This is how they cover their dupa's:

Found at the bottom of their web page:
http://titebond.com/IntroPageTB.ASP?....asp?prodcat=1

Important Notice: Our recommendations, if any, for the use of this product
are based on tests believed to be reliable. Since the use of this product is
beyond the control of the manufacturer, no guarantee or warranty, expressed
or implied, is made as to such use or effects incidental to such use,
handling or possession or the results to be obtained, whether in accordance
with the directions or claimed so to be. The manufacturer expressly
disclaims responsibility therefore. Furthermore, nothing contained herein
shall be construed as a recommendation to use any product in conflict with
existing laws and/or patents covering any material or use.

1.) Our recommendations, if any, for the use of this product are based on
tests believed to be reliable. - *** Translates to we tested it looks okay
by our standards..

2.) Since the use of this product is beyond the control of the manufacturer,
no guarantee or warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to such use or
effects incidental to such use, handling or possession or the results to be
obtained, whether in accordance with the directions or claimed so to be.
***They don't stand behind their product because it doesn't work as their
marketing says.

3.) The manufacturer expressly disclaims responsibility therefore.
Furthermore, nothing contained herein shall be construed as a recommendation
to use any product in conflict with existing laws and/or patents covering
any material or use.
*** If it doesn't work and you followed the directions to the letter you are
SOL and they are covered.


They are scamming you with their marketing. The tests by Wood prove that
they are not the " The Best Wood Glue Ever". Their Glue probably works very
well for most glue-ups. I love the article because it exposes them for what
they are worth. Next Months issue will probably have some half ass
clarification and the Titebond ad will be still on the back page.

Rich







"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote in message
...

"RKON" wrote in message
Hold on there Ed. The back cover of the same issue. It reads "The Best
Wood
Glue Ever". It goes on to say What makes Titebond III Ultimate Wood
Glue
the best ever? It's Waterproof, yet it cleans up with water......

In case one forgot what waterprrof means:

wa·ter·proof - Impervious to or unaffected by water.

I do not see any asterisks or footnotes on the Ad. I think they are
making
a
bold claim and they are fair game.

On the label of the glue it reads:
Passes ANSI/HPVA Type 1 Water Resistance

I'll agree that water proof and water resistance are different according
to
the dictionary. Given that though, the label gives a specification so
testing should be done in compliance with the intended use.

The following was found in a forum on
http://ths.gardenweb.com/forums/load...195230912.html

What is the difference between the ANSI/HPVA Type I and Type II
water-resistance specification?
Both of these tests are conducted using 6" by 6" birch laminates glued
together to make three-ply plywood. The test for Type I is clearly more
stringent than Type II, and involves boiling the glue bonds and testing
the
specimens while they are wet.
Type I testing involves cutting the 6" by 6" assemblies into 1" by 3"
specimens, boiling them for 4 hours, then baking the specimens in a 145°F
oven for 20 hours. They are boiled for an additional 4 hours, then
immediately cooled using running water. The specimens are sheared while
wet,
and the bonds must pass certain strength and wood failure requirements to
pass the Type I specification.

Type II testing involves cutting the 6" by 6" assemblies into 2" by 5"
specimens, soaking them for 4 hours, then baking the specimens in a 120°F
oven for 19 hours. This is repeated for a total of three cycles, and the
bonds must not delaminate to pass the Type II specification.



If they can't even compete then maybe
they should have it read " The Best Wood Glue Ever as long as you don't
immerse it Water" And based on the tests it doesn't appear to be the
best
regardless.

Looks like a 4 hour test is OK, not a 24 hour test.


It seems to me that marketing went a bit to far and they are coming
unglued
in their claims. I wouldn't jump all over the testing performed in the
article. They have set themselves up by making the bold claims.
You don't use Titebond by chance do you?

I recently bought some for a couple of outdoor furniture projects. I used
TB II the last time and it is holding up well, so this time I tried the TB
III. I expect it will take the exposure typical of outdoor furniture, but
I
have no plans to use in in anything submersed. I'd use epoxy for that. I
don't think the 24 hour test if fair to any adhesive. OK, you may want to
try it just for the fun of it, but I'd not make poor performance claims
for
something not made to endure the particular test.
Ed