swoody126 wrote:by regluarly perusing CL i found a Lincoln 180(220v) just yesterday NIB
and @ the spry young age of 71 brought it home for $400
by time to close the barn doors yesterday evening it was assembled and passing nice welds on 1/4" structural steel scraps using .035 flux core wire(outdoors in a breeze) and set in the middlish portions on the 2 dials(amperage & wire speed)
never could find a 120v unit worth a tinker's dam
buy once cry once(i learned the hard/$$$ way and i now have a 120v Miller for sale REAL CHEAP)
sw
In the 'budget' world, where fine adjustment is rare:
If you're welding structural components, and especially 1/4" or thicker, a 220V machine is pretty much mandatory.
But if your priority is sheet metal and/or autobody work, the 110V machines usually allow for a little more 'finesse' and softer start.
Different strokes for different folks.
I'm still looking for the right 220V multi-process machine for myself; as well as a set of O/A bottles (I have half a dozen torches and regulators, but no bottles of my own). But I won't be ditching the little 110V machine. It is so much easier to work with for sheet metal and thin-walled structural tubing that I want to keep it around. (I missed a good opportunity on an engine-driven multi-process last year. Still kicking myself for procrastinating...)
In the aircraft world, weld processes are a hot topic - especially for amateur repair and home-built steel frames.
Most people today think TiG is best, because of the control and cleanliness afforded by the process.
Others think MiG is the best, because you just pour wire into the joint and grind the excess.
Only the most experienced and/or old-school guys bring up O/A welding ... because they don't want to have to explain it to the guys that grew up with everything in their lives relying on electricity. They know that, even though it's a dirtier process with arguable less precise control than TiG, it's still more controllable than MiG and has a very important byproduct: Stress relief. The method of heat application and minimal use of filler rod results in joints with far less stress than TiG or MiG. The process is almost 'self-annealing', so to speak. That can be a very big deal, especially with assemblies like the infamous "five point" in the tail of a J-3 Cub (the joints of which, coincidentally, are nearly impossible to reach with a MiG torch and almost as difficult to get at with a TiG torch).
If you really want an interesting discussion, ask an old aircraft builder about O/H welding (Oxygen/Hydrogen). People today think it's garbage, even though they've never seen it, let alone tried it (including myself). The old guys say ignorance is bliss...
What's right? What's wrong? What's my point?
They all work. They all have their place.
Some are easier to work with. Some are easier to learn. Some require less (or zero) touch-up. Some require less prep. Some result in a better end product.
You can't have 'em all. Pick what you want and find the weld process that ticks your chosen boxes.
(An astute observer may have noticed that stick welding [SMAW] was not mentioned in aircraft frame welding. That's because aircraft frames are so thin that attempts to use stick usually blow right through the tubing/gusset/bracket. I know of no one that thinks stick welding is a good idea for aircraft - not even the guys that have done it.)
by GPW » Thu Oct 10, 2019 5:28 pm 
… And while there I picked up a few things on Sale and a few things that weren't … All things I “needed” … We’re ready …. almost … 
