<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" = http-equiv=Content-Type> <META content="MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=GENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=#b8b8b8> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>List,</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Several years ago, I did some tests on = "Pin Driving Fluid". I used an old 5 ply scrap of pinblock, similar to Bolduc stock. = On several I intentionally drilled way undersize, drilling two holes of = each size, (I use English, Letter and Metric bits. Chart available on request.) I = swabbed one of the holes with "Phenolic Varnish", from Rodda Paint and left the = other hole dry. I sized the tuning pins with a micrometer to ascertain = exactness. I then drove the pins to the height they would normally be if in an = "exposed" pin block. Then I waited an hour. After the hour, I took my trusty Inch = Pound Torque Wrench and attempted to measure the lot. I found that ALL of the pins = that were swabbed with the "Pin Driving Fluid" were consistantly smoother. Also, = they had less propensity(?) to "pop" and had a lower torque than those driven = "dry". Several of the "dry" pins actually broke(!), where the pins with "PDF", = in the same size holes, DID NOT! Needless to say, I have been using Pin Driving = Fluid, religously, since. Hope this helps. By the way the "Phenolic Varnish" "#1067-S1", from Rhodda Paints, does not have the added "Driers" in it = that regualr "Spar Varnish" does. I found this out by furnishing a sample of = my last bottle of Trefz Pin Driving Fluid, for analysis by Rhodda's chemist. = It's my opinion that regular Spar Varnish, although "less bad" than driving = "dry", it does not do the job as well and I've found that poppy pins are more prevalent.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Regards,</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Joe Garrett, R.P.T. (Oregon)</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>