I have built a Sig Something Extra using CA Glue. Would it have been better to use wood glue instead? What are the pro's and con's of each.

Since you've already built your plane the differences seem moot at this point... However -- I see CA as being faster and maybe a little heavier than wood glue. There is evaporation of a solvent (water) from wood glue and there is very little (none?) evaporation using CA. I built my SSE 6 years ago using thin CA and it is on its third engine and second owner and is still going strong!

I like CA glue for the speed factor instant holding power or nearly. for areas that I need to sand or am not pressed for time Tite bond is one of the best when I was first building it was Tite Bond, Elmers wood glue ,and Testors wood glue . for little or no fumes Tite bond great holding power also

I stick mainly to CA's and epoxy for all of my construction, and rebuilding. Some people have
reported on a thread, and at our flying field that they have developed a bad reaction from the
use of CA's and epoxies. It would be a good idea from a health stand point to use less CA's where possible just so to lower the chance of getting a health problem from the CA fumes. My
only suggestions is to use a glue that is somewhat water proof just in case the plane winds up on
floats, or gets drenched flying in a light rain shower or two. My Eagle II was lost in a farm field
for some 8 weeks in Oregon's rain, and was really soaked when it was found by a farmer. Once
dried out, there was no CA join failures anywhere. It flys very well since rebuilding.

Rich S.

I like CA if I'm in a hurry, but the fumes really aren't good for you and it's pricey...

Tite Bond and the other aliphatics are superb glues, tough, light, cheap and no fumes. The only drawback is they cure slowly.

One that hasn't been mentioned yet is the polyurethane glues, such as Gorilla glue and Elmer's Pro-Bond. Elmer's is significantly cheaper for the same stuff. They are super tough and strong and will stick almost anything to anything. There is nothing better for sheeting wing skins (PU weighs about half of epoxy) and it works very well everywhere else. The biggest advantage (and drawback, sometimes) is that it foams to fill gaps and cracks. This can be great for less than perfect joints (and bonding to foam), but you MUST clamp the joint or it will shift with the foaming action. No fumes to speak of and water clean up until set. Slow curing action, as well. Hard to sand once cured. Waterproof once cured.


Mark

I currently use aliphatics (TiteBond II) but am strongly considering moving to primarily CAs. We'll see.

I try to use Titebond wood glue and 15-30 minute epoxy.

I was sick for about a month from the fumes from that CA glue last year. CA glue is alright if you wear a mask and have good ventilation.

But I still prefer to use my above choices due to the good adhesion and cost.

Always remember, duct tape is always available

big dan

I like cyanoacrylates (CA), epoxies, and more recently, urethane glue. It depends on the application. I love the speed of CA for general building of the airframe. Epoxy for high stress areas like firewalls, landing gear plates, etc. Urethane is great when you need a filling or expanding bond. It's great on foam, especially repairing when gaps need to be filled in. Great for sheeting foam wings with a vacuum bag. Also good for pin point hinges.

Here is some interesting info on cyanoacrylates.

[link=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyanoacrylate]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyanoacrylate[/link]

Alphatic resins (Tite Bond, etc.) are great if you have the time. There are basically no fumes and the cost is much less than CA for a very strong glue joint. CA's are the thing if time is a factor. Epoxy for plywood/high stress areas.

You are completely right. Use the right glue for the right job. One glue usually does not fit all applications.