Tim:

Yes, I know what you mean about keeping traditions. Some folks still build in the old ways, which is wonderful. It's what this fourm is all about, I think... Full-thickness lumber, board sheathing, etc. Dating is tough because traditions die hard!!

Based on what you tell me and from what's been going around on the forum, I'm guessing that the sawn-frame CG barn in my area built in the 1880s is probably not scribed, largely because of its "newer" date. We'll see.

But let me address what you said on the last thread... As far as advantages of the CG design, I can think of 3... and this is possibly something a meeting-of-the-minds can discuss when we meet/visit. This should be exciting stuff to talk about...

1. Erection/construction advantages:

I feel it would take less hands to erect a barn transversley, bent by bent, attaching them with girts as you go. Of course traditional "plate" barns can be erected transversley, but bracing them in position for the lowering of the continuous plate apprears to now be an extra, tricky, and time consuming exercise. All the bents must be held in perfect position, while the massive plate is hoisted and lowered. Extras in both time and hands required.

2. Preventing roof spread:

As we've seen, a CG barn's major rafters rest directly on the crossties and not on a plate. These rafters are also tenoned or pinned to the crossties pretty substantialy, which are atop post tenons. the crossties in all 5 of these CG barns are continuous, not spliced. This all makes a true "truss" in every sense of the word. In plate construction, most crossties are tenoned into the posts and because of relish issues cannot resist tension (the walls spreading under a roof load)to the same degree. And only one crosstie is needed per bent. (To gaurd against roof spread, a queenpost truss, for example, really has two crossties). This is extra lumber, extra time, etc.

3. Efficency advantage.

Another point on CG style is that of efficency. In addition to what I already said (raising, timber economy, etc.) there is no need to hunt down big trees and then hew long top plates... often the largest timbers in a building. I would think a 3-4 guys and a good horse could erect these CG bents w/ less effort than the traditional plate method (that uses either transverse bents, or longitudinal sections, which are enormously heavy...requiring 15 (or more) men w/ gin poles, etc...)

The more I study this CG system, the more I'm respecting it. For nothing else, it's different. AND it doesn't compromise tradition! You can still hand hew and scribre away, incorporating joinery galore!!

I also remember Will Truax stating a CG system would be easier to scribe than it plated counterpart because it's eaiser to move smaller timbers/sections around than large plates/sections.

At any rate, that's stuff to chew right now. Study the CG system carefully...it's kind of neat in many (and often subtle) ways.

Don