Tubing size, thickness, and applications.

N-Smooth

Smooth Gang Founding Member
Location
UT
Hickey said:
It's not about saving money. It's about not building a tank.

well it will be a trail rig not a comp rig, right?
i am confident you could build a sweet rig with .120
how bad would it suck to ruin most of your tube on the first roll? you could use 1.75 .120 on the outer parts that will contact rocks and then use the thinner stuff inside i guess.
my jeep is built with 1.75 .120 dom and "tank" is the last thing i would describe it as.
ahh whatever just build something cool
 

N-Smooth

Smooth Gang Founding Member
Location
UT
mbryson said:
I like yesterday (at least the overbuilt part).......

i am a pretty big fan of overbuilt stuff. one day i hope to have something overbuilt :D
 

Hickey

Burn-barrel enthusiast
Supporting Member
xj_punk said:
you could use 1.75 .120 on the outer parts that will contact rocks and then use the thinner stuff inside i guess.
Alright class. Pay attention. I shouldn't need to repeat myself. :rolleyes:
 

Caleb

Well-Known Member
Location
Riverton
Hickey said:
It's not about saving money. It's about not building a tank.


I guess if the few extra OUNCES per foot = tank then I would rather be driving a tank on the trail...overall I would be willing to bet you will save maybe 50 lbs or less...since it is a trail rig I would rather have the extra 50 lbs and not doubt for one second my stuff is going to hold up...
 

Johnny4X4

Active Member
tank

i am quite fond of the tank idea as well. if you can roll it and roll it and only need to replace silly crap, thats a real trail rig. i hope to be in that same situation also some day. :)
 
Top