Anyone ever try this stuff for rodbuilding? As described, Liquid Fusion is a clear urethane that's claimed to be non-toxic and waterproof. Says it dries clear, nothing about UV exposure or effects in that area and about 24 hours for complete cure. Cleans up with water when wet, I assume that implies some type of waterbased urethane product. It's a one-part glue, a bit thick, no idea of thread penetration or leveling though some saltwater tiers advise using a rotation wheel for larger patterns. Doesn't sound flexible, but it may be something to consider for handles and cork adhesion where chipping risk would be minimal. I found out about it on a search for non-toxic epoxy substitutes and picked some up today at Hobby Lobby.

One can goooogle Liquid Fusion and "fly tying" and get some encouraging results in a search, but the proofs in the "putting" as I say. Meaning putting the stuff underwater for a few days to see how it holds up to it's claim. Just applied it to some jigheads and various objects and am letting it dry/cure for a good while before the bucket test.

This stuff is from the craft world and is made by Duncan Enterprises yet it seems to be getting some initial raves from the flytying crowd. Surprised to see that flytying stores/websites are carrying it and backing the claim of waterproofedness. Maybe it's true. Most eco-freindly, non-tox glues and adhesives that claim to hold up to water have been a huge disappointment by my standards, but this one was only $5.99. Thus far, the little watercolor paintbrush I used to apply the glue has indeed cleaned up well with a bit of water.

Anyhow, those of you with amine sensitivities or just a curiosity for non-toxic/non-irritating adhesives might want to hit the search engine for some overview of this glue and what it might be used for. I'll report back on what I find, might take a few days...I like to let things soak a bit.

It sounds similar to Pubond used by wooden boat builders, it's said to be boil proof , gap filling and moisture curing. I'd would image a bit of water immersion wouldn' t be a problem, been meaning to try some for some cork repair as it expands into gaps as it dries.

Is it a "glue" or a "coating", they are different.

Phil Erickson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is it a "glue" or a "coating", they are different.

It's a glue, Phil. But then so to is Devcon 2-Ton, CA glue, and a host of others that serve a dual purpose as a coating or overcoat hence my trying it on a few jigheads first. I'm assuming this 2 oz bottle of Liquid Fusion is an offshoot of the waterbased urethane deck finishes that come in 1-5 gallon buckets at the hardware store. Looked into waterbased stuff for lurebuilding in the past and that's the only place I ever saw waterbased urethane, there it's considered a coating or finish. One would imagine some differences in the formula, I'm not sharp enough to sort it out from an MSDS, but here's a link

[www.sial-canada.com]

Charles, thanks for the Pubond info. I don't think this LF stuff is quite at that level of strength and durability, but it may suffice if it passes a decent water test. Thus far in the cure, it seems to be rather flexible which surprised me. About what you would expect out of Duragloss (U40) when curing so I'll give some of these experiments a longer cure time. Decided to run a few thick beads on some PVC and other plastics so I'll have a good, fat bead to soak and poke at once it's cured well. Doesn't look like LF is really much of a large gap filler, it's a non-foaming product as described and may run a bit.

Safe to suspect this stuff will not be a rock hard cure like typical epoxies or CA and will require a longer cure time. Waterbased fabric paints are kinda like that as well, they are quite durable, but with the caveat of a longer cure/drying rate depending on thickness of application. Oddly, those 99 cent bottles of fabric paint contain a non-tox product that is able to withstand most anything (fishing, washer & dryer), so maybe this LF has some hope to it. We'll see.

Pond out back is still iced over, so I may as well dig up a scrap blank and try a few wraps with the new glue just to see how it behaves (shrinkage) and if it can penetrate bare thread wraps to any degree. I know folks say that thread coatings mostly cover/protect thread, but Duragloss LS Supreme DOES penetrate well and fill in nicley along a guide foot under the wraps when used without CP. That's my standard for performance and behavior on a wrap. Makes for a tough re-do, but it adds some nice structural integrity to the wrap when the abuse comes over years.

BTW, Happy New Year!

Joseph, I realize epoxy adhesives and CA are often used as coatings on lures, flies and the like, but they are unsuitable for coating guide wrap thread if that is what you are considering. That's why I asked if it was a glue or coating. I may have misinterpreted your intended use.

Guide wraps need to retain some flexibility and should have UV protection characteristics as well.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/01/2011 02:29PM by Phil Erickson.

Joseph,
As far as I know, NONE of the items that you mentioned are suitable or used on thread wraps. They are all used in rod building as an ADHESIVE, not thread wrap. CA is often used as a wood finish but have never heard of it used as a thread finish.

Mike (Southgate, MI)
If I don't want to, I don't have to and nobody can make me (except my wife) cuz I'm RETIRED!!

Phil, the original question was pretty open ended as far as potential use. I bought the bottle mainly as a jighead overcoat to replace Devcon 2 ton which is getting hard to come by. Was wondering if it had any other uses or if anyone had used this type of product in fishing and that got me thinking of rodbuilding in general.

Gents, I've used Devcon on wraps as an experiment, it does quite well but I prefer the LS Supreme/Duragloss. Never used CA as a rod wrap finish, but use it extensively on flies and to coat threads elsewhere. Quite good, but it's not flexible, hence the limitations of my use. I've heard of many things folks use on guide wraps outside of the typical products, some pretty unusual. Apparently, many things will do the job and withstand the elements though they may not be pleasant to work with or look at.

Can't say for UV protection and urethane, maybe it's there, maybe not. As far as flexibilty and our favorite epoxies, they all lose it over time in my experience. After a year or two Flexcoat and U40 are alot less flexible than one might think. I'm betting the stiffness of the guide foot prevents that from being much of an issue in most cases, probably why so many things have been used there and lasted. Spread it on foil and set it on a shelf for a few years, it gets quite hard. I think what little flexibility does remain prevents chipping or fracturing and that's a good thing!

The LF experiment on wraps? It does penetrate somewhat by itself or thinned a bit with water, but the lack of self leveling and finished look is NOT something I find pleasing. Not easy to work with around edges of thread as it doesn't roll over nicely and create a smooth transition to the blank. Did not try a winding check or using it in place of an epoxy ramp in front of a reel seat/handle. May have some utility in that arena, but it's a no go on wraps for workability.

I'll torque the cork when it's fully cured, immerse it, the attack it again to see how it does. Hopefully, it does well because a one-part glue like this beats the epoxy mess on building handles for me. Sanding might be another story, it looks and feels more like Aqualseal wader repair when cured then sandable glue.

Joseph, anything will work if you are satisfied with the results. Whether others would have the same satisfaction is questionable. Most rod wrap epoxies retain their flexibilities for many many years. I have repaired rods that are 10-12 years old epoxied with Flexcoat and find it still has some flexibility. Adhesive epoxies are manufactured for ENTIRELY different purposes!

All that said one of the great things about custom rod building is that ones does what one wants.

Phil Erickson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Most rod wrap
> epoxies retain their flexibilities for many many
> years. I have repaired rods that are 10-12 years
> old epoxied with Flexcoat and find it still has
> some flexibility.

Yes, they do to a certain extent. However, the key word here being "some" and there is a certain limit to how much we want to have here. One might think lack of flexibility is a negative, but get too much and you'll learn what I just did on some scrap blanks. The Liquid Fusion urethane is actually TOO FLEXIBLE to use on rod wraps, especially on larger guide feet and on the larger diameters of blank. Has a bit to do with how the thread comes over the guide foot and the tendency to move a bit unless wraps are crushingly tight.

Essentially, it doesn't solidify the wrap enough and make it a relatively rigid/stable form. Small guide feet on small diameter sections of blank are decent, but the thread comes over the guide foot and drops almost immediately around the blank, thus very secure. Larger guide feet have that longer run off the foot before getting around the blank and are more apt to move to the side a bit. Even when ground fairly low and thin to minimize tenting, the foot can sneak a bit. It's subtle, but one can notice the movement under the cured wrap when torquing the larger single foot guide. Know how we adjust guides prior to applying the finish, the wiggle and tweak until they are in proper alignment? Well, when coated with LF they will return to a position, but can be jostled about fairly easy relative a true rod wrap epoxy. The LF is tough stuff, but it has too much give and flexibility for this purpose. I don't like guide feet rubbing a blank with that much movement under a wrap, it tends to wear into the blank over time.

Ironically, the somewhat less flexible Flexcoats and U40's win over the LF urethane here as they add a good bit of structural integrity and firmness to the finished wrap. I don't think I fully appreciated this prior to the recent LF experiment. Might also explain why some other types of inflexible glues or coatings work reasonably well for guide wraps, it's not just about flexibility, there's also a rigidity component in operation here especially on the fat end of the blank.

I suspect rod wrap epoxies have a pretty well thought out balance of attributes on this one, I learn something everyday in this craft (maybe).

Does Permagloss, when used on guide wraps with the (don't say micro!) smallest guides have flexible characteristics? Something tells me no, but then <5mm guides tend to have a pretty short foot and wrap.

Either way, I'll stick with LS Supreme and use the Liquid Fusion for cork and lures. After 6 hours underwater, the LF is still intact and I can't peel it off the plastic I ran a bead on. Apparently, it IS waterproof to a reasonable degree and adheres to some things quite well. Not bad for non-tox!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/02/2011 02:32AM by joseph arvay.

Permagloss is highly flexible, yet very hard. It was designed for this purpose.

....................

Thanks, Tom. the "flexible, yet very hard" part sounds a bit contradictory at first, but I think I get it after this round of experiments and some thought. Ran another search here and came across some of the Permagloss threads that mention other properties such as solvent/xylene in the product. I suspect that the hardness characteristic spoken of is related to that formulation to a certain degree.

This water based LF can't legally have that in it to meet the non-tox code and perhaps that's why this formula is flexible, yet not so hard as other solvent based urethanes. Not sure if the solvent allows for a harder cured result while maintaining flexibility, but it is one major difference between what I tried and what is in Permagloss.

Perhaps waterbased, non-tox urethanes can be very flexible, yet only get so hard on a final cure. Solvent based probably gets far better penetration into the thread wraps, that might be a factor here between the two formulas as well. Might not be a way around the solvents and toxics for this purpose in the near future, but then time and technology surprise me often so maybe eventually there will be such a product.

Liquid Fusion is also marketed as a fabric adhesive, ref. joann.com or hancockfabrics.com

Yeah, Steve...I noticed that about these types of products. Duncan seems to be the parent company/source of many labels. You might be speaking of the line known as "Aleene's" as well which is a similar (same?) formula under another label, but by Duncan.

As a note, the LF is getting considerable harder, yet maintaining flexibility and adhesion quite impressively. Cures fast so to speak, but the full cure and hardness looks like it takes considerable longer than solvent based products. Appears to adhere well to itself, the new beads I ran on top of the existing water tested one's are holding well.

Looks like mostly a cork and lure crafting glue/coating where batches of stuff can be allowed to cure fully and time is not really of critical importance. I don't know enough to say on complete cure hardness and total draw-in or shrinkage of this waterbased stuff when used as a glue. Might be an issue in gap filling or where tolerances are not perfectly fit, not much can outdo epoxy there.