Another day...another load of oak!

  • Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.

    We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.

    We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
Status
Not open for further replies.

burntime

New Member
Aug 18, 2006
2,395
C'mon hunting season!
The ranger is getting its workout again, thats 6 big loads and I have at least 3 to go. For the gurus, does a 40 inch at diameter at eye level sound like 3 cords of oak? I am curious if my guess is on or too high or low. I am figuring each load is a face cord after cut and split.
 
Don't know. Drop it at my place and I'll tell ya when I stack it. :cheese:

Another day and the wood man cometh. He brought me another load of oak/maple. A few oddballs too in this one.
 
If you refer to a face cord as a 1/3 of a cord then that would be pushing it. Certainly not impossible but quite a load for a Ranger. Red Oak definitley teaches you patience It takes a long time to cut, it takes a long time to split, it takes a long time to haul, it takes a long time to season, and it takes a long time to burn.
 
Been thru this, ranger has coil overs and adds 1500 pounds to the capacity. 5ft x 4ft x 2ft per load. Some is dead and dry, some is really wet. Splitting seems actually easy, very straight grain. It actually "pops" before the ram gets 1/3 of the way thru. It should be a great all night wood though!!!
 
I just finished cutting up an oak that was about the same diameter at eye level and 100-150 ft tall and took home about 2 cords of wood after limbed cut and split. Easy splitting better than elm by far!
 
hedgeburner said:
I just finished cutting up an oak that was about the same diameter at eye level and 100-150 ft tall and took home about 2 cords of wood after limbed cut and split. Easy splitting better than elm by far!

???

That's practically a tree like the one in this post, well not quite but I would imagine there was quite a bit more than two cords, especially if you limbed out some of the branches.
 
Grab all you can Burntime...post some pics when you can.
 
There is only about 9ft of trunk and 2 small piles left. Not as impressive as when I came upon it. You know the feeling...bright lights, angels singing :p Now its 20 inchs of bar from each side and load it up. I actually have to cut the "waffers" in half just to pick them up...and I am 6 ft and no slouch! I keep forgetting the splitting axe! If I ever take the time to figure out how to post pics I will post the pile. It never looks as big when it is cut to 16 inch sizes!!!
 
I would say that is 2 cord, no more 22" dia at 4.5' is one cord. havign a top that is 4" in dia too
 
Wow, I was off by 50%? I will split it and stack it in a month or two. 2 cords just sounds too light to me.
 
That makes more sense. If you look a 44 inch tree is not 2x's a 22 in, it is 4x's. I am probably closer to 3.5 cord.
 
I must be missing something then. I see that one (1) 22" tree at 4.5' measured is equal to one cord.
 
Start with a smaller measurement and look at how many it takes, then look at double the size... ratio's are seldom 1 to 1
 
I would have guessed in the 3 cord range. I took down a tree that was over 2 cord and it was maybe 33" at 2' off the ground. It was at the edge of a clearing though- so the upper branches were major league wood producers still.

Adk- when a tree gets twice as wide, there's 4 times the wood per length- not 2x.
 
Adirondackwoodburner said:
I must be missing something then. I see that one (1) 22" tree at 4.5' measured is equal to one cord.
The area goes up with the square of the diameter. So a 44" tree gives 4x the wood of a 22" tree, rather than just double the amount.
 
well thats good to know.
 
BTW- I think that red oak is EASIER to split than most other woods. Heavy to move around, but I'd rather be hand splitting that than white pine (all those knots make it a PITA). Now-when you do hit a good crotch in a red oak... that can be another story entirely.
 
Thats where some cussin or the stihl come in handy!!! If it is really bad it becomes my splitting log (low of course)
 
LOL- for me it becomes a hydraulic candidate. I split with a maul because it's fun and faster than moving, loading, etc. Tough stuff, big logs, and stringier stuff goes to the beast.

I never use a chopping block... too much effort for my lazy butt
 
I hit it acouple times with the chopper1 axe, it has the levers that open when it hits. I just hate chasing the wood. If you use a splitter on oak it is really fast...the wood pops before the ram is 1/3 of the way thru, sometimes less!
 
Boy, I wish my Red Oak split that easy, but it was standing deadwood when it got cut down, then it sat on the ground for two years. It's not as tough as Hickory or Apple, for sure, but it does make me work a little more for it. My neighbor scored some fresh cut Oak and Maple recently, and he just got it cut up this weekend. Now I see him next door working with a maul, 'popping' it into little florettes like a "Bloomin' Onion" from that Aussie steak place. Jealousy, grumble grumble. But He doesn't know a lot about firewood heating, and I need to talk to him about seasoning. I bet he plans to burn those green splits this fall. He burns in a fireplace. I plan to gently work on him and try to convince him he needs a wood stove. The Maple perhaps, the Oak- no way! My Oak, OTOH, is already pretty dry and I'm getting good burns at about 4-6 months out, split thin. But I do have to work for it. If I ever get ahead, I'll give it a lot longer, of course. This will only be my 2nd year, this fall.
 
Are you sure it's not white oak? White oak is more of an issue. Red oak has never been a problem for me- small, big, wet, dry. Of course- several varieties of trees fall under the category of "red oak"- including black oak, pin oak, turkey oak, etc. etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.