High density red maple?

  • 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.

heus

Member
Jan 15, 2009
57
NE Ohio
I am in the process of cutting up two 170+ year old red maples that were in a huge forest. No branches for the first 60 feet or so. The growth rings are tiny and the wood seems as dense as sugar maple. Has anyone ever come across red maple that burned as good as sugar maple as far as heat and length of time? These trees blew over in a storm two months ago. These two reds and a huge sugar came down together in a massive root clump.
 
If there isn't much light wood it should be pretty dense. It's too bad you can't mill them up as they would probably make outstanding lumber.

Matt
 
Light wood only in the sapwood. The rest is reddish. Growth rings only about 1 mm or less. I've read that red maple life span is only 100-150 years. These reds were very healthy and ready to live many more. However, my aunt's woods that borders ours was logged this summer, exposing these huge trees to the west wind. I have lost 7-8 130+ year old sugar maples, a beech, and these two reds along the border with the logged woods.. Sincewe make maple syrup, I hate to lose any sugar maples, but I'm getting some excellent firewood.
 
Not every tree of a species grows at the same rate, and the dark wood of the annual rings is more dense than the lighter colored wood in between, so it makes sense that an old, slow growing Red Maple might have significantly denser wood than average. Sad to see such old trees fall down, but at least they are going to good use.
 
EBL,
I tap a few reds, too, up next to the sugar house, but I have access to several hundred sugars in my woods. Interestingly, the sugar content of the reds that I tapped last year was the same as my overall sugar content of the sugar maples (1.5 to 1.8%) The one giant red that I tapped did not run hardly at all. The smaller ones (probably 40-50 years old) ran like crazy.
 
I've read that there is a difference in taste, but never noticed it. Have you noticed any?


Matt
 
I've busted up many Red Maple, Some old twisted ones....twisted like a barber pole........but once you season it, it's still on the lighter side compared to Sugar Maple.
Red Maple or "Swamp Maple" that's good sized can be pretty ugly splitting with a maul........I've had my share of it... that's for sure.

WoodButcher
 
EatenByLimestone said:
I've read that there is a difference in taste, but never noticed it. Have you noticed any?


Matt
I've never noticed it, we used to tap Red maple as thats all we had. My dad would boil it on the woodstove in the shop, good times :)
 
there's a difference in taste when the buds start popping. :)
I tried when the buds were popping once - may as well have just thrown the bark in a blender.
I thought it was because they were swamp maples at the time, then I talked to someone who knew what they were doing and thought my attempt was hilarious.
Hey, at least I tried.
 
That is funny Bill.

I have not yet seen a red maple that old. It must be one fantastic tree.
 
growth rings really should have no bearing on wood density....if its dense..its dense,and wether it grew that way slowly or quickly does,nt matter
 
Status
Not open for further replies.