cord wood. A thing of the past?

[CalG]

Just as the original post suggests, Times change, and usage of terms change as well. (Even region to region at the same time ;-)

It is important to accept that a cord of firewood is NOT THE SAME as a cord of cordwood. Just isn't. Firewood is cut to user desired length and split to suit. cord wood comes in four foot lengths. PERIOD! (See MA legal discription referenced above. ;-))

Firewood can stack much tighter than cordwood. The purchase of a "cord" (volume) of cordwood to be used for firewood will likely result in an undersize volume when stacked. One must modify expectations based on realities. Purchase of firewood by the cord cut delivered and stacked should carry a premium price. One part for actual wood amount, and of course the added labor value.

There are many aspects to forestry. Firewood is a "by product" compared to most. But modern methods appear to have reduced "cordwood" to an anachronism. ;-)

 

[KennyG]

Firewood can stack much tighter than cordwood.

I used to think this also but then I was informed that the volume increases as you split the wood. The large openings you see between the rounds are more than replaced by the many more small openings. I actually saw a mathematical proof for this once assuming perfect cylinders. The less straight grained the wood, the more the volume increase. Theoretically, you could stack the wood back into it's original configuration after it's split, but that's not what we do.

 

[turnkey4099]

Just as the original post suggests, Times change, and usage of terms change as well. (Even region to region at the same time ;-)

It is important to accept that a cord of firewood is NOT THE SAME as a cord of cordwood. Just isn't. Firewood is cut to user desired length and split to suit. cord wood comes in four foot lengths. PERIOD! (See MA legal discription referenced above. ;-))

Firewood can stack much tighter than cordwood. The purchase of a "cord" (volume) of cordwood to be used for firewood will likely result in an undersize volume when stacked. One must modify expectations based on realities. Purchase of firewood by the cord cut delivered and stacked should carry a premium price. One part for actual wood amount, and of course the added labor value.

There are many aspects to forestry. Firewood is a "by product" compared to most. But modern methods appear to have reduced "cordwood" to an anachronism. ;-)

Not sure but yoyu seem to think that you get more wood in a given volume after splitting than before. You don't, you get less. A given pile of rounds will grow after splitting.

 

[Rustyiron]

Not sure but yoyu seem to think that you get more wood in a given volume after splitting than before. You don't, you get less. A given pile of rounds will grow after splitting.

??huh?

 

[bcp]

Yes or no.

From:
Difference Between A Cord Of Split And Unsplit Firewood

So there is obviously more solid wood in a cord of large pieces, than a cord of small pieces.

And from:
Figuring Firewood by the Cord, Any Way You Stack It | Lake Barcroft

If you buy raw logs by the cord and plan on cutting and splitting them yourself (and leaving them to season for a year), the stack should be the traditional size.

If you buy a cord of split wood cut to burning length (generally 16 inches), the pile could be about 15 percent smaller because split wood stacks more compactly than full logs. If you buy a cord of split wood cut to 12-inch lengths for smaller wood stoves, the stacked pile could be 25 percent smaller.



Yes and no.

From:
A Cord is a Cord is a Cord | Winter 28 | Knots and Bolts

Splitting the wood is going to reduce its volume because the knots and other irregularities that were creating air space between the round logs are going to be reduced in size and packed tighter in the pile after they’re split. Unless, of course, the initial roundwood was extremely smooth, in which case splitting the wood will increase its volume.

Bruce

 

[turnkey4099]

Yes or no.

From:
Difference Between A Cord Of Split And Unsplit Firewood

So there is obviously more solid wood in a cord of large pieces, than a cord of small pieces.

And from:
Figuring Firewood by the Cord, Any Way You Stack It | Lake Barcroft

If you buy raw logs by the cord and plan on cutting and splitting them yourself (and leaving them to season for a year), the stack should be the traditional size.

If you buy a cord of split wood cut to burning length (generally 16 inches), the pile could be about 15 percent smaller because split wood stacks more compactly than full logs. If you buy a cord of split wood cut to 12-inch lengths for smaller wood stoves, the stacked pile could be 25 percent smaller.



Yes and no.

From:
A Cord is a Cord is a Cord | Winter 28 | Knots and Bolts

Splitting the wood is going to reduce its volume because the knots and other irregularities that were creating air space between the round logs are going to be reduced in size and packed tighter in the pile after they’re split. Unless, of course, the initial roundwood was extremely smooth, in which case splitting the wood will increase its volume.

Bruce

You can prove it to yourself sitting in front of the TV. Take a carrot, slice it into lrounds. Grab boxtop and put as many rounds as you can into the boxtop single layer. Throw away any leftovers, or munch on them.

Dump out the box top, split each round in half and put them back into the boxtop single layer. You won't be able to do it.

In hte last one above he is wrong unless those knots and irregularitye are very big.

Amazing how many people think they get more wood split than in rounds when it is so simple to prove that you don't.

Harry K

 

[CalG]

You can prove it to yourself sitting in front of the TV. Take a carrot, slice it into lrounds. Grab boxtop and put as many rounds as you can into the boxtop single layer. Throw away any leftovers, or munch on them.

Dump out the box top, split each round in half and put them back into the boxtop single layer. You won't be able to do it.

In hte last one above he is wrong unless those knots and irregularitye are very big.

Amazing how many people think they get more wood split than in rounds when it is so simple to prove that you don't.

Harry K

And as easily proven the other way. Just stuff a SPLIT piece on every gap between the rounds.

Another detail of this conversation. Log length comes by the load. Woodsman. Driver and customer alike all speculate how many "cords" will be on.
Some say 8, some say 10, with a pup trailer behind I've heard 14.

It all depends on the shape and length of the trees on the load. They can only run 'em so high, and the ribs define the width.

So from that aspect, I buy "fire wood" by the "Log truck load". I can't imagine it any other way. Matching my terms and expectations I suppose. I'm out there "shortening the pile" now. Just in for a coffee. ;-)

 

[TnAndy]

...but who cares!
If I sell you "that much, right there" for x dollars, what does the government care what I call it? Buyer beware if I call it a "face cord", " 1 pick-up load", or "this much". This is where "the market" / consumer should decide if the price is worth it. The market will then demand (or at least inquire) on how many cords ( or cu.ft.) they are buying for x dollars and if the guy down the road has a better price. .
Besides, there's so many other factors besides volume (the moisture content, type of wood, etc.. ) that are a factor. - I'd better be quiet, or the government will make sellers list the moisture content, species, age of tree, average grain width, date cut, date split, density, bark content, etc...

The Libertarian side of me tends to agree, but if there are a few legitimate functions of govt, I do think a system of honest weights and measures are one of them.

I like have some assurance that some govt weenie checks the gas pumps to certify I am pumping a gallon when the dial says a gallon, and the butcher scale sells me an actual pound of hamburger, so I personally don't have an issue with a defined unit of sale for firewood.

 

[quicksandfarmer]

The Libertarian side of me tends to agree, but if there are a few legitimate functions of govt, I do think a system of honest weights and measures are one of them.

I like have some assurance that some govt weenie checks the gas pumps to certify I am pumping a gallon when the dial says a gallon, and the butcher scale sells me an actual pound of hamburger, so I personally don't have an issue with a defined unit of sale for firewood.

The problem isn't with the idea of standardized measures, but that the cord is a poor unit of measure for commerce, because it is so easily manipulated and the product being measured is irregular. Or to put it differently, it's so poorly defined. It's also hard to verify. Measuring a cord of wood requires stacking it, which is a not-insubstantial amount of work.

Any rigorous system of measurement -- say, weight plus moisture content -- is going to require expensive equipment. But cutting firewood is the ultimate low-budget business. If you have a source of wood, and a few hundred dollars worth of equipment, you're in the firewood business.

 

[turnkey4099]

The Libertarian side of me tends to agree, but if there are a few legitimate functions of govt, I do think a system of honest weights and measures are one of them.

I like have some assurance that some govt weenie checks the gas pumps to certify I am pumping a gallon when the dial says a gallon, and the butcher scale sells me an actual pound of hamburger, so I personally don't have an issue with a defined unit of sale for firewood.

Agree. I don"t really care if someone sells to me by the load, rick, face, whatever but if he sells by cord or part cord he will be checked upon when I pile it.

Harry K