Return-Path: Sender: "Marvin Kaye" To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 01:27:42 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from lakermmtao03.cox.net ([68.230.240.36] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c3) with ESMTP id 818295 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 23 Mar 2005 23:46:30 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.240.36; envelope-from=patricktc@cox.net Received: from P43G ([68.228.160.203]) by lakermmtao03.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with ESMTP id <20050324044542.WWKR2673.lakermmtao03.cox.net@P43G> for ; Wed, 23 Mar 2005 23:45:42 -0500 From: "Pat Cohenour" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" Subject: primer X-Original-Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 22:45:24 -0600 X-Original-Message-ID: <003401c5302c$4d448e80$6501a8c0@P43G> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0035_01C52FFA.02AF0080" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C52FFA.02AF0080 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Can anyone compare/contrast the urethane primers such as PPG K-36 or Dupont 1101S to WLS as to ease of use, sandability, durability, cost, etc? Thanks Pat Cohenour IV-P in progress ------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C52FFA.02AF0080 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Can anyone compare/contrast the urethane primers such = as PPG K-36 or Dupont 1101S to WLS as to ease of use, sandability, durability, = cost, etc?

 

Thanks

 

Pat Cohenour

IV-P in progress

 

------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C52FFA.02AF0080--