One of the lost topics was about "thread killers
": members whose posts seem to be the death of the thread, as no one else then responds. I was sure I had accidentally killed this thread, and I really don't believe that no one out there has anything better to say than my ramblings.
The original frame material for the Compact Jr. seems quite small, especially to me since I am accustomed to the 2"x4" box section frame of my Boler
, although I suppose it is closer to what those more familar with the smaller trailers might expect. The C-channel
choice is not surprising - lots of utility trailers are built with C-channel - but still somewhat disappointing. I had not realized when I first saw Tom's photo that the frame members are channel, rather than box.
If I am not a fan of C-channel, I like angle sections
even less. Angle (and to a lesser extent channel) has low torsional stiffness and is not efficient in carrying bending stresses. Why not use box section? For the less weight
than the 2.25"x2.25"x3/8" angle, I would expect 2"x2"x3/16" closed box section (square hollow steel tubing) to be stronger.
The 2.25x2.25x3/8 angle should be about 1.6 square inches in cross section, so 26 feet would be about 57 kg (123 lb) - less than with the size of tubing I used for an example, but still significant - I assume more than 10% of the weight
of the whole trailer.