For what it's worth, some or most of you might know this, but in case you don't-
Henkel/Loctite are well aware of the "impostor" situation going on. One thing that Loctite does, as well as legitimate competing brands of similar products, is they make performance and engineering specifications available. Does that matter in a home shop? Honestly, "probably" not. In nearly all cases, in a home shop environment, nobody's doing engineering calculations that require this, it's just a reactive or proactive decision to add "a little help" to a joint (thread, press fit, "missed" press fit, etc. But there's no calculations involved, it's just a little help that's being subjectively applied. It's hard to know what the right solution is when you don't even know what the failure mode is that caused a fastener or press pin to come loose, and so you don't even know that a retaining compound is a plausible solution, but "it can't hurt"... In that case, some of the generic, even "look alike" and borderline or fully counterfeit imitations may well do what needs to be done. To my knowledge, they'll "lock" to some degree. How strong? how much gap can they fill, how temperature resistant, how oil or solvent resistant are they both before and after they've cured... Who knows. But I believe they'll all do "something". If that's adequate, (and it may legitimately be adequate...) and you don't mind supporting business that work this way, that's a personal choice.
Henkel is very well aware of the problem. For the user's protection AND for their own protection, they've gone to putting a unique QR code on every single package of their retaining compounds that they sell, as well as engraving the actual container. (I'm not sure about the rest of the Loctite line, but definitely all of the retaining compounds). This allows you to verify the product you have is genuine, AND it kind of obligates you to "use" that QR code if you're doing something that's dependent on the specs and you want help from their engineering department (mostly industry stuff, not for hobbyists), and also if you want them to take any responsibility for a "bad batch", or other reasons why their product might not have lived up to it's claims. You can scan the QR code yourself, or you can take a picture and they'll figure it out for you.
They didn't add that level of authenticatrion because a few people are making knockoffs. They made that investrment and take on the ongoing expense because the counterfeiing is real, the misleading if not fully counterfeit labels of off brands is costing them money, the level of continuity of performance between brands using the same part or model numbers is real, and leaving them needing to be distinguished for the purposes of their legal responsibility, and their biggest customers (indusry...) absolutely need that service to cover their own liability. If the knockofffs were of comperable performance, there would be no need for industry to worry about liability for the products they use.
Henkel/Loctite are well aware of the "impostor" situation going on. One thing that Loctite does, as well as legitimate competing brands of similar products, is they make performance and engineering specifications available. Does that matter in a home shop? Honestly, "probably" not. In nearly all cases, in a home shop environment, nobody's doing engineering calculations that require this, it's just a reactive or proactive decision to add "a little help" to a joint (thread, press fit, "missed" press fit, etc. But there's no calculations involved, it's just a little help that's being subjectively applied. It's hard to know what the right solution is when you don't even know what the failure mode is that caused a fastener or press pin to come loose, and so you don't even know that a retaining compound is a plausible solution, but "it can't hurt"... In that case, some of the generic, even "look alike" and borderline or fully counterfeit imitations may well do what needs to be done. To my knowledge, they'll "lock" to some degree. How strong? how much gap can they fill, how temperature resistant, how oil or solvent resistant are they both before and after they've cured... Who knows. But I believe they'll all do "something". If that's adequate, (and it may legitimately be adequate...) and you don't mind supporting business that work this way, that's a personal choice.
Henkel is very well aware of the problem. For the user's protection AND for their own protection, they've gone to putting a unique QR code on every single package of their retaining compounds that they sell, as well as engraving the actual container. (I'm not sure about the rest of the Loctite line, but definitely all of the retaining compounds). This allows you to verify the product you have is genuine, AND it kind of obligates you to "use" that QR code if you're doing something that's dependent on the specs and you want help from their engineering department (mostly industry stuff, not for hobbyists), and also if you want them to take any responsibility for a "bad batch", or other reasons why their product might not have lived up to it's claims. You can scan the QR code yourself, or you can take a picture and they'll figure it out for you.
They didn't add that level of authenticatrion because a few people are making knockoffs. They made that investrment and take on the ongoing expense because the counterfeiing is real, the misleading if not fully counterfeit labels of off brands is costing them money, the level of continuity of performance between brands using the same part or model numbers is real, and leaving them needing to be distinguished for the purposes of their legal responsibility, and their biggest customers (indusry...) absolutely need that service to cover their own liability. If the knockofffs were of comperable performance, there would be no need for industry to worry about liability for the products they use.
