202GF, A miracle glue?!

Page 3 of 3  
wrote:

When fresh glue is directly applied to a surface it has maximum ability to 'wet out' the surface and achieve optimum adhesion. Adhesion will normally be a combination of chemical and mechanical properties.
Squeeze-out will never yield optimum wetting and therefore adhesion. The fact that squeeze-out doesn't penetrate the wood and easily chips off when dried doesn't really tell you much about the adhesives properties where properly applied. Wally Goffeney http://mywebpages.comcast.net/wgoffeney/index.htm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Wally Goffeney wrote:

Are there any independent test results on this stuff?
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I've used the 2002GF glue from Lee Valley and love it. Never tried its gap filling ability, but its extended working time and thickness make it a pleasure to use.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Same here. I prefer it to the big name brands.
Don't know if the 202GF from Garrett Wade is the same as the 2002GF from Lee Valley though. Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message

Lee
They may be the same formula because they all kinds look alike and are in the same price range. The Lee Valley 2002GF is about USD 11.00/liter and the GW 202GF is about USD 12.00/quart.
I've never seen it sold here in Durham or Raleigh, NC, CSA but I'm going to order some of each. Maybe some experiments and a report?
Agkistrodon
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

dried,
I've used Garrett Wade 202GF for at least ten years. It's good. Joints are strong, it does fill gaps, and excess does chip off.
-- Conehead
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

are
Still hard to believe, but worth $7 to find out. Thanks.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The 202gf seems to be cheaper than titebond III and Gorilla glue. If it is also waterproof why bother with the others?
Len ----------
conehead wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Anybody remember the name of a wood airframe German fighter airplane developed around 1943-44 that had two engines? As I recall from the History Channel, it was supposed to be a terror in the air but the Germans couldn't put it into production because the vibration shook the wood joints apart unless they used a special glue. The factory that made the glue was bombed, the formula burned up in the fire, and the glue chemists apparently killed in the attack.
Agkistrodon
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Agki Strodon" writes:

History
couldn't
bombed,
Can't help with the German glue, but the Brits used Aerolite 306.
BTW, I still have some.
--
Lew

S/A: Challenge, The Bullet Proof Boat, (Under Construction in the Southland)
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Lew Hodgett wrote:

It's still in production. Good rundown on it at <http://www.seqair.com/skunkworks/Glues/Aerolite/Aerolite.html .
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Agki Strodon wrote:

Sounds like the Messerschmitt 328 twin pulsejet.
Wasn't the only wooden aircraft in WWII, though. The British Mosquito was for a while during WWII the fastest airplane in the world, and I believe the only high performance wooden aircraft of WWII to go into volume production. The German Go.220 twin turbojet would have been a terror if it had been developed in time, but the factory was captured just as they were getting ready to start production. Then there were the He 162 variants.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I can find it tonight. AFAIR, it was colloquially known as "mosquito" (or the German equivalent) because it was a deliberate attempt to copy the De Havilland.

Tegofilm. They did make them without it, using an alternative glue, but they broke up in flight.
Towards the end, there were several German aircraft with wooden fuselages, if not wooden wings too. Natter and Salamander are some of the more famous of the "desperation weapons".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yeah, the history if some of the designs they had for future planes would have made Wernher von Braun proud. One Messerschmitt design was captured by the Americans and became the F-86 Saberjet used a lot in Korea. I'm not sure about the designer but there was also a design (Focke-Wulf?) captured by the Russians that became the MiG -8(?) that fought the F-86s. So, the Luftwaffe kept on flying!!
Agkistrodon
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 18:16:38 GMT, "Agki Strodon"
The German "mosquito clone" aircraft was the Ta-154, designed by Kurt Tank and so it's also referred to as a Focke Wulf. As I thought, it was also named "Moskito"
I don't know what Tego-Film replacement was, but my sources describe it as a cold glue that had problems with residual acid. Maybe it was an early PVA ?

I doubt it - he just did rockets ("That's not my department", says Wernher von Braun)

No, this was the P.1101. It was captured almost complete in Oberammergau, generally ignored for years and NASA later flew it as the Bell (sic) X-5. The original version had a variable sweep wing that was ground adjustable, but Bell developed this to allow in-flight sweep changes. Last person to fly it was some guy called Neil Armstrong.
The F-86 almost entirely ignored the German swept wing research. What the Americans learned about sweep, they mainly picked up from the British.
The first supersonic jet to fly was the DH108 Swallow, a swept wing tailless development of the 1943 Spider Crab - both with short and tubby wooden fuselage sections, built by the Mosquito laminated wood sheet production technique. However the Swallow was a bit of a widow maker and all three prototypes killed their pilots. Not before however, almost certainly becoming the first supersonic jet, albeit unrecorded and in a near-fatal dive.
Germany's tailless Gothas and Hortens would probably have suffered similar problems, had they ever been flown under real power.
The first supersonic aircraft was of course the Miles M.52. Cancelled by a short-sighted British government in 1946, the first real test wasn't until a model flight in 1948 - when it promptly achieved M1.38 in level flight, with no fuss at all.
The Russians weren't so daft. They copied everything Messerschmitt did with swept wings and produced the Mig-15 and Mig-17 on the basis of them. However, given what the British did by giving them Nene engines to power them, no doubt we'd have given them wing designs too, if they'd asked.
The Me328 (twin pulse jets) was a dismal failure. The wooden fuselage was destroyed by the intense acoustic noise from the pulse jets, so they were moved off the fuselage and under the wings. Here they became uncontrollable, as pulsejets aren't easily throttled to balance their thrust. Unbalanced thrusts such a long way from the centre line gave it a tendency to yaw wildly - and the fuselage still fell apart.
--
If we fail, then let us fail heroically
(or even better, stoichiometrically)
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Agki Strodon wrote:

Not quite. A lot of German data on swept wings was used in the design of the F-86, but it was not a German design or a copy of one. The US did capture the P.1101 prototype, of which the Bell X-5 was a partial clone. Other than being a swept-wing jet it bore little resemblance to the F-86.

TA-183. The Mig-15 looks a little bit like it but a long way from being a clone.
So, the

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.