aluminum auger

[MSU AGGIE]

Has anyone seen an aluminum auger that fits a Jiffy?  My buddy owns a metal shop and we were discussing making a 10". Maybe just a beer induced idea.

[Fisherman 1]

Maybe just a beer induced idea.

X2..hahaha.  I don't think the spiral on the shaft would last too long.

[Clear_Ice]

Steel bends. Aluminium cracks. All I am gonna say 

[matzilla]

depends on the grade and any treatment....same with steel, lots of steel alloys will not bend and will crack

You could always fine a strike lite or whatever they called the composite auger

[bobberbill]

The price of heavy aluminum now, I think steel is cheaper..Beer is good! 

[Muskyrush]

I don't honestly think you'd save weight

[esox_xtm]

You could always fine a strike lite or whatever they called the composite auger

Don't forget: Jiffy and Strikemaster do not interchange. Augers go opposite directions.......

[rgfixit]

If you build it, they will come!

Rg

[Agronomist_at_IA]

Ummm screw that I want a graphine sp? material used for an auger. 200 times stronger then steel, can be flexible, and is lighter then about everything.....

[Drifter_016]

Carbon fiber!!!!!
Tell me that wouldn't look cool. 

[MSU AGGIE]

That would look awesome, but that price tag would hurt.

[cold_feet]

you never would get the same Tensile strength from aluminum the thickness of the flights on a normal auger. Second to much flex and the angle of the dangle would always be off. 3rd Brrrrr. SNAP Mo FO%$#&  %*&&%$.  4th $$$$$$ 

[J_Snow]

Interesting engineering problem, had to play with it in solidworks to see what it would take. A jiffy style auger is feasible as an aluminum fabrication.  Would look a little different that one is accustomed to now. Mandrel diameter would jump significantly to accommodate the torque, wall thickness would not have to change. Would likely bump the auger flights/spiral material up in thickness or have to add a rolled edge so they would not collapse which would make rolling the spiral much more difficult. The cutting depth regulation they have built into the chipper attachment would require triangulation in one way or another so it would not deform punching the bottom of the hole, either gusseting which would likely negatively impact ice/water clearing due to cavitation when it reached the bottom of the ice or adding a negative sloped segment that shares the same pitch as the regulator stiffening the outer edge this method cavitate less but be much more difficult to form.  Both would take care of stiffening the chipper attachment so it wouldn't roll/deform while chipping. Attachment at the power head could be different but might be a wash on where weight wise.

All told you might save 5 lbs. Fast models shows the jiffy in steel at 12.5-13 lbs and the aluminum jiffy at 8.5-9 lbs. From a manufacturing standpoint, triple (thinking this may still be low) your material cost and go 1.25X on the fab cost. I'd bet you'd pay $90 to $125 more for the auger. This assumes they make a change all augers to aluminum manufacture. As an option over steel it would cost more.

[jethro]

Titanium! Stop messing around, let's make this thing out of the super metal. If you dream, dream big!

[cold_feet]

I will still use my trusty TNT. Never worry about it breaking or never needs sharpening.

[Dan J]

Interesting engineering problem, had to play with it in solidworks to see what it would take. A jiffy style auger is feasible as an aluminum fabrication.  Would look a little different that one is accustomed to now. Mandrel diameter would jump significantly to accommodate the torque, wall thickness would not have to change. Would likely bump the auger flights/spiral material up in thickness or have to add a rolled edge so they would not collapse which would make rolling the spiral much more difficult. The cutting depth regulation they have built into the chipper attachment would require triangulation in one way or another so it would not deform punching the bottom of the hole, either gusseting which would likely negatively impact ice/water clearing due to cavitation when it reached the bottom of the ice or adding a negative sloped segment that shares the same pitch as the regulator stiffening the outer edge this method cavitate less but be much more difficult to form.  Both would take care of stiffening the chipper attachment so it wouldn't roll/deform while chipping. Attachment at the power head could be different but might be a wash on where weight wise.

All told you might save 5 lbs. Fast models shows the jiffy in steel at 12.5-13 lbs and the aluminum jiffy at 8.5-9 lbs. From a manufacturing standpoint, triple (thinking this may still be low) your material cost and go 1.25X on the fab cost. I'd bet you'd pay $90 to $125 more for the auger. This assumes they make a change all augers to aluminum manufacture. As an option over steel it would cost more.

Wow, would you please write me a note to give to my wife explaining why I'm late getting home😀

[matzilla]

Interesting engineering problem, had to play with it in solidworks to see what it would take. A jiffy style auger is feasible as an aluminum fabrication.  Would look a little different that one is accustomed to now. Mandrel diameter would jump significantly to accommodate the torque, wall thickness would not have to change. Would likely bump the auger flights/spiral material up in thickness or have to add a rolled edge so they would not collapse which would make rolling the spiral much more difficult. The cutting depth regulation they have built into the chipper attachment would require triangulation in one way or another so it would not deform punching the bottom of the hole, either gusseting which would likely negatively impact ice/water clearing due to cavitation when it reached the bottom of the ice or adding a negative sloped segment that shares the same pitch as the regulator stiffening the outer edge this method cavitate less but be much more difficult to form.  Both would take care of stiffening the chipper attachment so it wouldn't roll/deform while chipping. Attachment at the power head could be different but might be a wash on where weight wise.

All told you might save 5 lbs. Fast models shows the jiffy in steel at 12.5-13 lbs and the aluminum jiffy at 8.5-9 lbs. From a manufacturing standpoint, triple (thinking this may still be low) your material cost and go 1.25X on the fab cost. I'd bet you'd pay $90 to $125 more for the auger. This assumes they make a change all augers to aluminum manufacture. As an option over steel it would cost more.

What if...you machine the cutter head and have it fasten to the mandrel and flights. Blades bolt on just like standard. Make the flights out of molded plastic

[Dan J]

If you had a Strikemaster or Eskimo you could get a K-Drill to fit it.

[slacker9]

Company called KECO makes Kluge auger . They make an aluminium one and one with plastic flytes on a steel shaft. Expensive from what i remember , twice or more cost of nils. Think 8 inch gas comes in at 5 pounds. They may make the k drill too. Dont think they do the style for jiffy though.

Also make a12 inch for when a ten just isn't quite enough

[icejohn]

Vexilar has a carbon fiber drill and I think clam has a light carbon fiber