Replies

1. 
   RussellAssoc | Mar 13, 2003 07:18pm | #1

     Absolutely 2 x's.  In addition ship lap joint the corners, glue and screw and make sure the diagonal goes from the top of the hinge side.

1. 
   JamesBynum | Mar 13, 2003 07:39pm | #2

   Russ, Thanks for the reply.  You seem firm in your instruction that the diagonal run from the top hinge to the bottom outer corner.  I read a number of messages in a prior discussion in which the respondents seemed equally divided as to whether the diagonal should be a Z with the diagonal running to the lower hinge.  The arguments seemed to rest on whether the diagonal should be under tension (top hinge to lower corner) or compression (bottom hinge to upper corner).  I am very much interested in your rationale for why the diagonal should run from top hinge.

1. 
   Piffin | Mar 14, 2003 07:01am | #3

   If you use Cedar for light weight and epoxy well fitted joints, and use two by's for stability, you don't need any diagonals, .

   This gate is seven feet long, per side, with four by four frame and 2x2 spindles, top rail alminated with epoxy as are all joints. Three years old now and nary a sag. No screws except to attach hinges. ground pin not weight bearing, only to hold position of the gate..

   Excellence is its own reward!

1. 
   AaronRosenthal | Mar 14, 2003 07:54am | #4

   I make a lot of money repairing gates that sag.

   I agree that starting out with epoxy and solid joints will help, yet I think that within a short time, sag will happen.

   The only way I will ever build a gate without diagonals is when I use an anti-sag kit (essentially 90 deg support brackets).

   At my age, my fingers & knees arrive at work an hour after I do.

   Aaron the HandymanVancouver, Canada

2. 
   JohnSprung | Mar 14, 2003 10:14pm | #6

   Very nice gate.  Just looking at the picture, I would have guessed that it was welded tubular steel.

   -- J.S.

1. 
   UncleDunc | Mar 14, 2003 10:21pm | #8

   >> Just looking at the picture, I would have guessed that it was welded tubular steel.

   I had the same thought. What led to the decision to execute this design in wood rather than steel?

2. 
   Piffin | Mar 15, 2003 05:00pm | #10

   see post above.

   Excellence is its own reward!

3. 
   Piffin | Mar 15, 2003 04:59pm | #9

   Thanks, I actually tried to talk them into a steel gate which could have been better and cheaper but they had their hearts set on wood. The whole estate is an attempt to be early American stuff but they do have radiant in floor heat and whole houser vacumn and hidden sound system and security devices, etc.

   Anyways, the architect had drawn and speced this gate and when I tried to mention steel or diagonal bracing, they wouldn't hear of it. Either adding a diagonal or going to welded steel would have made this pair a $3000 job instead of a $7000 job.

   Their choice. My ppoint here in this discussion was just to say, "It is possible to do away with the brace - but it costs".

   Excellence is its own reward!

4. 
   jonblakemore | Mar 15, 2003 06:37pm | #11

   Did the $7k include the stone work?  That's alot of money to be "accurate".  Glad you could benefit from their desires.

   Jon Blakemore

5. 
   Piffin | Mar 15, 2003 07:14pm | #12

   No. The stone columns were already built but some of the high cost was for the following;

   It HAD to be finished in time for the garden party in three weeks

   I had to drill and set the hinges into the masonry with "Piffin Putty" (inside joke - masons epoxy)

   I had to get a generator to do the on-site work.

   It was a classic case wherre some forethought, communications and compromise would save a bundle of money. I can solve problems where other guys just say no sometimes. But I don't do it for free..

   Excellence is its own reward!

2. 
   RussellAssoc | Mar 14, 2003 06:08pm | #5

     Opps, I was in error.  We have just finished skirting a deck with 2x cedar frames, with an elliptical top. routed out on the backside to accept 1x lattice in a sq. hatch pattern.  We also built 2 hidden doors/gates for under deck  storage.  These had no cedar cross brace, but cable tensioners.  I made a point of telling the young guy detailing the gates to go upper hing to lower corner, that's correct.   I guess that's what I was thinking of, or possibly a mind f@rt.  For solid diagonals the opposite is true.  Tension verses compression.  Sorry!

   Edited 3/14/2003 11:11:54 AM ET by Russ

3. 
   JohnSprung | Mar 14, 2003 10:20pm | #7

   If you want nails to hold a gate together, the diagonal should be in compression.  If you do it with glue and screws, it could go either way, or even not be there at all.

   -- J.S.