Titebond Vs Gorilla Glue
Share
For fingerboard deck lamination, I'd choose Titebond over Gorilla Glue.
| Titebond II / III | Gorilla Glue Original (polyurethane) | |
|---|---|---|
| Wood-to-wood bonding | Excellent | Excellent |
| Thin veneer laminating | Excellent | Poorer |
| Glue-line thickness | Thin, controlled | Expands/foams |
| Clamp requirements | Moderate | Important |
| Ease of application | Very easy | Messier |
| Consistency between decks | High | More variable |
| Water resistance | Very good | Excellent |
| Sanding/finishing | Easy | More troublesome |
| Fingerboard suitability | ★★★★★ | ★★☆☆☆ |
Why Titebond wins
Fingerboards are essentially thin laminated wood composites. You want the adhesive to form a very thin, uniform glue line between every veneer.
Original Gorilla Glue is polyurethane and expands as it cures. That expansion is useful for certain woodworking applications, but it's not particularly desirable when you're trying to laminate several very thin fingerboard veneers and maintain precise geometry.
Titebond II or III doesn't foam, spreads predictably, and is much easier to control during pressing.
Titebond II vs III
For premium fingerboards, I'd lean toward Titebond III if the price difference is reasonable.
Titebond III:
- Longer open time
- Higher water resistance
- Strong wood bond
- Good working characteristics
- Particularly useful when you're assembling multiple thin plies
Titebond II:
- Also an excellent choice
- Slightly shorter working time
- More than adequate for indoor fingerboards
- Potentially more economical for production
One important point: don't assume the strongest glue automatically produces the best fingerboard. A properly controlled, thin glue line can matter more than chasing the adhesive with the highest published strength.