Replies

1. 
   jeffn7 | Jun 20, 2002 12:04am | #1

   you purchase by cubic ft., that's interesting... one way to think of a board foot is simply 1/12 of a cubic foot

   a board foot is: 1 inch thick, 12 inches wide and 12 inches in length.

1. 
   Elcoholic | Jun 20, 2002 12:12am | #2

   We pay for the rough thickness of the wood even if it's surfaced.  So a surfaced 3/4" board, is usually 25/32" thick and figured as 4/4.  Same over there?John O'Connell - JKO Handcrafted Woodworking

   Life is tough.  It's tougher if you're stupid - John Wayne

1. 
   trevglen | Jun 20, 2002 11:51am | #5

   Thanks    Elcoholic and to everyone for your replies.

   Yes we pay for the sawn dimension for timber.  Usually between 3/32 and 1/8 is removed from each surface when timber is commercially planed.  I only have wood planed by my timber merchant if i want to end up with boards wider than my planer will cope with.  The  charge  approx £20 per hour  ($32)

   I have noticed that that firms who supply to the Do It Yourself market charge very high prices for prepared timber 200% ,  to   300% more than I pay for sawn timber.

   The other advantage of planing the timber oneself is that the board can be broken down into component sizes before planing so that the effects of distortion can be minimised and thus less has to be removed in planing. 

   Regards   Trevor

1. 
   qldwoodie | Jun 21, 2002 12:38am | #6

   Another Nth American peculiararity you forgot to mention, is referring to board thickness by "quarters", hence "four-quarter" (written 4/4) for 1 inch, 8/4 for 2", etc.  And sawn timber becomes "lumber" - if you talk about 'timber' most Americans visualize an unsawn log.

   IW

1. 
   fdampier | Jun 21, 2002 05:29pm | #7

   Not us timber framers!  Timbers is big wood, lumber is for guys with no imagination.....

    Hopefully I've started something   <G>

2. 
   sschefer | Jun 21, 2002 05:45pm | #8

   No, no, no, I'm really tempted,,,, no I wont... Jeeze could I turn this thread in a totaly new direction with your comment Frenchy... Tim would surely ban me forever. LOLSteve - in Northern California

3. 
   fdampier | Jun 22, 2002 04:58am | #9

   Now steve,

      I may have overstepped my point when I said that lumber was for those with no imagination, 

     actually lumber is for those with small imagination, timbers are for those with BIG  imagination,

                   <G>

      I just love to stir up a little trouble when everyone is getting along so well!!!   <G>

4. 
   sschefer | Jun 22, 2002 06:13pm | #11

   Frenchy, actually I was going in a totaly different direction.Steve - in Northern California

5. 
   fdampier | Jun 23, 2002 05:51am | #12

   OHHH gooody! 

        maybe we should have a real arguement like they do over at Fine homebuilding. I can insult you and you can insult me...  You know arguements!  It'll be fun, they do it all the time over there ......Or should I bring back toothpaste polishing?  

6. 
   sschefer | Jun 23, 2002 06:49am | #13

   LOL no ROFLOL... Man don't bring that one back....If you do, I'll try to get someone to make another arched door for me for free... Say, did you ever get a finish figured out for that walnut ? And hows that Delta saw of yours.... Now I'm really on the floor. Unfortunately, since the flood, I'm on the shop floor... Darn I sure miss that carpet.Steve - in Northern California

7. 
   JAllen9301 | Jun 25, 2002 11:29pm | #15

   Frenchy,

   Confucious say, man who build with BIG timber, compensating for little...  chisel.

2. 
   dondownunder | Jun 22, 2002 06:49am | #10

   Trevor

   Prior to metrication (a term guaranteed to prematurely age or turn most of our American cousins 'grey'), we used 'Superfoot' to describe a board foot.

   As our early building roots go back to the Old Dart that term may have originated there. If Ian is still lurking out there he may be able to shed some light on this as he has worked in both countries.

   As for timber,  frenchy we're with you. The term 'lumber' has all but dropped out of our vocab, generally prior to breaking down it's descibed as logs, after that it's timber.

   Don

1. 
   qldwoodie | Jun 24, 2002 10:31am | #14

   No, Downunder, I've been off-air for a few days.  But the term "Super-foot" comes from "Superficial foot", and yes, it is something the Poms brought to Oz, along with the rabbits and foxes.  Despite having metrified myself many years ago, I still miss the old super-foot - it was a useful and intuitive way to figure out quickly, how much material you needed for a job.  I sometimes find mysef going through the absurd process of converting back to feet, doing the rough and ready estimate, then converting that to a rough cubic metre value to get a costing.  Given that, the constant increase in prices, plus the fact I've been very much a part-time woodworker for the last 10 yrs, it's no wonder some of my materials estimates are out of whack these days!  But if I have a good look at the plan, I can usually go and pull just about the right amount of wood (timber or lumber, depending on where I am, and how big my imagination is at the time!!)  off the stack.

   IW

2. 
   sschefer | Jun 20, 2002 12:18am | #3

   Two methods - board foot = 144 square inches and Linear foot = 12 inches in length without regard to thickness or width. A cubic foot of wood is 12 board feet in the U.S.

   Steve - in Northern California

3. 
   DaveHeinlein | Jun 20, 2002 12:41am | #4

   To expand a little on what Steve said about linear foot measure; it is also known as a "running foot", and the BF content per LF varies depending on width, so 1LF of 4/4x12 = 1BF, 1LF of 4/4x8 = 2/3BF,etc.,etc. Confused? Thicknesses we call by the quarter inch- 4/4=1", 8/4=2". This is what it measures before any surfacing.