Page 1 of 1
ERW vs A-43 vs sch. 40
Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 9:08 pm
by ridemx
I know what DOM is, its the other types that confuse me so much. From looking online for many hours it seems the consensus is that ERW>ASTM A-53. Is ERW a better choice for a cage that A-53, and where does sch. 40 fall into the mix, compared to ERW, or is sch. 40 the same as A-53?
Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 8:16 am
by BadAssEddie
Pipe is generally not structural. A53 pipe is however. Schedule is just the measurement of the wall thickness compared to I.D. It varies depending on the I.D. Generally, pipe is not desirable for applications such as a cage. If you are putting a toilet in your truck, then thats a different story
ERW is a process of welding the rolled steel to retain the round shape. It is done in both tube and pipe manufacturing. So you have to be more specific before you can say ERW>A53, as A53 Type E is ERW'd. What I think you meant was HREW tubing>A53 pipe, which is true for this application. It is only Kosher to use HREW on non-structural parts of a cage, however and it must be bent with the seam facing inwards.
Pipe is heavy and brittle. Don't be cheap and use DOM for your cage with some 1.5x.120 HREW thrown in the mix to offset some cost. Go ahead and use HREW tube and A53 pipe for a tube bed.