Other than cost, is there a reason CA glue is unsuitable? I'd used it on
wood (not as a joint glue) and it does bond pretty well. Depending on the
CA glue, you could get 30-60 seconds of open time. (Some of the thick
stuff really needs accelerator or clamping.)
Historical "Crazy Glue" products are pretty brittle so don't do very
well in shear. There are specifically-formulated cyanoacrylates for
wood applications which pretty much perform as well as typical yellow
wood glues...but other than the case for quick set-up times the cost is
still pretty much the biggest case against it as a general purpose wood
That's what I was thinking of - don't woodturners commonly
use CA glue to attach scraps of wood so they can hold their
work on the lathe, expecting to just rap the scrap with a
hammer to remove it when done? Because the CA glue is
brittle and just breaks off when the scrap is hit.
Traditionally, without a 3 or 4 jaw lathe chuck, a face plate was
screwed to a piece of scrap, and brown paper from a paper bag was glued
between the work and the scrap with standard wood glue. When done, you
could tear the pieces apart with the paper ripping apart, not the wood.
I made a ton of turnings doing this in the old days. Not sure paper
bags are thick enough to do this today. I never had a bowl come off
this way, wish I could say the same for the 4 jaw chuck...
Add Life to your Days not Days to your Life.
I've been trying out Nexabond.
Basically a CA glue with much longer open time-- minutes instead of
The jury's still out as I haven't used it enough to form a valid opinion.
I did use it on some stairway handrail returns a few months back. I
just glued with Nexabond, no trim screws or nails. It's on a
friend/client's house and I asked him to be my guinea pig for the stuff.
He's going to let me know if/when it ever fails and I'll come over and
inspect/repair it for free.
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
Can't be done. Several groups have tested various joints
in various ways over the years, and invariably come to
the conclusion that there's too much variation in the
wood used to resolve the difference between joints of
similar strength. "Everything else being equal" just
isn't going to exist with wood.
That's why statistics was invented, to deal with situations where there
are multiple variables. Test 30 samples of each and calculate means and
standard deviations and if there's a real difference it will likely show
Well, that's a different question. You could certainly group
results together, accepting that within some range of measurement
error a group is "the same", and then look for differences
As I recall, when Fine Woodworking did their test several years
ago, all the machined mortise & tenon variations were effectively
the same (regular M&T, floating tenon, wedged tenon, etc). All
of them were significantly stronger than dowelmax, beadlock,
I also recall there there was a difference in the failures, with
the M&T always breaking the tenon, and the beadlock, etc,
breaking the mortise. There was discussion at the time as to
the significance of that difference, but I don't recall any
I use pocket hole screws in 5 times more applications other than as
pocket hole screws. It seems that pocket hole screws themselves are
pretty darn good screws.
In another discussion the counter sink drill bits came up. I often use
the Kreg drill bit to drill my countersink and pilot hole and then use
pocket holes in those holes and then plug with conventional round plugs.
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.