snip
> Most of the facts that changed their mind were from
> different studies. They decided to ignore the results of their own
testing.
Exactamundo !!! The tests are from the Industry Standard tests. Guess who
defines the standards? Not woodworkers. It is Meaningless babblecock.
The ANSI/HPVA Type I or Type II testing is done by the HPVA (Hardwood
Plywood Veneer Associaition) and if you go to their website (hpva.org) any
type of information requires purchase. This is not consumer friendly, yet
Titebond uses it to market it as the "Best Glue Ever". So, take it for what
its worth. I know there are people who swear by Titebond and I have TBII
which is good. But is it that good?
The other thing I notice that since the original testing there has not been
a TB add in the Wood Magazine. We'll know when the next issue comes out and
the TBIII "Best Glue Ever" marketing spew is back.
How can you trust the study when they change their mind and omit
competitors (e.g. Gorilla glue)?
[email protected] (WilliaJ2) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> The Nov. issue of Wood magazine (page 8) has an update to the Sep. glue test.
> Basically give T3 a rating of Top Glue Overall.
>
> Big John
>
>
> Take out the TRASH for E-mail.
"Prometheus" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> I decided against getting Wood magazine, and I'm sorta glad after this
> thread. Personally, I prefer Woodsmith, precisely because it has no
> ads- therefore no ad departments to put pressure on their content!
No ads but plenty of referrals of where to get supplies from. And I bet
that there is something going on in that respect.
"Never Enough Money" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> How can you trust the study when they change their mind and omit
> competitors (e.g. Gorilla glue)?
>
GG was in a different category since it is a polyurethane glue. It
performed well in the original tests.
"RKON" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%JTcd.40560$%x.22913@okepread04...
>
> The ANSI/HPVA Type I or Type II testing is done by the HPVA (Hardwood
> Plywood Veneer Associaition) and if you go to their website (hpva.org) any
> type of information requires purchase. This is not consumer friendly, yet
> Titebond uses it to market it as the "Best Glue Ever". So, take it for
> what
> its worth. I know there are people who swear by Titebond and I have TBII
> which is good. But is it that good?
What is funny about the water proof test is that the only time you see the
words "Water Proof" is in the name of the test. When you read the details
of the "Water Proof" test, the words "Water Resistance" are used.
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 14:13:59 -0400, "RKON" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>snip
>
>> Most of the facts that changed their mind were from
>> different studies. They decided to ignore the results of their own
>testing.
>
>
>Exactamundo !!! The tests are from the Industry Standard tests. Guess who
>defines the standards? Not woodworkers. It is Meaningless babblecock.
>
>The ANSI/HPVA Type I or Type II testing is done by the HPVA (Hardwood
>Plywood Veneer Associaition) and if you go to their website (hpva.org) any
>type of information requires purchase. This is not consumer friendly, yet
>Titebond uses it to market it as the "Best Glue Ever". So, take it for what
>its worth. I know there are people who swear by Titebond and I have TBII
>which is good. But is it that good?
>
>The other thing I notice that since the original testing there has not been
>a TB add in the Wood Magazine. We'll know when the next issue comes out and
>the TBIII "Best Glue Ever" marketing spew is back.
I decided against getting Wood magazine, and I'm sorta glad after this
thread. Personally, I prefer Woodsmith, precisely because it has no
ads- therefore no ad departments to put pressure on their content!
Prometheus wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 14:13:59 -0400, "RKON" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>snip
>>
>>> Most of the facts that changed their mind were from
>>> different studies. They decided to ignore the results of their own
>>testing.
>>
>>
>>Exactamundo !!! The tests are from the Industry Standard tests. Guess who
>>defines the standards? Not woodworkers. It is Meaningless babblecock.
>>
>>The ANSI/HPVA Type I or Type II testing is done by the HPVA (Hardwood
>>Plywood Veneer Associaition) and if you go to their website (hpva.org) any
>>type of information requires purchase. This is not consumer friendly, yet
>>Titebond uses it to market it as the "Best Glue Ever". So, take it for
>>what its worth. I know there are people who swear by Titebond and I have
>>TBII which is good. But is it that good?
>>
>>The other thing I notice that since the original testing there has not
>>been a TB add in the Wood Magazine. We'll know when the next issue comes
>>out and the TBIII "Best Glue Ever" marketing spew is back.
>
> I decided against getting Wood magazine, and I'm sorta glad after this
> thread. Personally, I prefer Woodsmith, precisely because it has no
> ads- therefore no ad departments to put pressure on their content!
FWIW, Consumer Reports has no ads and yet they're often way off base.
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Never Enough Money did say:
> How can you trust the study when they change their mind and omit
> competitors (e.g. Gorilla glue)?
>
I'm pretty sure gorilla was included in the first article.
The change did seem rather abrupt though. Wonder if Franklin's lawyers
called, or more likely, their marketing department called and threatened
to pull advertising... Most of the facts that changed their mind were from
different studies. They decided to ignore the results of their own testing.
--
New project = new tool. Hard and fast rule.