C Channel vs. tube trailers ?'s opinions.

[Mark_VTfisherman]

Re: C Channel vs. tube trailers ?'s opinions.

I....I have a 1967 MFG that sits on it's original trailer, I repainted it back in about 1982 and that's it, still has all it's original bolts. My trailer is over 40yrs old! I think the gauge of the tubing is a big factor, they put more emphasis on lightweight rather than strength and longevity nowadays?
cheap light and strong hmmmm.

Some truth to that... I also have a MFG- a 1964 on its original trailer. Likely never saw salt water or salted roads either.

Originally it was an all c-channel construction, and had surface rust but cleaned up and painted well. I did have to replace the two main rails above the springs- there was no rust there but where my boat was parked at one point my friend thought he could move it with his Bobcat- while it was still attached to the truck. This bent, crimped, and ruined the main rails.

I replaced them by cutting out with a tiger saw and welding in 2x4 light-wall tubing. Almost ten years later and not rusting out. And the trailer is stiff and solid to boot- no more creaks and rattles. I welded them shut with plates over the ends.

I'll tke the strength of tube.

 

[mrdancer]

Re: C Channel vs. tube trailers ?'s opinions.

I have a feeling you haven't done much welding. You can easily weld so they are watertight. how are you planning on getting this foam in? Before or after the welding?

True, it isn't THAT hard to weld them watertight, but how many minimum-wage welders or robot-welder programmers are going to worry about that with a mfr. trying to sell cut-rate trailers at a competetive price? But then, I guess they wouldn't worry about using high-quality closed-cell foam either, so I guess it's a moot point.

Personally, I'd still go for a tube trailer with drain holes and a wash-out fitting - the drain holes can always be plugged for those worried about that. For some reason, I have round tubes in mind - they would wash out easier without water collecting in the seams like it would on square tubes.

 

[dingbat]

Re: C Channel vs. tube trailers ?'s opinions.

Yes I have looked, under many GM and Chysler vehicles in the past, oh say five years? There is a significant amount of aluminum being used for major suspension components such as A-arms and independent rear axle swing arms, engine cradles and crossmembers, etc.
Not frames or components that need to flex, but there is a growing use of aluminum as well as magnesium chassis components in use today.

As a member of the Aluminum Association, TMS( The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society) and the AIST (Association of Iron and Steel technologies), I have a vested interest in the continued growth of both industries so I?m not pushing one industry over the other but the facts are the facts.

Your "significant amount" of aluminum in 2009 was just 8.6% of an automobile by weight. I wouldn?t call #31.8 pounds of aluminum on a #3,500 automobile as anything close to significant. By 2020 the Aluminum association is projecting a usage of just 10% which isn?t exactly the leaps and bounds you seem to project with your comments. In realty, I suspect that the 1.4% projected growth in the next 10 years will most likely turn out to be a pipe dream given the industry trends over the last several years.

Since 2006, aluminum/ mag alloy frame components (subframes, cradles and crossmembers ) has actually decreases from 1.5 million unit to just 0.5 millions units (an 80% decline) do to advances in the specialty steels such as TRIP and numerous other high alloy specialty steels currently be developed by the steel industry.

As an ?insider? in both industries, my money is still on steel?s overwhelming domination the auto industry for a long time to come.

 

[jeeperman]

Re: C Channel vs. tube trailers ?'s opinions.

As a member of the Aluminum Association, TMS( The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society) and the AIST (Association of Iron and Steel technologies), I have a vested interest in the continued growth of both industries so I?m not pushing one industry over the other but the facts are the facts.

Your "significant amount" of aluminum in 2009 was just 8.6% of an automobile by weight. I wouldn?t call #31.8 pounds of aluminum on a #3,500 automobile as anything close to significant. By 2020 the Aluminum association is projecting a usage of just 10% which isn?t exactly the leaps and bounds you seem to project with your comments. In realty, I suspect that the 1.4% projected growth in the next 10 years will most likely turn out to be a pipe dream given the industry trends over the last several years.
Oh good grief. By "significant amount" I only meant compared to 15 or 30 years prior to now.
And is that 8.6% content an average per automobile? If it is, then that means there are some with virtually 0% and some with more than 8.6%. Certainly not every vehicle is built like a high end Corvette, Ferrari or Nissan NSX, etc. which do have a significant amount compared to vehicles at the other end of the spectrum (in my opinion).
BTW, I too have/had a vested interest in the use of cast aluminum products in north American transport industry. Virtually any motor vehicle built in NA since 1980 that has cast/diecast aluminum components almost certainly has aluminum that was melted in furnaces I helped to design and build.

Since 2006, aluminum/ mag alloy frame components (subframes, cradles and crossmembers ) has actually decreases from 1.5 million unit to just 0.5 millions units (an 80% decline) do to advances in the specialty steels such as TRIP and numerous other high alloy specialty steels currently be developed by the steel industry.

As an ?insider? in both industries, my money is still on steel?s overwhelming domination the auto industry for a long time to come.

Peace and happiness to you and yours.