# Types of Oak



## Rebelduckman (Feb 11, 2014)

Will all oak burn about the same when it's seasoned properly? I've always heard red oak was the best but don't really know. I have all types (red, post, white, etc.) to choose from and would just like to know if there's a difference


----------



## splitoak (Feb 11, 2014)

According to my chart white oak is 25.7 MBTU/ cord while red is 25....so according to the chart white is "better"..but i think oak is oak..dont sweat it its good stuff...but as averyone says it takes a long time to dry min 2years c/s/s...


----------



## tarzan (Feb 11, 2014)

The biggest difference would be if you don't have a wood splitter, then it's red oak all the way!


----------



## Woody Stover (Feb 11, 2014)

splitoak said:


> According to my chart white oak is 25.7 MBTU/ cord while red is 25....so according to the chart white is "better"..but i think oak is oak..dont sweat it its good stuff...but as averyone says it takes a long time to dry min 2years c/s/s...


I usually see Red rated the same as Sugar Maple, 24. But I don't think you could really tell the difference between Red and White in the real world. Oak is great stuff no matter what color it is.


----------



## red oak (Feb 11, 2014)

I can't notice any difference between red and white oak.  Haven't burned any others....


----------



## Paulywalnut (Feb 11, 2014)

Its all good. I've never met an Oak I didn't like.


----------



## paul bunion (Feb 11, 2014)

I can tell the difference between white and red, and within red varieties pin falls to the bottom.  Subtle, but noticeable.  White oak is going to last a little longer.


----------



## aansorge (Feb 11, 2014)

I have seen a BTU chart where Live oak is way higher in btu's than the rest.  This may have been a misprint, but it said live oak is 36 million btus per chord. Otherwise they are all pretty close.  

I really like the Bur oak we have here in MN.  It is as high in btu's as white but splits almost as well as red.


----------



## Wood Duck (Feb 11, 2014)

I find as much variation between splits of White, Red, or Black oak as I do between species. They are pretty similar in my opinion, and all are great firewood. A nice clean Red Oak trunk splits really well, but a lot of White Oak trunks split very well too. I haven't found any species of oak to be unpleasantly hard to split.

I think White Oak has closed pores, which make it waterproof and thus the wood that oak barrels and oak ships are made of. I imagine this must make it dry more slowly than Red oaks, but all oaks are slow to season.


----------



## bigbarf48 (Feb 11, 2014)

About the same. If I had to pick one, I'd probably go for red. Splits easy and I like the smell of it


----------



## CenterTree (Feb 12, 2014)

A *dead oak *would burn better than a *Live Oak*.  Unless the Live Oak is dead.
Then the dead Live Oak would still burn fairly well.

Got it?


----------



## Adabiviak (Feb 12, 2014)

I burn a few different species of oak and they seem largely the same (I haven't done experiments where I control for moisture and volume, for example), but I can tell the difference when the live oak goes in... it's like the flames start out "dark" well into the outgassing stage (but it's not smoke; it burns quite clean), and it's distinctly hotter than other types.


----------



## Missouri Frontier (Feb 12, 2014)

Ok. Here we go into the weeds. I've been doing some basic research on this subject. Certain Oaks classified as Red Oak very greatly as to their weight per cubic foot. The dominant tree on my property is the Shingle Oak. It is classified as Red Oak and its very straight growing characteristics make it a dream to split. It also happens that Shingle Oak is heavier per cubic foot than White Oak(MC being equal). Heavier per cubic foot = more BTU's per unit volume. I agree that this is splitting hairs and that any and all Oak makes great firewood but, the general consensus of White Oak better than Red Oak is not always the case.

My wife is right. I've turned into a total wood nerd.


----------



## Flatbedford (Feb 12, 2014)

I'm processing my first White Oak this winter. Hand splitting it hasn't been much different from my experience with Red Oak. Maybe a little more stringy. I have no moisture meter, but the White seems drier inside than Red. This tree has been down since Sandy, but I have cut Reds that have been down longer and been slashed in the face when I split them. I also notice that the White has very little smell compared to Red. I've had my neighbors complain about the the stink of freshly split Red. I won't be able to comment on how it burns until early 2017 though.


----------



## lindnova (Feb 12, 2014)

I cut a lot of burr oak, similar to white oak but more knots and strings.  I think it holds moisture longer than red oak and is harder to split sometimes - straight pieces split very nice when frozen.  It does seem to be heavier and burn hotter.  The red oak & have to compare is actually northern pin in my area, but I think the wood is almost the same.  I guess I am a wood nerd also.


----------



## bigbarf48 (Feb 12, 2014)

Flatbedford said:


> I'm processing my first White Oak this winter. Hand splitting it hasn't been much different from my experience with Red Oak. Maybe a little more stringy. I have no moisture meter, *but the White seems drier inside than Red*. This tree has been down since Sandy, but I have cut Reds that have been down longer and been slashed in the face when I split them. I also notice that the White has very little smell compared to Red. I've had my neighbors complain about the the stink of freshly split Red. I won't be able to comment on how it burns until early 2017 though.



Ive thought this before as well. It seems like white oak gets off to a faster start than red in terms of drying. Although I think it could just be that white oak is stringier than red and those strings dry out quick, giving the impression of it drying faster


----------



## Wood Duck (Feb 12, 2014)

I wonder about the data behind the various wood density values that you can find online. Are these based on lots of samples gathered from varied geographic locations and growth conditions (shade vs sun, moist vs dry etc.) or are they based on a realtively small number of measurements? My point is that there might be variation in the density of wood for a given species. For example, if Red Oak varies by plus or minus 15% in density, then some Red Oak could be more dense than some White Oak.


----------



## bigbarf48 (Feb 12, 2014)

Wood Duck said:


> I wonder about the data behind the various wood density values that you can find online. Are these based on lots of samples gathered from varied geographic locations and growth conditions (shade vs sun, moist vs dry etc.) or are they based on a realtively small number of measurements? My point is that there might be variation in the density of wood for a given species. For example, if Red Oak varies by plus or minus 15% in density, then some Red Oak could be more dense than some White Oak.



I imagine youre right. I think most of those BTU reference charts are more guidelines than anything too accurate. Lots of them are compiled by government organizations, and you have to wonder how high accurate firewood BTU charts are on the priority list at congressional meetings . On the other hand, the ones you find on general firewood/tree info sites are likely similarly accurate because these people probably dont have the means or the money to gather data in the manner that you describe


----------



## hickoryhoarder (Feb 13, 2014)

I like every kind of oak I've tried. Never saw a pin oak on the ground yet. White oak seasoned split super easy for me. They burn a little different -- white, red, and black -- but the amount of heat is basically the same. Red oak seems better for kindling if it's seasoned long enough (2 years in my opinion).


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Feb 15, 2014)

Pin will burn about like regular red oak but will split a bit harder.


----------



## bigbarf48 (Feb 15, 2014)

Backwoods Savage said:


> Pin will burn about like regular red oak but will split a bit harder.



Yep. It smells worse too


----------



## JASFARMER (Feb 15, 2014)

Missouri Frontier said:


> Ok. Here we go into the weeds. I've been doing some basic research on this subject. Certain Oaks classified as Red Oak very greatly as to their weight per cubic foot. The dominant tree on my property is the Shingle Oak. It is classified as Red Oak and its very straight growing characteristics make it a dream to split. It also happens that Shingle Oak is heavier per cubic foot than White Oak(MC being equal). Heavier per cubic foot = more BTU's per unit volume. I agree that this is splitting hairs and that any and all Oak makes great firewood but, the general consensus of White Oak better than Red Oak is not always the case.
> 
> My wife is right. I've turned into a total wood nerd.



I to have quite a few shingle oaks. I am in the process of splitting them now for next season.  Using my new fiskars x27 and it is very easy splitting.  I don't know about the variation in burning but in my opinion most oaks have a different odor between them.  White and red have a pleasant aroma ( especially white) and black oak has a very pungent smell when splitting. Don't know if anybody else noticed this.


----------



## mikey (Feb 16, 2014)

Red oak has a higher moisture content by quite a bit, ash and hard maple are good bets.


----------

