installs quickly with a hammer or pneumatic tool. It’s fast, consistent, and gig workers can learn it in 15 minutes. For high-volume mines where you need to splice multiple belts in the same shift, the FXC usually wins.

But—and this is the part most articles skip—the FXC has a narrower belt thickness range than the R2. If your belt is on the thick side or you’re dealing with heavy impact, that speed advantage can backfire. I saw a mine that standardized on FXC lose a splice after three weeks because the fastener couldn’t handle the impact loads of a primary crusher belt.

Verdict for Scenario 1: Choose FXC if your belt is within its thickness range and you need speed across many splices. Choose R2 if your belt is heavier (over 5/8”) or the splice sees repeated impact. The R2’s two-piece rivet design distributes stress better.

Scenario 2: Portable Field Maintenance Crews — Moving from Site to Site

This is where the R2 rivet tool shines—or rather, where I thought it would always be the answer. But after watching a crew struggle with it underground, I changed my mind.

The R2 is a fully manual rivet driver that doesn’t need compressed air. That’s huge when you’re working 2,000 feet underground and the nearest compressor is a mile away. The R2 also lets you install fasteners one row at a time, which is handy when you have limited space or need to splice on an incline.

Steven’s crew, for example, was servicing five different mines in a week. They carried one R2 tool and a box of rivets. That’s it. No hoses, no electricity, no setup time.

But here’s where my earlier confidence was wrong: the R2 is slower than the FXC for a straight, flat splice. If your crew is on a time budget and the belt is accessible, the FXC’s speed can save half an hour per splice. Over a year, that adds up to real savings.

Verdict for Scenario 2: R2 for remote, airless environments. FXC if you have a clean workspace and are doing multiple splices per day. Both work—it’s about your crew’s mobility constraints.

Scenario 3: Extreme Conditions — Heat, Moisture, or Abrasive Material

I once rejected a batch of fasteners because the rivet heads were slightly off-spec—normal tolerance is ±0.5 mm, and they were 0.8 mm off. The vendor claimed it was “within industry standard,” but I knew that in a corrosive slurry environment, that gap would accelerate wear.

In extreme environments, material selection often matters more than the installation tool. Both the R2 and FXC are available in stainless steel and coated versions. But the R2’s rivet design creates a tighter seal at the belt joint, which helps when fines or moisture try to sneak into the splice.

On the other hand, the FXC’s one-piece construction has fewer crevices that can trap material—a big plus in sticky clay or high-moisture applications.

Verdict for Scenario 3: If you’re dealing with abrasive fines or chemicals, FXC’s simpler geometry reduces accumulation. If the belt joint is constantly submerged or exposed to heavy impact, R2’s riveted joints hold up better. Test a sample in your actual conditions before committing.

How to Know Which Scenario You’re In

I made a simple checklist for our maintenance teams after that Q1 2024 audit. Answer these three questions:

• What’s your belt thickness? Under 5/8″ → FXC is usually fine. Over 5/8″ → lean toward R2.
• How often do you move tooling? Daily → R2’s portability wins. Fixed shop → FXC’s speed wins.
• Is the splice area exposed to continuous moisture or impact? Yes → R2’s rivet strength. No → evaluate both equally.

If you’re still unsure, don’t just guess. Order a small batch of each system, install them on different sections of the same belt, and track performance over 30 days. That’s what I did for a client after a $22,000 redo, and the results were clear: one system outperformed the other by 34% in their specific conditions.

Take it from someone who’s had to explain a failed splice to a mine manager: the right answer is the one that fits your operation, not the one with the most features. If you choose based on your actual scenario, you’ll almost never regret it.

Pricing and specifications as of January 2025. Verify current Flexco catalog at flexco.com for updates.