While the choice of stationary phase, organic modifier, and gradient strength can have significant effects on biomolecule separations, mobile phase additives can also have a significant effect on the chromatographic selectivity, recovery, efficiency and resolution. Given the importance of stationary phase coverage, the beneficial, silanol‐masking properties of amines, and the potential for selectivity modification through ion‐pair interactions, cyclohexylamine was examined as a mobile phase additive and compared with triethylamine and trifluoroacetic acid. Greatly improved separation was possible when cyclohexylamine was used as compared with phosphate buffer, and cyclohexylamine did not require purification before use, while triethylamine required distillation before ‘clean’ chromatograms were obtained. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.