# How well does Norway Maple burn?



## wood-fan-atic (Oct 16, 2010)

Is it just a shoulder season burner? The rounds I got were sitting for about 8 months and when I split them, are showing between 23-26% MC.


----------



## rdust (Oct 16, 2010)

Never burned any but I'd think it's similar to any other soft maple(silver or red).  It's probably considered a medium grade hardwood.  Maybe not a great middle of winter overnight wood but probably fine mixed in with your high heat hardwoods any other time.


----------



## oldspark (Oct 16, 2010)

Norway Maple is a hard maple with btu's close to sugar maple.


----------



## gzecc (Oct 16, 2010)

Its middle of the road, good for the cold but not overnights.


----------



## oldspark (Oct 16, 2010)

Its funny every time this come up it seems to cause an argument, if you look it up (hard to find) it is a hard maple with btu's close to sugar and it is used for flooring as a hard maple. One post over on arborist site claimed it was not even close to silver maple. I have not burnt any but that is the info on the net, a lot of misinformation on the internet but enough info to make me believe it is a hard maple. There is a BTU chart with it on the chart but it locks up my computer when I go there.


----------



## wood-fan-atic (Oct 16, 2010)

Beech, American 21.9 poor light slight
Birch, Black (sweet) 27.9 poor light slight
Birch, White 23.6 poor slight slight
Birch, Yellow 21.3 poor light slight
Butternut 16.3 fair light light
Cherry, Black 17.1 fair light light
Chestnut, American 18.4 good light light
Cottonwood, Balsam 14.6 fair slight slight
Cottonwood, Black 15.0 fair slight slight
Cottonwood, Eastern 13.7 good some light
Elm, American 21.4 good light light
Elm, Cedar 21.4 good light light
Elm, Rock 27.4 good light light
Elm, Slippery (Red) 22.7 good light light
Hackberry 22.7 fair light light
Hickory, Bitternut 28.3 good slight slight
Hickory, Mockernut 30.9 good light light
Hickory, Nutmeg 25.7 good slight slight
Hickory, Pecan 28.3 good light light
Hickory, Pignut 32.1 good light light
Hickory, Red 32.1 good light light
Hickory, Shagbark 24.7 poor light slight
Hickory, Shellbark 29.6 good light light
Hickory, Water 26.6 good light light
Locust, Black 29.6 good light light
Locust, Honey 28.3 good light light
Magnolia, Cucumber 20.6 fair some slight
Magnolia, Southern 21.4 fair some slight
Maple, Bigleaf 20.6 good light light
Maple, Black 24.4 good light light
Maple, Norway 26.4 good light light
Maple, Red 23.1 fair light light
Maple, Silver 16.1 fair light light
Maple, Sugar 27.0 poor light slight
Oak, Black 26.1 good light light
Oak, Bur 27.4 fair light slight
Oak, Cherrybark 29.1 fair light light
Oak, Chestnut 28.3 fair light light
Oak, Laurel 27.0 fair light light
Oak, Live 37.7 poor light light
Oak, Overcup 27.0 poor light light
Oak, Pin 27.0 fair light slight
Oak, Post 28.7 fair slight light
Oak, N. Red 21.6 poor light slight
Oak, S. Red 20.2 poor light slight
Oak, scarlet 28.7 poor light slight
Oak, Swamp chestnut 28.7 poor slight slight
Oak, Swampy white 30.9 poor slight slight
Oak, Water 27.0 fair light light
Oak, White 29.1 poor light slight
Oak, Willow 29.6 poor some slight
Sassafras 15.8 good light high
Sweetgum 22.3 poor some slight
Sycamore, American 21.0 poor slight slight
Tulip 14.4 good some light
Tupelo, Black 17.1 fair some light
Tupelo, Swamp 21.4 poor light light
Tupelo, Water 21.4 poor light light
Walnut, Black 18.9 fair some light
Willow, Black 16.7 poor some slight


----------



## wood-fan-atic (Oct 16, 2010)

Here it is. I dont think I would bank on 26.4m/BTU , but it IS considered a hardwood. Not as ggod as Sugar maple, but better that silver maple(from what I can gather from other sites).


----------



## rdust (Oct 16, 2010)

That list has Northern red oak the lowest I've ever seen it.  Those charts are always all over the place, burn it and come to your own conclusion.


----------



## wood-fan-atic (Oct 16, 2010)

I concur. You've all supported what Ive always heard- that its an average hardwood, decent BTU's , but wont last all nite.


----------



## Danno77 (Oct 16, 2010)

That list needs a major YMMV attached to it. as with all lists there are some things that MY experience just doesn't jive with. I do think there must be a regional difference to some of these woods, because the lists that correspond more with my experience tend to be from midwestern universities or departments of agriculture, etc. 

For example, that list shows that White oak is about the same as black locust. that's not even close to being true in my experience. Black locust is noticeably better than white oak in terms of BTU output and density in my experience.

In reference to the Norway, I have only limited experience. I had some mixed in with my Black Walnut and it seemed comparable to it, BUT the black walnut on that list above seems to be listed significantly weaker in comparison to the others than I'd expect.


----------



## oldspark (Oct 16, 2010)

Some lists suck but I have found my oak to be pretty much the same as black locust here in Iowa.


----------



## Battenkiller (Oct 16, 2010)

rdust said:
			
		

> That list has Northern red oak the lowest I've ever seen it.  Those charts are always all over the place, burn it and come to your own conclusion.



A lot of these tables have conflicting numbers because they use data from many sources and then throw them all together into one comprehensive list.  For example, sources vary in how they report moisture content, some using dry basis (the standard in science and in the wood industry) and some using wet basis.  Since it is pretty well established that the amount of potential energy in a given amount of wood is entirely dependent on its dry fiber content, the method used to determine the part of the wood that won't burn (namely, ash content and water content) needs to be standardized.  As long as there is no standard for determining these figures, there will always be contradictory values in these tables.  

I don't think the precise amount of wood fiber in a given species of wood is that important to scientists, so don't expect any good new data to emerge any time soon.  No matter, eventually, we all learn which woods work best for us.  Experienced burners try to be helpful, but in the end, beginners have to pay their woodburning dues, just like in everything else in life.


----------



## Jotul_Rockland (Oct 16, 2010)

I burnt Norwegian Maple in my Rockland. Seasons quickly - Mine were 19% MC in 6 months.

First fire - Almost overfired my insert - Burns great - temperature around 650F with a full load and airflow shut. Threw out crazy heat. Pretty good coaling in the morning. You'll be happy.


----------



## wood-fan-atic (Oct 16, 2010)

You seem to be correct about it seasoning quickly. The rounds were 18-22" in diameter and were 23-26% when split. I think that when I split them to stove size, they'll be down to 20% in 8-10 weeks.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Oct 16, 2010)

wood-fan-atic said:
			
		

> Is it just a shoulder season burner? The rounds I got were sitting for about 8 months and when I split them, are showing between 23-26% MC.



So, how well does Norway Maple burn? Simple:  It depends on how dry the wood is. Burning at 23-26% moisture, it won't burn worth a hoot.


----------



## EatenByLimestone (Oct 16, 2010)

If you have it, burn it.  Personally I'm happy with any free wood I get.  Given that Norway Maple (Acer platanoides) is considered invasive and banned in some states it probably should be burnt for firewood, often.

Matt


----------



## iskiatomic (Oct 16, 2010)

I have never seen a cold fire. Sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do.


KC


----------



## wood-fan-atic (Oct 16, 2010)

Oh,Dennis,no- it's not for burnin now. I'll stack the maple in the back of stacks and see how it is in a few months. Will probably be below 20% by February,latest. If not, it'll be greatfor next fall. %-P


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Oct 16, 2010)

wood-fan-atic said:
			
		

> Oh,Dennis,no- it's not for burnin now. I'll stack the maple in the back of stacks and see how it is in a few months. Will probably be below 20% by February,latest. If not, it'll be greatfor next fall. %-P



Ya, I was hoping so. Methinks you are smart enough to not burn green wood.  ;-)


----------



## wood-fan-atic (Oct 16, 2010)

Me-hopes what you-thinks is correct!


----------



## clr8ter (Oct 17, 2010)

Personally, I like Maple. Seasons fast, bark falls off, so it's nice & clean, burns hot. Does go up quick, though. Anybody else burn Black Birch? (Strong wintergreen smell when freshly cut) I got a ton of it for free, and it's rated as being one of the highest BTU woods where I live.


----------



## fishingpol (Oct 17, 2010)

I've been meaning to chime in on this one.  Norway maple has decent BTU's, but burns a little quick.  I like it for starting over kindling as it lights pretty well and coals up nicely for the oak or locust.  My stove needs a good bed of coals to light of the bigger splits and maple does the trick.  Good shoulder season wood though.  I'd rather save the oak, cherry and locust for mid winter.


----------



## Needshave (Oct 17, 2010)

clr8ter said:
			
		

> Personally, I like Maple. Seasons fast, bark falls off, so it's nice & clean, burns hot. Does go up quick, though. Anybody else burn Black Birch? (Strong wintergreen smell when freshly cut) I got a ton of it for free, and it's rated as being one of the highest BTU woods where I live.



I have a bunch of black birch. I started cutting it last summer so it's still green. The only time I've burned it was in a outdoor fire pit. It burned good but does not seem to last like the oak that is growing in the same area.


----------



## Battenkiller (Oct 17, 2010)

I like black birch a lot.  Like to burn it, love to smell it, can never get much of it.  It ain't quite locust, but it smells 1000% better.  I almost ordered a tri-axle load of logs just because it was supposed to contain a large proportion of black birch.  Maybe if they're still cutting from the same lot this winter...

Never burned Norway that I know of, but if it is really as dense as sugar maple, it's real good stuff.  Around 25% MC?   Should burn perfectly fine now, but it'll drop more before you need it and be even better.


----------



## billb3 (Oct 18, 2010)

I've burned the  trees the town  gave out free to homeowners for their front yards 60 years ago and  the younger trees that are still spawning from them today far from where the originals were planted.
Not a lot of them, especially the older ones.
I think the older ones burned better.
Most of the (norway) maples I burn now are weed trees I cut just to get rid of them  (salt on the stumps seems to help with resprouting) . Average firewood if you ask me.


----------

