Tube or Angle???

[Nitetimes]

On the hitch I was thinking 3x3x3/8" or is this all over kill? I wasn't gonna use a A-frame or should I?

Any suggestions would be helpful!

Elmer

HOLY SHEEPDIP!!! WHAT YOU HAULIN' IN THAT THING?
A good choice for a tongue is 2x3x1/8" if you go straight or you could use 2x3x3/16" angle for an A-frame. There are other options but those would be my choices.

[SteveH]

I've noticed everyone here considers either tubing or angle iron for the construction of their trailer frame. Nothing really wrong with that, but why not channel iron for the frame? At least one of the original teardrops that I know of used channel for the frame, and that was the Kit.

Andrew,

Being the engineer that you are, any thing wrong with channel for a frame? Seems to me it has some advantages over angle in strenth without some of the complications of tubing for attachments.

[elmo]

Rich,

That's why I started asking questions! My first idea was to have 2x2x1/4 for everything and 3x3x1/4 for the tongue.

I want somehting that will be able to do a little off-roading, but 90% of the time will be just normal roads.

How does this sound? 2x2x1/8" for the frame 2x2x1/8" for the middle supports and 2x3x1/4" for the tongue.

Also what is the advantage to a A frame tongue and a staight tongue?

Sorry if i'm giving some of the terms different names! The guy that will be doing the welding has done this alot of times before and told me to get the stuff cut up and ready and he would get it welded up for me.

Elmer[/list][/quote]

[Nitetimes]

Rich,

How does this sound? 2x2x1/8" for the frame 2x2x1/8" for the middle supports and 2x3x1/4" for the tongue.

Also what is the advantage to a A frame tongue and a staight tongue?

Elmer

What you have there will work fine, plenty strong, but you really don't need the 1/4" all it will do is add tongue weight. If you use 2x3 angle with the 3" upright and the 2" across the top in an A-frame configuration 3/16" is all you'll ever need.
As far as A-frame vs straight, an A-frame will distribute your weight on a wider area of the frame, so when using the lighter material on the frame you have 4 contact points rather then the 2 you have with a straight frame (unless you do the A braces on it) in which case it has 6 contact points. It's mostly a matter of which you prefer.
Of course with the price of steel these days there can be a major difference in the cost between tubing and angle, so if cost is a factor in your decision the A-framed angle tongue would be your best choice.
Make sense to you?

[Nitetimes]

I've noticed everyone here considers either tubing or angle iron for the construction of their trailer frame. Nothing really wrong with that, but why not channel iron for the frame? At least one of the original teardrops that I know of used channel for the frame, and that was the Kit.

Andrew,

Being the engineer that you are, any thing wrong with channel for a frame? Seems to me it has some advantages over angle in strenth without some of the complications of tubing for attachments.

Actually there are a couple of reason I wouldn't use it. The first of which is weight, unless your are using 2" C the weight is higher per foot than tubing or angle and I personlly consider 2"C useless for building out of. But that's JMO. Channel has it's own problems in construction none of which can't be overcome. One thing that can make it difficult is that it is very inconsistent, it is hot formed so often the ears will be different lengths and/or not square making it a bit of a challange to miter the corners also cosider that you have an angle top 'AND' bottom to contend with now. A 3" channel frame is pretty heavy compared to the other 2 and very strong in the lengths we are using but it will out weigh them and I can't see any real advantage.
One other little thing, if you never tried to drill the flanges on C make sure you have a few spare bits on hand, that little slope on the inside can wreak havoc on them.
I'll say this about 2" real quick. The stuff isn't very strong, it has narrow flanges to work with, often less than 1", it's hard to get welds inside because of the lack of room, I could go on but won't.
Remember, you asked, I just gave you my opinion.

[Chris C]

Rich, where was all this help when I was trying to figure out what to use on MY frame? Took me forever to decide. I finally had to get an opinion on my decision from Andrew. Glad you are willing to help all of us with these problems. Looking forward to your tutorial on welding.

[SteveH]

Rich,

So, it's clear to me you don't like working with channel, but as far as strength vers weight, it's got to be better than the purlin or what ever it is that the Harbor Freight trailers are made out of, don't you think?

If I were to use channel, it would be 2" for a teardrop. Don't know the cost, but I figure it's stronger than angle and IMHO, no more difficult to work with. I've built a small 40" X 48" garden trailer out of it and thought it was easy to work with. Guess I just feel square tubing is over kill and over priced.

[Nitetimes]

Rich,

So, it's clear to me you don't like working with channel, but as far as strength vers weight, it's got to be better than the purlin or what ever it is that the Harbor Freight trailers are made out of, don't you think?

If I were to use channel, it would be 2" for a teardrop. Don't know the cost, but I figure it's stronger than angle and IMHO, no more difficult to work with. I've built a small 40" X 48" garden trailer out of it and thought it was easy to work with. Guess I just feel square tubing is over kill and over priced.

I haven't actually been introduced to an HF trailer but I'm sure you are probably right. I don't imagine they are much heavier than 14ga.
But I do hafta say that broke sheet steel C is generally stronger than comperably sized standard C but the labor cost makes it prohibitive.
The 2" C is probably stronger than angle but as for using it for your trailer frame you are back to having to put mounting tabs everywhere, there is almost no room to bolt thru the flange, no area for spring/axle mounts (tubing is best for that).
Don't get me wrong, I used it almost everyday, 3" and up that is, hardly ever use 2". The only nice thing about it is when I have used it it seems a little better quality than the larger stuff, don't know why that is.
Like I said, it's all a matter of choice and frankly that wouldn't be my first choice. I would however use it for X-members if the price was right, just not the main rails or tongue.

The price of tubing is the reason I built my frame the way I did, I paid a few extra bucks to assure my tongue and it's attaching points were strong enough to keep me from worrying about it. I don't see any reason to use anything heavier than 1/8" tube or angle in these trailer frames (the tongue is another subject) because once they are bolted to the box the strength is there.
I wanted mine simple and strong and as light as possible at the same time keeping it reasonably price, the design I came up with met all of those.

[angib]

I'm split two ways on this.

Channel is way better than angle from a strength point of view - 2x1x1/8 channel is twice as strong as 2x2x1/8 angle, but weighs the same and costs only 20% more (using published steel prices). 2x1x1/8 rectangular tube is no stronger than the channel, weighs a third more and costs a half more - though it will be stronger over long lengths, where its stability is better.

But Rich works with these sections every day, so if he doesn't like channel, that's a strong argument against it. Is it right that US channel has tapered flanges, unlike US angles? Having to make tapered washers to go under each bolt used is a real pain.

Andrew

[Nitetimes]

Is it right that US channel has tapered flanges, unlike US angles? Having to make tapered washers to go under each bolt used is a real pain.

Andrew

I have seen 2" with squared flanges but all the larger sizes from 3" up have the inside of the flange tapered. This tends to snap drill bits and either bends or breaks bolts if you tighen them down to it unless you use the tapered washers.
If I get a chance I'll grab a piece this week and take some pictures, and try and show why I would rather not use it for this application. It is primarily due to the work involved for a novice welder.
I really am not saying it no good because I have built hundreds of trailers out of it, it just involves more cutting and fitting than angle and tube. And with the varied leg lengths it can be a real b!tch to fit.

[SteveH]

I had a chance to look at my friend's '47 Kit frame again today, and it is made from 2" channel. It's very interesting as the outside rails are turned so the "C" is to the outside which allows the cross pieces to be cut square and welded in. Then the tongue, which is pipe and in a "V" configuration, is bolted to the inside of the "C" of the channel iron. A very simple, light, yet effective frame.

[angib]

Then the tongue, which is pipe and in a "V" configuration, is bolted to the inside of the "C" of the channel iron.

I've seen that joint before and I can't say I like it. Either the bolt goes through a plain hole and is trying to crush the tube, or the hole is sleeved which isn't a simple joint anymore. I guess if the tube is fairly heavy wall then an unsleeved hole isn't a problem, but it still doesn't appeal to me!

This only applies to that joint - the rest of the frame sounds perfectly sensible.

Andrew

[SteveH]

I've seen that joint before and I can't say I like it.

Andrew,

Yes, I see where you are coming from and don't disagree. However, it's been working pretty good since 1947!

[Mitheral]

I had a chance to look at my friend's '47 Kit frame again today, and it is made from 2" channel. It's very interesting as the outside rails are turned so the "C" is to the outside which allows the cross pieces to be cut square and welded in. Then the tongue, which is pipe and in a "V" configuration, is bolted to the inside of the "C" of the channel iron. A very simple, light, yet effective frame.

The outward facing C makes a good place to mount side marker lights if your frame is exposed.

[angib]

Yes, I see where you are coming from and don't disagree. However, it's been working pretty good since 1947!

I make a principle of never letting reality get in the way of a good theory........

Andrew