Oak versus maple ID on splits, or?

  • 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.
  • Super Cedar firestarters 30% discount Use code Hearth2024 Click here
Status
Not open for further replies.

gyrfalcon

Minister of Fire
Hearth Supporter
Dec 25, 2007
1,836
Champlain Valley, Vermont
My c/d/s wood is the typical "mixed hardwood"-- a lot of beech, some black birch, some rock maple. But there are some fairly small splits, 4 or 5 inches, that are noticeably heavier, holding onto their bark, with fewer and thinner cracks, and reluctant to burn despite having been stacked (by moi) out in sun and wind for about six months. I don't remember my wood guy saying anything about oak, but is it possible that's what these are? The bark, to my still only semi-educated eye, doesn't look that much different from the maple-- maybe a little flatter, thinner, lighter, but nothing dramatic or definite that it couldn't just be another of the many species of maple, except that it's not as dry as the rest of the wood that's had the same treatment. It's a fair percentage of my firewood supply for this winter, but I'm thinking of picking it out of my shed and putting it right back out on the stacks until next year if I can do without it this year.

Anybody have any thoughts about ID'ing this wood just from the splits or what it might be? If I can figure out how to do it, I'll post a pic, but that may take me a while.
 
Pics would help. Does it smell like oak? Oak has a pretty distinct smell. It also takes forever to season, so it very well could be...
 
You described the bark, but what do the guts look like? Oak and maple bark should be different enough (and I do not feel like it sounds like it looks like oak), but the grain and color of the wood will help rule some ideas in or out.
And smell, yes, you'll know if it's oak!
Hard to say not knowing, but sounds maybe like ironwood to me. Did you ask your wood guy?
 
branchburner said:
You described the bark, but what do the guts look like? Oak and maple bark should be different enough (and I do not feel like it sounds like it looks like oak), but the grain and color of the wood will help rule some ideas in or out.
And smell, yes, you'll know if it's oak!
Hard to say not knowing, but sounds maybe like ironwood to me. Did you ask your wood guy?

Ironwood-- you mean as in hornbeam? I think that's a very real possibility since Googling tells me it's abundant around here and the pix of bark I can turn up look at least plausible, although bark looks so different at different ages, it's hard to be sure. But the bark is fairly flat and a little scaly looking.

It hardly has any odor at all, and although I'd have to go split a couple pieces further down to say anything definitive about color, it looks to be pretty ordinary, um, wood-color wood. :-)

It just occurred to me this evening that maybe this stuff was really a different species, so haven't had a chance to track down my wood guy and ask, but it certainly seems like a real possibility. I don't remember him mentioning hornbeam, but he may have.

OK, so if that's what it is, will another year of seasoning be enough for it, do you guess? BLAST. I struggled through last winter with only minimally seasoned wood and I'm not sure I can get through this winter without using this stuff. I was REALLY hoping to have that problem behind me forever.
 
woodburn said:
This kind of question definitely calls for some pictures. Can you put any up?

You're entirely right, and I should have waited to post until I had a chance to take some and fiddle around with the camera and software and Web site, yada, yada, yada, but I got impatient. I'll re-post the question when I can get some pix in order.
 
gyrfalcon said:
branchburner said:
But the bark is fairly flat and a little scaly looking. I don't remember him mentioning hornbeam, but he may have.
OK, so if that's what it is, will another year of seasoning be enough for it, do you guess? BLAST. I struggled through last winter with only minimally seasoned wood and I'm not sure I can get through this winter without using this stuff. I was REALLY hoping to have that problem behind me forever.

I think hornbeam and ironwood may actually be different but are often thought of as interchangable (or ignorable, since they don't pop up everywhere). The stuff I call ironwood has a smooth bark and is very sinewy (looks like it has muscles/tendons sometimes). I have little experience with hornbeam, but the bark is more scaly. And while you surely don't have red oak, I suppose it could be white oak, that bark's more papery and thin.
In any case, all those are very dense and all should get the extra year I'd think. On the bright side, you'll have some really hot, long-burning stuff next year.
I'm in the same boat with not enough wood, but will not be tapping into my unseasoned reserves. If I can't scrounge enough in free hardwood pallets and dead limbs, I'll turn on the burner (horrors!). Unless oil goes way back up...
 
branchburner said:
gyrfalcon said:
branchburner said:
But the bark is fairly flat and a little scaly looking. I don't remember him mentioning hornbeam, but he may have.
OK, so if that's what it is, will another year of seasoning be enough for it, do you guess? BLAST. I struggled through last winter with only minimally seasoned wood and I'm not sure I can get through this winter without using this stuff. I was REALLY hoping to have that problem behind me forever.

I think hornbeam and ironwood may actually be different but are often thought of as interchangable (or ignorable, since they don't pop up everywhere). The stuff I call ironwood has a smooth bark and is very sinewy (looks like it has muscles/tendons sometimes). I have little experience with hornbeam, but the bark is more scaly. And while you surely don't have red oak, I suppose it could be white oak, that bark's more papery and thin.
In any case, all those are very dense and all should get the extra year I'd think. On the bright side, you'll have some really hot, long-burning stuff next year.
I'm in the same boat with not enough wood, but will not be tapping into my unseasoned reserves. If I can't scrounge enough in free hardwood pallets and dead limbs, I'll turn on the burner (horrors!). Unless oil goes way back up...

The grain on this looks not much different from maple. It's pretty straight and clean, in contrast to the twisty beech. The color is definitely not pink or reddish-tinged.

You're probably right about saving it for next year, given the drop in the price of fuel oil to a level where I can (barely) afford it. Sigh. Whatever this stuff is, it sure is dense.

Thanks for your good help, Branchburner.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.