22
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Is this lumber picture accurate?
Posted on 10/28/26 at 6:10 pm
Posted on 10/28/26 at 6:10 pm
Posted on 10/28/26 at 6:12 pm to weagle1999
It looks AI as frick
Posted on 10/28/26 at 6:14 pm to weagle1999
Yes. My house was built in the early 80s, and the grain of the wood is similar to what is shown. Shocked me to see the difference.
Posted on 10/28/26 at 6:15 pm to weagle1999
Further north ya go shorter growing season so narrower the ring. 1918 is most likely from yankee state… 2018 probably from Brewton, AL
Posted on 10/28/26 at 6:16 pm to weagle1999
1918 lumber would have bee 2”x4”
Todays lumber is 1-1/2”x3-1/2” (nominal 2x4)
Todays lumber is 1-1/2”x3-1/2” (nominal 2x4)
Posted on 10/28/26 at 6:16 pm to weagle1999
Ladies say old wood is good wood, who am I to argue?
Posted on 10/28/26 at 6:22 pm to weagle1999
Current SYP is grown on farms with a ~30 year cutting cycle. They are maintained by fertilizing and thinning so that the growth is as fast as possible.
The real question is how much old growth like the older lumber, actually adds to the strength/rigidity of a home. Without that objective fact all the discussion is just feels. Engineered building materials are almost certainly better at managing actual loads than old ways of building even with slower-growth, higher-density wood.
As to the person that suggested it was AI, the picture has been around for 7-8 years. It was discussed on woodworking forums when it was new.
The real question is how much old growth like the older lumber, actually adds to the strength/rigidity of a home. Without that objective fact all the discussion is just feels. Engineered building materials are almost certainly better at managing actual loads than old ways of building even with slower-growth, higher-density wood.
As to the person that suggested it was AI, the picture has been around for 7-8 years. It was discussed on woodworking forums when it was new.
Posted on 10/28/26 at 6:22 pm to weagle1999
Probably so, but 2 different wood species.
Posted on 10/28/26 at 6:34 pm to weagle1999
I wood not know
Posted on 10/28/26 at 7:10 pm to weagle1999
Older wood is definitely much harder to run pipe through, I can promise you that.
Posted on 10/28/26 at 7:14 pm to weagle1999
Yes. I have a couple of older rent houses and the lumber is much more substantial than anything built in the past 30 years.
Posted on 10/28/26 at 7:17 pm to Tyga Woods
Might be AI but it is very accurate if you have demo an 60+ year old house.
Posted on 10/28/26 at 7:17 pm to weagle1999
Yes. The bottom is rough-sawn and the top is s4s (surface 4 sides).
Decades ago millers started proving s4s but rough was still available.
People prefer s4s because of splinters.
On to grain spacing. We eventually ran out of old growth wood so you have to pay much more for it.
Structurally, studs and columns are closer in strength because of axial force but beams and joists are much weaker because of bending stress.
Decades ago millers started proving s4s but rough was still available.
People prefer s4s because of splinters.
On to grain spacing. We eventually ran out of old growth wood so you have to pay much more for it.
Structurally, studs and columns are closer in strength because of axial force but beams and joists are much weaker because of bending stress.
This post was edited on 10/28/26 at 7:22 pm
Posted on 10/28/26 at 7:18 pm to UKWildcats
Building our house in 2007-ish, I was talking with a rep for a major window manufacturer. I told her that the casement windows in the house I grew up in ( built in 1970)were solid wood, not clad. Never had a problem. She said the wood today is no good. Fast growing is not nearly as rot resistant and won't hold paint as well. At least she was honest.
Posted on 10/28/26 at 7:19 pm to weagle1999
My house is old, and it's a bitch to pull a nail out of anything.
Likewise my shop is made of fir, and you aint pulling those nails either.
Likewise my shop is made of fir, and you aint pulling those nails either.
Posted on 10/28/26 at 7:21 pm to weagle1999
Yep it’s old growth wood vs new faster growth wood from managed forrest, Same thing applies to,guitar tops made from spruce.
Posted on 10/28/26 at 7:30 pm to weagle1999
I salvaged some 100 year old cypress from a house. The grain is very tight.
Posted on 10/28/26 at 7:34 pm to Obtuse1
quote:we kind of wasted old growth. We have better standards and sustainability now and we don’t need the lumber to look like that anymore.
The real question is how much old growth like the older lumber, actually adds to the strength/rigidity of a home. Without that objective fact all the discussion is just feels.
Posted on 10/28/26 at 7:45 pm to RealDawg
quote:
if you have demo an 60+ year old house.
Those 3 1/2” hand driven nails are no joke
Posted on 10/28/26 at 7:46 pm to Art Vandelay
I wish we still had old growth doug fir.
Softwoods are grown so fast these days, it doesn't have the strength and density of old growth softwoods. I make a lot if hardwood furniture and rarely use softwood, but the SPF at most lumber yards is trash.
Softwoods are grown so fast these days, it doesn't have the strength and density of old growth softwoods. I make a lot if hardwood furniture and rarely use softwood, but the SPF at most lumber yards is trash.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News