On 5/17/2016 9:37 AM, dadiOH wrote:

That and the fact that it was used so extensively. Bondo works well for
smallish areas but over large areas it will eventually fail.

Absolutely, as will most any product. If something requires a patch, it
has arguably started down that road.

The ultimate, usually most desirable remedy is replacement with new.

The question: do you want to spend $X to patch something you can replace
for $X +/-; knowing that any "patch" will likely require some future
maintenance regardless of the product used to patch?

Recently finished an interior remodel. Previous inhabitant had been
confined to a wheel chair. There was not a door jamb in the house that
was not scarred, scraped, dinged and gouged by being rammed repeatedly
with a wheelchair.

Nothing structural, all cosmetic ... just like the OP's post in this
thread, before a trolling idiot introduced a rabbit trail, which we all
followed like sheeple.

The client originally wanted to replace all door jambs, but given the
replacement cost (demo, cost of material, trim out labor, prime and
paint); versus patching options; the client decided to patch.

The painter, as I knew he would, wanted to use Bondo for the patching.

I was fine with that for this job, knowing from past experience that its
ubiquitous availability, price, and the time involved from application
to ready-to-paint, would give the client the bang for the buck he was
looking for in his particular situation.

And, also confident in knowing that this particular painter's success is
due in large part to his believe that preparation is the key to an
excellent patch/paint job, often in spite of the product being used.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
https://www.facebook.com/eWoodShop-206166666122228
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)