from Consumer Reports on a scale of 100.
Tied for 1st at 99:
Elmer's ProBond Interior/Exterior Wood Glue $4.50 for 12 oz.
Titebond III Ultimate Wood Glue $5.00 for 8 oz.
3rd at 94:
DAP Weldwood Carpenter's Wood Glue $4.00 for 8 oz.
4th at 76
Liquid Nails Woodworking and Furniture Adhesive $3.50 for 4 oz.
The next glue is rated at 32.
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
On Sat, 14 May 2016 07:38:52 -0500, "Dean Hoffman"
Not to undermine your intention or the good people at Consumer
Reports, but .. whenever I see a product rating / comparison -
I always remember that my 1971 Vega was actually MotorTrend
car-of-the-year ! :-0
... perhaps they meant " might last a year "
On 05/14/2016 07:41 AM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
I haven't looked at the magazine in a long time but I was amused by
their car reviews. If reviewing an inexpensive car their conclusion was
you would do better finding a used Honda Civic. If the car was in the
same bracket as the Civic, the Civic was a much better buy. If the car
was upscale, you'd be wise to buy two Civics for the price.
I recently got a promo letter from them that listed my current car as
one of the ten worst. I feel much better now.
I would look at CR at the library when I was looking for something I
knew absolutely nothing about like a digital camera. However, after
reading the reviews about products I did know something about I realized
their standard recommendation was for plain vanilla, whitebread,
mediocre, safe bet products.
| Tied for 1st at 99:
| Elmer's ProBond Interior/Exterior Wood Glue $4.50 for 12 oz.
| Titebond III Ultimate Wood Glue $5.00 for 8 oz.
One note I'd add there: I always buy the regular
Titebond for interior cabinet work because if I make
a mistake I can free it up with water easily and start
over. Yet it's also a very strong bond. It's rare to
actually need waterproof glue for interior work.
I don't know what the sample population was nor do you even say what the
scale is supposed to represent, but as far as strength of bond goes,
there's been sufficient testing over the years that virtually any of the
PVA wood glues creates a bond as strong or stronger than the wood.
There's minor differences between the Weldwood PVA, and the Type II/Type
III, granted, but not _that_ much. So that there are only three in the
top echelon is simply indicative either their population sample is
entirely too small or their testing is, as so much of what they do at
CR, simply irrelevant and useless for actual application.
Well, I'll be d'd if I'm going to give CR a penny so couldn't see the
actual report but did a search on Type III to see what could find --
there's a little bit (as in very little) background but what could
ascertain is that they grouped every adhesive they could find into one
of 23 generic classes with an unknown number of sample(s) from each
class, then tried to rank 'em on a generic scale. Essentially worthless
concept from the git-go; wood glues are useless for anything else as are
most other "for purpose" products. While not nearly as strong for the
purpose as PVA, cyanoacrylates have specific purposes in woodworking
that cannot be performed by others; trying to rate the two on a single
scale is ludicrous.
Just on Titebond Type III the summary results were
In another portion where they listed the meaning of test ratings, they
state for "Gap Filling: Gap filling represents the ability to fill gaps
when dowels were glued in[to] slightly oversized holes."
What a crock! Of course, it won't work if the parts don't fit.
Also, the lead-in says:
That should warn anybody w/ a lick of common sense off of taking any
real heed...wood glues, for example, should be excluded entirely as
there's no way they could be considered all-purpose and I'm unaware of a
manufacturer who does make such a claim for their _wood_ glue.
Always amusing when you see these dubious ratings -- is 96 THREE TIMES
BETTER than 32? Is 94 *100* times better than 93?? How much more
is a 76 *worth* than a 32??
I worked for a hand-tool manufacturer, at one point. How do you "test"
a hammer? Screwdriver? Tape rule?? How do you know that your "process"
is up to par and isn't degrading? How do you compare your products to
those of your competitor(s)?
There are some things for which you can get "hard, ABSOLUTE numbers"
(e.g., the hardness of a piece of steel). But, other things tend
to be a bit squishy.
E.g., how many times you can pull a tape out of a rule (the full length)
and release it -- before the spring mechanism or the case fails.
How many times can you "bang" a hammer (with a certain force) before the
handle breaks. Etc.
But, are these numbers really representative of anything *useful*?
How often do folks pull the tape *completely* out of the rule in
normal use? If the typical operation is to pull it out ~5 ft,
then how does a test that pulls it out 25 feet compare?
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.