Resourcenal is good stuff and works well, but does require a good fit and proper clamping pressures. When working on certificated aircraft with wood parts, it is often times the only acceptable wood bonding agent.

Epoxy resins are more tolerant of less than perfect workmanship and do not require (or even desire) so much clamping pressure. The bashing of epoxy resins here is a bit overblown and there are hundreds of thousands of epoxy resins, most with their own designed purpose. Not all Epoxy resins are equal. Several, including T-88, work very well for aircraft construction. It is highly unlikely that you are going to approach transition temperatures to where your aircraft may be heat damaged unless it is painted black and lives outside in southern AZ. I have a wood airframe aircraft that is now approaching 20 years old with well over 1000 hours of flight time on it. To date, I have seen -0- failures in the epoxy resins used in construction. This would include all of the fuselage, and the built up box spars.

I have observed a poorly built, aged and weathered example of the same aircraft that was not airworthy tortured to failure using a jacking frame and chains. The distortion of the box spars and airframe before failure was incredible, but the ultimate failures were in the shear webbing of the spars as the webbing plywood finally ripped right down the middle. No failures of the epoxy bonds were observed in the failure testing.

While I do agree that Resourcenal probably has a better bond than T-88 or other epoxy resins, many of the epoxy resins available and recommended for aircraft construction are more than adequate and will exceed the strength of the woods they are bonding.

Cub Builder