Wood prices and weight vs volume

[Alive]

Through a woodworking neighbor I found a line on some logs. They are strictly mixed hardwood, oak,hickory and locust. They will all be delimbed but freshly cut and green. He's selling them by weight, an 11 ton load for 400$.

Anyone know if this is a price I should jump on and an approx amount of (dried) wood I would end up with? I am new to this and getting a new stove so want to get a heads start on the years to come supplies. Thank you.

 

[English BoB]

Weight is not an acceptable measure of wood. The cord is the regular standard. 8 x 8 x 4 ft high cut split and stacked.

bob

 

[jatoxico]

Here is a helpful link. http://forestry.usu.edu/htm/forest-products/wood-heating Using red oak I come up with about 4.5 cords and using locust 4.7 in 11 tons.

I should say "dry" cords.

 

[drz1050]

Have never heard of selling wood by weight... unless it's processed pellets/ bricks.

All logs I've seen are sold either by cord or board feet. Rough equivalent: 500 BF = 1 cord.

 

[heavy hammer]

That a new one here. You should ask the gut what he believes that works out to in cords.

 

[jeffesonm]

Or ask him what kind of truck it's being delivered with... that should give a sense of volume.

 

[Montanalocal]

I went and found some sites that listed the weight per chord of the different species. Averaging your species together I get about 5,200 lb. per green chord. Dividing this into your 11 T. load we get about 4.25 chords. Then we have to further reduce that because there is about a 20 percent reduction going from rounds to splits. So taking 80 percent of this we are down to about 3.4 chords. Dividing this into the $400, we get about $120 per chord. This is just approximate. There is probably an additional shrinkage because of the moisture loss.

 

[Alive]

He said roughly 10-11 pickup truck "cords" which would fit with that wonderful calculator jatoxico provided says - about 4.5 full cords.

Better than the prices I've seen on Craigslist, but still has me doing all the work. I guess I'll have to continue to shop.

 

[Applesister]

Because you have to do some estimating conversions and be a little unsure of exactly what you can expect (which is usually the case) I would be on the defense. And unless you can spot those three species fairly easily (and they are fairly easy to ID) or put alot of trust in the seller, I would be careful.
Its unusual to find the 3 top firewood species in such a convenient offer.
Its possible...but not probable.

 

[jatoxico]

Because you have to do some estimating conversions and be a little unsure of exactly what you can expect

The biggest problem I see is how do you know how many lbs he's delivering? If he doesn't short you it should be more accurate than volume. Did the math based on wet weight and after doing dry weight conversion before I realized it doesn't matter, you're getting about 4.5 cords. I think guys that buy log loads pay about $100/cord so slightly better.

 

[Applesister]

Also, you have no way of measuring the weight. The "11 tons" will get dropped off in one load, right?
What do you mean you are doing all the work?

 

[claydogg84]

I went and found some sites that listed the weight per chord of the different species. Averaging your species together I get about 5,200 lb. per green chord. Dividing this into your 11 T. load we get about 4.25 chords. Then we have to further reduce that because there is about a 20 percent reduction going from rounds to splits. So taking 80 percent of this we are down to about 3.4 chords. Dividing this into the $400, we get about $120 per chord. This is just approximate. There is probably an additional shrinkage because of the moisture loss.

Firstly, we're not on a music forum, so it's cord, not chord. Secondly, how do you get a 20% reduction in weight going from rounds to splits?

As far as the weight measurement not being an acceptable measure of firewood, who cares? When you get a log load delivered, you're getting a "rough estimate" of actual cords. If he's legitimately getting the load weighed, it's pretty easy to get a rough estimate of how much green wood it will yield (given he's being honest on the species). The price doesn't seem bad to me. Log loads in my area go for approximately $100/cord.

 

[Applesister]

400.00 gamble...can you ID those woods?
You arent gonna know the weight unless you ride on the truck with the driver over a set of scales.
However long it takes you to split and stack to find out if you have 4 cords (by standard measurement of wood)
Im skeptical but it could be a great deal.

 

[Montanalocal]

It is not a 20 percent weight reduction going from rounds to splits, it is a 20 percent volume reduction, which is what a cord measures. I know it seems somewhat counterintuitive, but we had a whole thread on this subject some time ago. It might seem that a solid piece of wood would take up less space than that same round in splits, but it is not so. I did extensive googling for my posts on that thread, and found values ranging from 15 to 30 percent reduction in volume after splitting. 20 percent is just an estimate used for approximation. That 4.5 cords or whatever will get smaller once it is split.

See that thread here.

https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/measuring-cords-in-the-round.145261/

 

[drz1050]

That thread was volume to volume. This thread, they're talking about weight.

You will lose a small amount of weight splitting (splitter scrap, bark..), but nowhere near 20%.

 

[saskwoodburner]

I haven't purchased any wood yet, but if I was going to, I'd want to see what I'm getting first before dishing out my $$$. You mention your neighbor is a wood worker, and I'm curious what kind of wood (would) be rejected by someone who supplies wood workers?

Just thinking out loud wondering if you'll get a bunch of ugly knotted nasty stuff or a truck load of small fence posts. Or 11,000 lbs and not 11 ton because someone heard wrong. The devil's in the details.

 

[Montanalocal]

That thread was volume to volume. This thread, they're talking about weight.

You will lose a small amount of weight splitting (splitter scrap, bark..), but nowhere near 20%.

Yes, but you notice I have taken weight out of the equation once I converted the 11T. into green cords. The 20 percent reduction is a reduction in volume, not weight, reducing the 4.something cords of logs to 20 percent less as a final split stack. And since we all evaluate our stacks in terms of cords (volume) of our split dry stacks, that is what we want to use to evaluate the final cost of our wood.

And yes, there is a reduction of, as I said, from 15 to 30 percent going from rounds to a split stack. It does not come from the loss of chips. It comes from the fact that splits can be stacked closer together than rounds. There is a loss of a lot of space between rounds, especially if they are somewhat crooked.

But if you do not believe me, go do your own research. I spent a lot of time on that some time ago.

 

[drz1050]

You're assuming that weight transfers into unsplit cords.. why?

I took the weights listed to equal 1 stacked cord, 4x4x8.

 

[Montanalocal]

Yes, I assumed the weights per green cord referred to the load in question, which is a load of logs. You I think are assuming the weights per green cord referred to a stack of green splits produced from them. That does make a difference in our estimation of how many cords are on that load. The question is what assumptions did the people making these tables make. Now that I think about it I think that your assumption is probably the one they made.

I do however want to correct your assumption that I said there is a 20 percent reduction in weight as you said in your post. Green loads of logs will of course weigh mostly the same as the equivalent stack of green splits produced from them. So in this case could we say that taking a tape measure and measuring the volume of the logs on the truck would not be as accurate a predictor of the final volume of split wood as using a good weight and the density tables?

Because it is definitely established that there is a volume reduction upon splitting. What that percentage reduction is is a fairly wide range. Depends in a huge amount on how straight they are.

 

[claydogg84]

I completely disagree with your numbers of 10-30% reduction. I would think the opposite. Logs normally come pretty straight, and packed very tightly together on the truck. Splitting those logs into splits just creates more surface area, and in turn makes it very difficult to stack as tightly. So, if you accurately measured the log load, in terms of space occupied, I would think the final result of split, stacked firewood, would be very close, if not more.

 

[Kristen]

Weight is not an acceptable measure of wood

Its how I buy mine, over here. It comes on a forestry vehicle, about 20 tonnes / 44,000 lbs per load, and has been over a weighbridge (from which I get the ticket). Haulage cost is based on X per load and Y per tonne. Given that the wood has been weighed the land owner also charges by weight too - less for softwood than hardwood, but the difference is small, and the amount of extra handling (for me) is significant (more splitting, stacking, hauling and loading!) so I always buy hardwood.

The haulage cost over here is about 50% of the total, but our fuel cost is considerably more than in USA so that might mean that the by-weight method over here is more significant than in USA.

 

[Montanalocal]

Well I think I am done here for now. Hopefully this will be of some value for the members.



"when a firewood supplier delivers a load of green cut and split firewood and it stacks to a full 128 cubic foot cord, the supplier had to use up to 1/5th more than a cord of 48" green wood to supply that full cord"

http://www.vermontlumber.com/cord-of-wood.php


"a cord which is made from 4-foot (1.22 m) logs, will not be a cord when it is cut into 1 foot logs and these split so each piece will fit through a 3-inch (7.6 cm) circle. "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firewood


"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."

http://www.lakebarcroft.org/association/newsletters-reports/firewood-1


" A standard rough cord of firewood consisting of round 4-foot sticks fitting into a 4' X 4' X 8' space will "shrink" if cut to a shorter length, split and then re-piled"

http://forest.umaine.edu/files/2009/10/Tree-Volume.pdf


"A standard cord of 8’ lengths when processed loses some volume due to sawdust and loose bark falling off but the biggest loss is in air space between the pieces of wood. Cut and split wood can be stacked in a much tighter space. This loss in volume or air space normally runs from 15-17%."
http://woodbeaver.net/all-about-a-cord-of-wood/

"I expected the cord of rounds to be more than a cord when split. It has not worked out that way for me. Not with our "big" rounds here in the PNW. I end up with about 20% loss going from rounds to splits."
https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/measuring-cords-in-the-round.145261/#post-1957761

 

[claydogg84]

I went and found some sites that listed the weight per chord of the different species. Averaging your species together I get about 5,200 lb. per green chord. Dividing this into your 11 T. load we get about 4.25 chords. Then we have to further reduce that because there is about a 20 percent reduction going from rounds to splits. So taking 80 percent of this we are down to about 3.4 chords. Dividing this into the $400, we get about $120 per chord. This is just approximate. There is probably an additional shrinkage because of the moisture loss.

This is still completely false. There may be variations in the amount of wood when measuring a log load and then making splits, but that absolutely doesn't work when measuring a load by weight.

 

[mike van]

To the op alive - my advise would be find out where this seller is, go visit - Check out his delivery truck, see what size it is. See if he's sold to anyone else, a little investigating before can save a whole lot of grief after the fact -

 

[Pennsyltucky Chris]

Here is a helpful link. http://forestry.usu.edu/htm/forest-products/wood-heating Using red oak I come up with about 4.5 cords and using locust 4.7 in 11 tons.

I should say "dry" cords.

Oak is going to lose a ton of weight through seasoning. I took down an oak in August and I was getting moisture readings north of 50%.

This sounds like about 3 cords using my guesstimation. OP is going to pay AND do the work. I'd pass. He could always drop the logs off for free. There is almost no value in what he's trying to sell.