Bending with Titebond 2 or 3

schrammguitars · Post by **schrammguitars** » Sat Nov 07, 2009 12:09 pm

I recently started using Gorilla PU glue for glueing my cedar tops. The glue line is nearly invisible. I use a 5 piece top, non-bookmatched. Take a look: http://schrammguitars.com/shek_004.jpg I only do this on my lattice guitars. I've been impressed with the glue line being nearly invisible....better than Titebond 1. I used the LMI stuff a long time ago and had problems with it. It also showed the glue line more than any other glue I've tried. Maybe it is better now and worth another try.

Bob Connor · Post by **Bob Connor** » Sat Nov 07, 2009 4:19 pm

I bought some LMI white a while back and I believe it wasn't 100%.

It didn't dry clear but had a cloudy look to it (which I believe is an indicator that something is wrong with it)

I was put off after that and never bought any more prefering to use HHG or Titebond original.

As to using the appropriate glue for the job I'm reminded of a Mario Proulx-ism "The devil is in the details" as he he is fond of reminding us.

The instrument will only be as good as the sum of it's parts so use the most appropriate wood/glue/method for everything you do.

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Sat Nov 07, 2009 5:03 pm

I've used 2 bottles of LMI now, and both have been top notch glues. But alas it's awfully expensive to get here, so only get a couple of bottles when I'm doing an LMI order, which isn't all that often.

I suspect you had a bad batch Jeremy. The stuff I've got is a really easy to use and to date no failures.

Mike Lindstrom · Post by **Mike Lindstrom** » Sun Nov 08, 2009 12:08 am

What Waddy said got me thinking. His flex test showed fish glue to be extremely brittle, with some flex in LMI and HHG. Guitars do flex. So should we choose glues that can move at least a little? I wouldn't want the brace glue to shatter when I strung it up. Of course his test may not reflect behavior in a joint. Myself, I haven't used fish glue on anything except for bindings yet.

New to this forum. Lots of great info. Thanks all for sharing.

Mike Lindstrom
Denver, CO

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Sun Nov 08, 2009 6:23 am

Welcome to the forum Mike.

J.F. Custom · Post by **J.F. Custom** » Sun Nov 08, 2009 8:24 am

Allen wrote:I suspect you had a bad batch Jeremy. The stuff I've got is a really easy to use and to date no failures.

Yes Allen I'd have to agree at this point.

Either the timber was problematic, the glue a bad batch or possible environmental damage to it.

You simply can't sell a product that doesn't work, so something was amiss. Many people also swear by this stuff - on the other hand, it seems I'm not alone in having experienced issues with it too. In any case it's funny how first impressions have a lasting effect. As I said, I won't be in a rush to try it again. Having said that, it was only experimentation that led me to give it a go in the first place. I have no misgiving of another glue to solve at present.

What Jeff said is also a very valid point. The limited amounts that we import would appear to leave it open to less than ideal conditions and accessibility to fresh batches at reasonable prices compound this for us here in Australia as well. I think I'll stick to those familiar and experiment with the HHG a bit too.

Oh and welcome Mike !

Cheers,

Jeremy.

WaddyT · Post by **WaddyT** » Sun Nov 08, 2009 10:46 am

Mike Lindstrom wrote:What Waddy said got me thinking. His flex test showed fish glue to be extremely brittle, with some flex in LMI and HHG. Guitars do flex. So should we choose glues that can move at least a little? I wouldn't want the brace glue to shatter when I strung it up. Of course his test may not reflect behavior in a joint. Myself, I haven't used fish glue on anything except for bindings yet.

New to this forum. Lots of great info. Thanks all for sharing.

Mike Lindstrom
Denver, CO

Hi Mike, Welcome to ANZLF!

I don't think my test is a scientific one, nor do I think glue dried open is anywhere near what you get when it's in a nice tight joint. I'm sire that the glue that I was testing was much thicker than it would have been in a joint, too.

Rick Turner · Post by **Rick Turner** » Sun Nov 08, 2009 2:02 pm

As promised:

Glues I use in lutherie, where I use them, and a bit about why.

Hot hide glue
Center seams for tops and backs
Gluing braces to tops and backs
Bridges on acoustic instruments
Kerfing for acoustic guitars
Tops to sides on acoustic guitars

Traditional, and still a favorite for many lutherie jobs. May have tonal benefits because of how hard it cures. Has better heat resistance than Titebond and other â€œcarpentersâ€™ gluesâ€

Nick · Post by **Nick** » Sun Nov 08, 2009 2:45 pm

Nice tidy & informative post Rick, thanks for that.

kiwigeo · Post by **kiwigeo** » Sun Nov 08, 2009 4:25 pm

Thanks alot Rick....

J.F. Custom · Post by **J.F. Custom** » Sun Nov 08, 2009 9:48 pm

Thanks for the effort Rick, that makes for interesting reading.

If I could indulge myself a little further into your experience, I have a couple of questions.

What do you put the failures you've expressed in the scarf joints down to? I ask this as I can't imagine that the LMI is that much stronger than HHG, Epoxy or Titebond 1. Have you changed methods of creating this join to be more accurate/controllable in conjunction with the glue change or do you think it is the end grain that presents the issue for the others?

As you suggest, you believe the LMI be a Polyvinyl Acetate glue. I would agree only to add that I think it is likely a Cross-linking Polyvinyl Acetate. I personally think this may be where it gains the advantage for the said scarf joint. The cross-linking nature makes it particularly suited to end grain gluing. There is another glue available here in Australia that it reminds me of and it is also a cross-linking polyvinyl acetate - though the one here is very expensive for the volume; approx. $30 for 500ml. But if this is indeed why is performs well for you in this joint, does this bring Titebond 2 into the picture? Have you any experience with this glue? Titebond 2 from what I know is also a cross-linking glue. If it compares favourably, it may provide the best option for us in Australia. I say this because of the import costs and risks from LMI for their glue, and the price tag of the Australian version - average 2-3x that of a bottle of T2.

Lastly (I think

) , when you laminate necks with the West System, or any other gluing job as opposed to pore filling for that matter, do you ever use their white microfibre powder? If so, why?

I am sure you know but I wanted to express, you are under no obligations or expectations by me to respond to all these questions Rick. Thanks for the opportunity to pick your brains over such matters freely - very generous from someone with your experience and appreciated by all.

Regards,

Jeremy.

*EDIT*

BTW, nice change to your tag line Rick

Nick - love that avatar. Been around for some time now but still a favourite.

I did consider using it on here too... but opted to remain guitar based.

It takes a strange type of genius to come up with that I think...

Ahem, now back to topic.

Craig · Post by **Craig** » Sun Nov 08, 2009 10:57 pm

Appreciate that thanks Rick . From what I can see from your list ( and referring to my original question ) , you use either thin or thick C.A. ONLY for your binding ( unless it's plastc/celluloid ).

You stated earlier that you'd like your guitars to be good for two or three hundred years. You don't like the idea of TB3 ,yet you are using C.A. a relatively modern glue which hasn't got a great reputation among a lot of luthiers . One of our members here recently reported of his bindings letting go which were C.A'd . It's also been stated that there are doubts about it's use, long term.

I'm certainly not trying to trip you up here Rick . I'd just like to hear your reasoning for this choice , and why you think it preferrable .

If I could just get back to my original question : Attaching a side purfling line to bindings prior to bending .:

My understanding was that TB3 had the best chance of not delaminating whilst being bent . .Others have said they have got away with it using TB original and HHG . I would give these a shot in preference to TB3 if it weren't for the delamination risk . As I'm only going to get one shot with these matching bindings ( they were cut from the sides ) I'm not keen on cocking up . Given that this is only one thin glue line to one side of that purfling line ( side purfling ) ,. and considering the sides are connected via the liners anyways, do you think it reasonable to hedge my bets and use TB3 ? . I really can't see that's it's use ( in this instance) could be any more detrimental than the use of CA . In fact ,I think less so

Dennis Leahy · Post by **Dennis Leahy** » Mon Nov 09, 2009 4:21 am

Rick Turner wrote:As promised:

Glues I use in lutherie, where I use them, and a bit about why....

Thanks, Rick.

Dennis

Australian/New Zealand Luthiers Forum

Bending with Titebond 2 or 3

Who is online