Garden Fencing
mo
largest wooden fencing panels you can usually get 6ft by 6ft
Do you guys recommend the concrete post or wooden post option? both have
their costs but not sure which is easiest
would go down the conrete post route but it loosk liek unless you get the
measurements perfect you will be in deep shit if the fence doesn;t slot in
properly!
Kevin
outlast a wooden post by many years
--
Kevin R
Reply address works
John Rumm
That is one of the reasons for having a gravel board at the bottom - it
sets the spacing of the posts as you put them in (and then later stops
the panels rotting so fast by keeping them off the wet ground).
If you don't want to worry about spacing, then use posts with aris
rails, and nail feather edge boards on them later.
--
Cheers,
John.
/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\=================================================================/
The Medway Handyman
> Dunno if this falls under gardening but I am looking to put up some
> of the largest wooden fencing panels you can usually get 6ft by 6ft
>
> Do you guys recommend the concrete post or wooden post option? both
Concrete posts are much longer lasting, so better value for money long term,
plus as others have said its easy to replace the panels & concrete gravel
boards make the panels last lomger.
One point, concrete posts are very, very heavy. I doubt anyone could easily
lift an 8' concrete post, I certainly can't. Its a two man job. With
wooden posts its easy to try the post in the hole to see if its deep enough,
not what you would want to do with concrete posts. Use a scrap piece of
timber marked with the depth.
> would go down the conrete post route but it looks like unless you get
> the measurements perfect you will be in deep shit if the fence
> doesn;t slot in properly!
As others have said, install the first post, slot in a panel & use that to
mark the next hole position. If you use Post Fix or Postcrete its 'set' for
practical purpose in 15mins.
If you are doing a few posts, invest £18 in one of these
http://www.wickes.co.uk/Builders-Tools/Post-Hole-Digger/invt/501584#reviews
it makes the job so much easier.
--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
Rod
We chose wood. Mainly on the grounds of how they look. We did a thorough
survey of the fences in the neighbourhood and found no concrete posted
fences that looked good. (Actually we saw very few fences we liked at
all!) To some extent this was due to the various treatments applied -
either the concrete posts were not painted or, when they were, they
looked very different to the panels.
Mind, we have chosen to use 4 inch posts, which look better (IMHO) and
seem to be much sturdier.
Time to brag:
The other day I was out in the garden doing things (just about to cut my
hand) and someone who lives nearby stopped and said "I think what you
have done with your fences is wonderful. Especially at the back." (Or
words to that effect.) Considering I am still doing the fence at the
front, this was not a surprise.
I know it is not the world's finest fencing, I know all the
imperfections, but that really was a nice pat on the back and made it
seem even more worth the effort. And thank you, neighbour person, for
bothering to tell me.
--
Rod
Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
<www.thyromind.info> <www.thyroiduk.org> <www.altsupportthyroid.org>
mo
I am looking at 6 panels I think
Don;t mind doing it onlien as I will have to pay delivery eitherway.
The Medway Handyman
Not much to choose from between Wickes & B&Q, Wickes are slightly better
quality IMO. Local timber merchants are well worth checking out.
Roberts
"mo" <n...@spam.com> wrote in message
news:P7ydnebi-oCOh3DV...@giganews.com...
> Where is the cheapest place to get the panels and posts?
>
> I am looking at 6 panels I think
>
> Don;t mind doing it onlien as I will have to pay delivery eitherway.
>
I have done both. The concrete posts will last far longer. The first ones
were done over 30 years ago and still OK now but it was a real struggle on
my own to fit but they were not the ones with slots in so I made up bolts
from studding to go though post and panel. The posts were free as long as I
took them away. Wooden posts are much easier but with this ever increasing
wet weather how long will they last?. Fence panels fitting in slots is
easier but a friend of mine who lives in Greenford near the A40 had the
yoboes gain entry to the back garden by lifting a panel straight out! I made
up brackets to stop that happening again.
Best of luck
Alan
Nige Danton
> I know it is not the world's finest fencing, I know all the
Photo(s) please...
--
Nige Danton
The Medway Handyman
Yeah pickys! We want pickys, we want pickys...
TheOldFellow
I prefer the look of wood posts, and they are easier to put in.
I've used 3 foot metpost spikes before now, and they make it a complete
doddle, measure-drive spike-drive post-fit panel-next, about 15 minutes
a panel. This with 6 foot panels too.
However, I also tried an American (Norm) suggestion to put
the posts into a 2 foot deep pit onto a brick and then backfill with
compacted gravel - not concrete - so that water drains round the post
in the ground. The ground drainage conditions need to be right or this
won't work. The last I saw of the posts (10years later) they were fine.
Goes without saying that posts need to be pressure treated. And don't
put a fresh cut end into the ground - have them treated at the right
size - then 20 years plus.
R.
stuart noble
> I prefer the look of wood posts, and they are easier to put in.
>
> I've used 3 foot metpost spikes before now, and they make it a complete
> doddle, measure-drive spike-drive post-fit panel-next, about 15 minutes
> a panel. This with 6 foot panels too.
>
> However, I also tried an American (Norm) suggestion to put
> the posts into a 2 foot deep pit onto a brick and then backfill with
> compacted gravel - not concrete - so that water drains round the post
> in the ground. The ground drainage conditions need to be right or this
> won't work. The last I saw of the posts (10years later) they were fine.
>
Came across a couple of bags of "spar" the other day. I think a builder
had used it to fill round a new soil pipe. Never seen it before and
wondered what else it's used for.
Jeff Layman
We have concrete posts and I agree that they are much longer lasting. Minor
disadvantage (and one which stops quick-changing) is where trees have grown
up next to them, and large-diameter lower branches foul access to the slots.
It is simply not possible to lift up the panels high enough to gain access
to the slots.
Would be helpful to get a panel which you could slot one side in, then lift
the other by an inch or two (effectively turning the panel into a
parallelogram shape) which would allow access to the other slot. Once in
place, it could be dropped down into the slot, returning it to its original
shape.
--
Jeff
(cut "thetape" to reply)
Mark
Another option is to use wooden posts with a concrete spur in the
ground. These are easier to fit than full concrete posts and last a
long time. If the post does break then just bolt a new one on - no
digging required.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
See http://improve-usenet.org
Andrew Gabriel
TheOldFellow <theold...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> I prefer the look of wood posts, and they are easier to put in.
>
> I've used 3 foot metpost spikes before now, and they make it a complete
> doddle, measure-drive spike-drive post-fit panel-next, about 15 minutes
> a panel. This with 6 foot panels too.
I built an arris rail fence 21 years ago. That uses metaposts
(the make was Fensock back then). They're all still rock solid.
They hold the base of the post just clear of the ground, and
they haven't rotted. (Current metapost product isn't as well
made as Fensock way.)
Another fence I have which has lasted well has short concrete
posts cemented into the ground, and timber posts bolted through
to them, again holding the base of the timber just clear of the
ground.
> Goes without saying that posts need to be pressure treated. And don't
> put a fresh cut end into the ground - have them treated at the right
> size - then 20 years plus.
None of the posts I have used are treated, but they aren't sunk
into the ground.
--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]
Rod
> Nige Danton wrote:
>> On Oct 9, 3:03 am, Rod <polygo...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I know it is not the world's finest fencing, I know all the
>> Photo(s) please...
>
> Yeah pickys! We want pickys, we want pickys...
>
>
<http://www.flickr.com/photos/polyurethane/2926687032/>
<http://www.flickr.com/photos/polyurethane/2926687034/>
Photography not fantastic. Fence not fantastic!
The Medway Handyman
> I've used 3 foot metpost spikes before now, and they make it a
> complete doddle, measure-drive spike-drive post-fit panel-next, about
> 15 minutes a panel. This with 6 foot panels too.
>
I've found they are OK unless you hit a rock or summit, then the spike can
either twist or skew.
The Medway Handyman
> The Medway Handyman wrote:
>> Nige Danton wrote:
>>> On Oct 9, 3:03 am, Rod <polygo...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I know it is not the world's finest fencing, I know all the
>>>> Photo(s) please...
>>
>> Yeah pickys! We want pickys, we want pickys...
>>
>>
> OK, OK!!
>
> <http://www.flickr.com/photos/polyurethane/2926687032/>
> <http://www.flickr.com/photos/polyurethane/2926687034/>
>
> Photography not fantastic. Fence not fantastic!
Nice job Rod, looks really nice. Like the green colour, what treatment was
that?
Rod
Wilko Timbercare High Performance 'Evergreen'. From the *other* side,
there is quite a bit of foliage in front of the fence - and that shade
of green just seems to allow/make the fence disappear behind it. Just
hope it lasts reasonably well.
Rod
> TheOldFellow wrote:
>
>
>> I've used 3 foot metpost spikes before now, and they make it a
>> complete doddle, measure-drive spike-drive post-fit panel-next, about
>> 15 minutes a panel. This with 6 foot panels too.
>>
> I've found they are OK unless you hit a rock or summit, then the spike can
> either twist or skew.
>
>
flints embedded in very thick sticky mud - with the odd brick or lump of
concrete. But actually, I think they usually look pretty horrible
wherever they are - unless hidden behind bushes.
mo
Decided to go down the concrete route I think
WIll probably start in a few weeks as I need to clear out my garden - will
post soem pcis if I remember!!
The Medway Handyman
> The Medway Handyman wrote:
>> TheOldFellow wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I've used 3 foot metpost spikes before now, and they make it a
>>> complete doddle, measure-drive spike-drive post-fit panel-next,
>>> about 15 minutes a panel. This with 6 foot panels too.
>>>
>> I've found they are OK unless you hit a rock or summit, then the
>> spike can either twist or skew.
>>
>>
> Totally agreed about 'unless you hit'. And our soil isn't soil - it is
> flints embedded in very thick sticky mud - with the odd brick or lump
> of concrete. But actually, I think they usually look pretty horrible
> wherever they are - unless hidden behind bushes.
You don't live in Kent by any chance? Same here, heavy clay & flints the
size of bricks in many areas.
crb
<davidl...@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> One point, concrete posts are very, very heavy. I doubt anyone could easily
> lift an 8' concrete post, I certainly can't. Its a two man job.
That's a very good point - one that I had overlooked. I was planning
to put up a 6 foot high 100 foot long featherboard fence with concrete
posts single handed.
From your experience do you think they are "draggable" over level
ground by one person?
CRB
The Medway Handyman
Hmmm. Depends on the person :-) Geoff Capes could shift them easily I'm
sure.
I'm a big strapping lad, ex weightlifter and considered to be pretty strong.
Best I can manage single handed is to flip them end over end and move 16' at
a time IYSWIM. Thats on grass, if the post landed on anything like a rock
I'm sure it would chip.
I can just about lift one & position it in the hole, but its not easy. Two
man job IME.
Nige Danton
> Photography not fantastic. Fence not fantastic!
Nice job. The green colour looks excellent.
--
Nige Danton
The Medway Handyman
Your post (no pun intended) made me wonder how much an 8' concrete post
actually weighs. Brief look on the interweb indicates between 50 & 60 kgs -
which feels about right.
tony sayer
Handyman <davi...@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> scribeth thus
Or use some sort of pulley , lift, hoist, ingenuity, etc
--
Tony Sayer
Mark
The Medway Handyman <davi...@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:UZvHk.69588
> > From your experience do you think they are "draggable" over level
> > ground by one person?
>
> Hmmm. Depends on the person :-) Geoff Capes could shift them easily I'm
> sure.
>
strong.
> Best I can manage single handed is to flip them end over end
Wimp
Equivalent in weight to a bag of coal, but easier to handle.
-
Rod
cwt each. Amazing to think of that as being normal. Not sure if I could
ever have lifted one, at all.
Mark
Rod <poly...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:6la23lF...@mid.individual.net...
> Mark wrote:
> > The Medway Handyman <davi...@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:UZvHk.69588
> >>> From your experience do you think they are "draggable" over level
> >>> ground by one person?
> >> Hmmm. Depends on the person :-) Geoff Capes could shift them easily
I'm
> >> sure.
> >>
> >> I'm a big strapping lad, ex weightlifter (LOL) and considered to be
pretty
> > strong.
> >> Best I can manage single handed is to flip them end over end
> >
> > Wimp
> > Equivalent in weight to a bag of coal, but easier to handle.
> >
> I have to pinch myself when thinking about pre-WW1 coal sacks being 2
> cwt each. Amazing to think of that as being normal. Not sure if I could
> ever have lifted one, at all.
>
Well put it another way
An 8ft post is about 66Kg
The same as a slim size10 blond, weighing just over 10 stone.
How much trouble do you have picking one of them up. ;(
-
Rod
compliant.
But funnily enough, *they* seem to get easier to pick up the heavier
they get. :-)
The Medway Handyman
Oh yeh? Can you pick one up then? Or is this just theory?
:-)
Tim Lamb
<poly...@ntlworld.com> writes
>Mark wrote:
>> The Medway Handyman <davi...@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:UZvHk.69588
>>>> From your experience do you think they are "draggable" over level
>>>> ground by one person?
>>> Hmmm. Depends on the person :-) Geoff Capes could shift them easily I'm
>>> sure.
>>>
>>> I'm a big strapping lad, ex weightlifter (LOL) and considered to be pretty
>> strong.
>>> Best I can manage single handed is to flip them end over end
>> Wimp
>> Equivalent in weight to a bag of coal, but easier to handle.
>>
>I have to pinch myself when thinking about pre-WW1 coal sacks being 2
>cwt each. Amazing to think of that as being normal. Not sure if I could
>ever have lifted one, at all.
I doubt they were ever *lifted* as such. Dragged to the back of the
lorry by the boy and tipped onto the coalman's shoulder.
The standard hessian sack for agricultural use held 2.25cwt of wheat.
(W.W.II to the '50's). Once again nobody lifted them. We had an
incredibly dangerous sack hoist where you cranked the thing up to
shoulder height. The danger came from the indifferent pawl/ratchet which
held it up there. Combine harvesters and various means of moving loose
grain stopped this long before elfin safety came on the scene.
regards
>
--
Tim Lamb
Rod
>> cwt each. Amazing to think of that as being normal. Not sure if I
>> could ever have lifted one, at all.
>
> I doubt they were ever *lifted* as such. Dragged to the back of the
> lorry by the boy and tipped onto the coalman's shoulder.
>
> The standard hessian sack for agricultural use held 2.25cwt of wheat.
> (W.W.II to the '50's). Once again nobody lifted them. We had an
> incredibly dangerous sack hoist where you cranked the thing up to
> shoulder height. The danger came from the indifferent pawl/ratchet which
> held it up there. Combine harvesters and various means of moving loose
> grain stopped this long before elfin safety came on the scene.
>
> regards
>>
>
In fact, I am quite glad that bag sizes are so small these days. :-)
<Sign off as a big wimp.>
Mark
> Mark wrote:
> > The Medway Handyman <davi...@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
> > message news:UZvHk.69588
> >>> From your experience do you think they are "draggable" over level
> >>> ground by one person?
> >>
> >> Hmmm. Depends on the person :-) Geoff Capes could shift them
> >> easily I'm sure.
> >>
> >> I'm a big strapping lad, ex weightlifter (LOL) and considered to be
> >> pretty strong. Best I can manage single handed is to flip them end
> >> over end
> >
> > Wimp
> > Equivalent in weight to a bag of coal, but easier to handle.
>
> Oh yeh? Can you pick one up then? Or is this just theory?
>
A bag of coal is a hundredweight=50Kg,
yes easy and a lot harder to lift off the ground then a concrete post.
The standard adult training dummy used by the rescue services is also 50Kg,
down from the 76Kg of days past to give the wimps and girlies a chance.
If you cant lift a small adult and carry them a few feet fine,
Just reconsider the "I'm a big strapping lad, ex weightlifter" BS.
-
The Medway Handyman
>> Mark wrote:
>>> The Medway Handyman <davi...@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
>>> message news:UZvHk.69588
>>>>> From your experience do you think they are "draggable" over level
>>>>> ground by one person?
>>>>
>>>> Hmmm. Depends on the person :-) Geoff Capes could shift them
>>>> easily I'm sure.
>>>>
>>>> I'm a big strapping lad, ex weightlifter (LOL) and considered to be
>>>> pretty strong. Best I can manage single handed is to flip them end
>>>> over end
>>>
>>> Wimp
>>> Equivalent in weight to a bag of coal, but easier to handle.
>>
>> Oh yeh? Can you pick one up then? Or is this just theory?
>>
>
>
> A bag of coal is a hundredweight=50Kg,
Where do they sell 50kg bags of coal? I've only ever seen 25kg?
> yes easy and a lot harder to lift off the ground then a concrete post.
> The standard adult training dummy used by the rescue services is also
> 50Kg, down from the 76Kg of days past to give the wimps and girlies a
> chance.
> If you cant lift a small adult and carry them a few feet fine,
> Just reconsider the "I'm a big strapping lad, ex weightlifter" BS.
There is a huge difference between carrying a bag of coal or a rescue dummy
& a fence post. Bag or dummy can be carried with the weight evenly
distributed on the shoulders. Concrete post is much harder.
The origional question was can you carry an 8' concrete post, not a bag of
coal/dummy/woman. If so, why don't we see you on 'Britains Stroongest Man'?
Rod
<>
>>
>> A bag of coal is a hundredweight=50Kg,
>
> Where do they sell 50kg bags of coal? I've only ever seen 25kg?
>
That was surely 'a traditional bag of coal like coalman, the type who
had a leather back protector, used to have on the back of his lorry
alongside his scales was a hundredweight which is approximately 50 kg'? :-)
Mark
> >>> Wimp
> >>> Equivalent in weight to a bag of coal, but easier to handle.
> >>
> >> Oh yeh? Can you pick one up then? Or is this just theory?
> >>
> >
> >
> > A bag of coal is a hundredweight=50Kg,
>
> Where do they sell 50kg bags of coal? I've only ever seen 25kg?
Any coal merchant, they also sell half bags for collection by wimps
http://www.corralls.co.uk/bungay/acatalog/manufactured_smokeless_fuels_roomh
eaters_boilers.html
>
> The origional question was can you carry an 8' concrete post, not a bag of
> coal/dummy/woman. If so, why don't we see you on 'Britains Stroongest
Man'?
>
Yes I can and have shifted dozen's+ of the B* things over the years
a pair of leather gloves on my shoulder as a cushion
60Kg is not that heavy and a fence post is an easy lift for most reasonably
fit people even if you are the wrong side of 60 like me..
-
The Medway Handyman
Complete Bollox.
It exceeds the HSE guideline by a huge amount and it would be completely
irresponsible to suggest that anyone should even try it.
Mark
> >
> > Yes I can and have shifted dozen's+ of the B* things over the years
> > a pair of leather gloves on my shoulder as a cushion
> > 60Kg is not that heavy and a fence post is an easy lift for most
> > reasonably fit people even if you are the wrong side of 60 like me..
>
> Complete Bollox.
>
> It exceeds the HSE guideline by a huge amount and it would be completely
> irresponsible to suggest that anyone should even try it.
>
>
LOL
If all other avenues of an argument fail just quote H&S
I'll leave you with a video of a girl doing repeated 68Kg squat lifts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAvCSiTLEE4
-
The Medway Handyman
Proves bugger all, I could squat 150kg when I was training. Squatting a
66kg post isn't difficult, carrying one is.
Mark
Its only the overhang that makes carrying one interesting not the weight as
you implied, the knack of lifting one on your own is being able to squat to
get the post with its balance point at your shoulder before lifting, once
its on your shoulder its fine..
as long as you don't try to make any sudden change of direction.
-
Mark
> The Medway Handyman wrote:
> <>
> >>
> >> A bag of coal is a hundredweight=50Kg,
> >
> > Where do they sell 50kg bags of coal? I've only ever seen 25kg?
> >
>
> That was surely 'a traditional bag of coal like coalman, the type who
> had a leather back protector, used to have on the back of his lorry
> alongside his scales was a hundredweight which is approximately 50 kg'?
:-)
>
Yes they were (still are) referred to and ordered by the hundredweight bag
from a coal merchant.
I used to have a part-time Sunday job in the winter delivering them,
surprising what you will do to try and keep up with the mortgage payments.
-
Grimly Curmudgeon
drugs began to take hold. I remember "The Medway Handyman"
<davi...@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> saying something like:
>Where do they sell 50kg bags of coal?
Most coal merchants/stockists around here and elsewhere - it's the
standard size.
>I've only ever seen 25kg?
That seems to be the norm for urban stockists for ease of lifting it
into the boot of the car, I assume.
--
Dave
GS850x2 XS650 SE6a
"It's a moron working with power tools.
How much more suspenseful can you get?"
- House
The Natural Philosopher
> We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
> drugs began to take hold. I remember "The Medway Handyman"
> <davi...@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> saying something like:
>
>> Where do they sell 50kg bags of coal?
>
> Most coal merchants/stockists around here and elsewhere - it's the
> standard size.
Unusual. Elfin Safety IIRC sets maximum liftable entities at 35kg.
>
>> I've only ever seen 25kg?
>
> That seems to be the norm for urban stockists for ease of lifting it
> into the boot of the car, I assume.
That's normal commercial maximum hand load
Grimly Curmudgeon
saying something like:
>>
>> Most coal merchants/stockists around here and elsewhere - it's the
>> standard size.
>
>Unusual. Elfin Safety IIRC sets maximum liftable entities at 35kg.
I've just nipped out to check. We're all wrong - the weight is now 40kg,
here, at least. Which pisses me off slightly as I'm sure it used to be
50kg and not too long ago at that. I'm an infrequent buyer of coal and
didn't pay much attention to the bag size of the most recent ones.
>>> I've only ever seen 25kg?
>>
>> That seems to be the norm for urban stockists for ease of lifting it
>> into the boot of the car, I assume.
>
>That's normal commercial maximum hand load
Makes sense. I don't mind humping 25s around at all, but 40 /50 becomes
quickly becomes a bad back.