I got the latest issue of Wood Magazine in the mail yesterday. I notice
they have an update on the "controversial" glue testing they did a few
issues ago. It seems they basically reversed their opinion on some
aspects of Titebond III and now it gets their "Editors Choice" rating as
the best glue.
Maybe it was just my imagination, but the tone of the article almost
seemed as if they had been chastened by a parent. I wonder how much
pressure they received from Titebond's company, since they are an
advertiser. Did anybody else get a weird vibe on the article?
Yeah - me!
It was *odd*. It struck me as a complete back-down, a complete
capitulation. Not even the editorial-nads to stand by their testing. I
read it as they defer to the other labs work and then call it "Top
Then I'd wonder why they name TB III as "Top Dog" with their Numero
Uno logo. If their testing methodology is flawed - then redo all of
the samples against a new methodology. Or stick by your tests - if
their sound, if all samples were treated identically, why capitulate?
Not to prolong this - but I didn't get that vibe at all.
Obviously it's subjective - others may laud their approach.
And, in any case, I've been using TB III on my projects... ;->
I agree about retesting--this procedure leaves a bad taste in the minds of
the readers, such as they are. I don't know that WOOD capitulated to
advertiser pressure, but they could certainly clear the air. "Innocent until
proven guilty," and all that stuff.
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.