Replies

1. 
   forestgirl | Oct 28, 2003 06:14pm | #1

   Take a look at the Black Locust thread in this section.  Not an easily available wood, and I don't know what you're building for this outdoor project, but you asked about species :)  http://forums.taunton.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=tp-knots&msg=14431.1

   BTW, I think you're asking about the most rot resistant, not the least.

   forestgirl -- you can take the girl out of the forest, but you can't take the forest out of the girl   ;-)

   
   

   ---

   Edited 10/28/2003 11:16:23 AM ET by forestgirl

1. 
   randy12345678 | Oct 29, 2003 03:20am | #6

   Thanks for everyones replys,

   I'm always looking for options to give my customers. Special thanks to Jon,I like to know how things work. Also, while we're on the subject what's your thoughts on African Mahogany? 

1. 
   jonsherryl | Oct 29, 2003 06:50am | #8

   Randy, the woods usually marketed as "African mahogany" are cut from several species in the genus Khaya. This genus DOES belong to the mahogany family: Meliaceae...So this common name has some logic from the taxonomic perspective in that, unlike "Philippine mahogany", African mahogany is a true mahogany and shares similar chemistry with other true mahoganies.

   There are some subtle differences between the African Khayas and genuine American mahogany, which belongs to another Meliaceae genus; Swietenia. Generally, the American variety has somewhat superior resistance to decay fungi and termites, while the African species of Meliaceae, both those in the Khaya genus and also Africa's other major genus in this family; Entandrophragma (the source of sapele) seem to have slightly less resistance to both decay fungi and other terrestrial pests (borers)...But even genuine American mahogany has little resistance to marine borers.

   ...So, in a nutshell, the overall "durability" of any of these Meliaceae timbers rests heavily on what you expose them to in any given exterior application. From the practical perspective, though, virtually all of the Meliaceae species that produce important commercial timbers (including those of the "Spanish cedar" genus; Cedrela) have very respectible decay resistance and are generally acceptable for exterior applications...but the devil is in the details.

   The so called "Philippine mahoganies" belong to the genus; Shorea, which in turn belongs to a very different family; Dipterocarpaceae. Most of the Shorea species have far less decay resistance...However, a few of them; those usually marketed as "dark red meranti" DO have pretty respectible decay resistance...but it stems from an entirely different chemistry. They happen to be rather resinous woods. 

2. 
   Scrit | Oct 29, 2003 07:43pm | #9

   Randy

   Don't know if it's readily available, but iroko (another African hardwood) serves well as a teak substitute at about 1/2 the price (at least in the UK)

   Scrit

1. 
   Elcoholic | Oct 29, 2003 09:55pm | #10

   I was in a boat shop a while back and they were using Purple Heart to replace and sister the ribs.  Evidently in a cost is no object restoration of a 60' wooden sail boat Purple Heart is the wood of choice.John O'Connell - JKO Handcrafted Woodworking

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

1. 
   jonsherryl | Oct 29, 2003 10:39pm | #11

   John, actually purpleheart isn't all that pricey, unless you're sourcing stock that has been carefully selected for color. The purpleheart genus; Peltogyne has about 20 species spread all over Latin America from southern Mexico down into Argentina and most of them contribute to the lumber supply.

   The purplehearts have outstanding decay resistance and are good for marine applications, but as with genuine mahogany, they aren't particularly resistant to marine borers...so, you've got to be careful using them below the waterline. Now that teak has become so costly, an African timber, iroko, has become one of the more popular substitutes. It's extremely toxic and miserable to work with, but it does have good resistance to marine borers...unfortunately, it too is now becoming scarce.  

2. 
   brulew | Oct 30, 2003 12:04am | #12

   Jon -

   What about that Ibe' article you wrote in FWW June 2002.  I just reread the piece and was wondering what the BF cost is and where I can find this wood.  ( I live in Maine).

   Thanks.

3. 
   jonsherryl | Oct 30, 2003 01:22am | #13

   Bru, over the past decade or so, ipe have become a relatively popluar material here in the American market. You should be able to source it through some of your local lumber retailers. I'm not familiar with the market in your area up there, but it shouldn't take you more than a couple of phone calls to find somebody who stocks it.

   Nice quality Ipe decking is relatively affordable. In the Detroit area (the last time I looked, which was about a year ago), it was running between $3 and $4 a board foot...and you can't even get clear western redcedar for that price anymore. So, given ipe's outstanding decay resistance, it's easily the best price value for a quality, long lasting deck these days.

4. 
   brulew | Oct 31, 2003 03:59am | #19

   Thanks, Jon. 

   Ibe, Ipe...guess I need to pay a little more attention when I read!  Hammer gave me some added insight below with regards to local yards. 

5. 
   hammer1 | Oct 30, 2003 08:42am | #16

   I live here too! Richardson Dana in Portland used to be the distributer for Ipe but they are staying away from it because of its movement, checking and quality control. It is sold here PAD very heavy, hard and must be sealed all faces and cuts. Camberra is another that is similar. The best decking I have used is Blue star merante as far as tropicals go but if I can find Alaskan Yellow cedar that is my first choice. Same wholesaler, check with your salesman. Rufus Deering stocks Camberra and Merante.

6. 
   brulew | Oct 31, 2003 03:55am | #18

   Thanks for the insight.  I just moved here over the summer and am getting my shop in order (finally after painting the kid's rooms, kid's soccer practices, seemingly endless family visits (everyone has to see the new house!), fixing the wood shed roof...you get the idea. )

   I'm looking for a good place to get used machinery around here (in the market for a drill press 16", 3/4 hp +) and of course wood.  I have heard about someplace in NH off 101 for the machinery.  Wood seems to be everywhere but I'll  certainly check out Richardson Dana.  Thanks again. 

7. 
   hammer1 | Oct 31, 2003 05:33am | #20

   Welcome BruLew. Richardson Dana is a wholesaler to the lumberyards only. We can't buy there (info) but what we get comes through them. Brentwood machine is the NH company, not much for small shop equipment but you could get lucky. Tell them what you want and they will look, ask for Steve. Uncle Henry's the classified mag is a place to keep your eye open. Keiver Willard and Holt and Bugbee have been long time hardwood and plywood suppliers to the trade in New England. Maine Coast lumber, Black Mountain Hardwoods and Atlantic Harwoods are here in Portland and Westbrook.

8. 
   brulew | Oct 31, 2003 09:35pm | #21

   Thanks, Hammer.

   There seems to be quite a few local mills air drying lumber around here.  I lived in Austria for most of the 90's and bought beautiful Ash, Doug Fir and some Oak from the smaller mills with great results.  This area reminds me a lot of Austria in that regard. 

   Are you building for a living or hobby?

9. 
   hammer1 | Nov 01, 2003 05:09am | #22

   There are all kinds of sources here in the Pine Tree State from backyard saw mills to world class producers. Wait until you have time to explore the north country. Take your truck and a hand full of cash!. I make my living as a custom woodworker. Where are you if you don't mind my asking. I was recently in Belluno, Italy not far from the Austrian border, the Dolomites are magnificent.

10. 
    brulew | Nov 01, 2003 06:01am | #23

    I'm in Gorham.  It is a long and winding road to Maine from whence I came, but this move was purposeful with Maine proving to be everything we expected.  I can't see myself ever wandering away.

2. 
   randy12345678 | Oct 30, 2003 06:02am | #14

   More informative info! I can see there is a wealth of knowledge just waiting to be tapped.

3. 
   jeffreysherow | Oct 30, 2003 07:31pm | #17

   One additional thought, if you go to all the trouble of using an exceptional (and/or expensive) wood, please consider going to the trouble of fastening the decking with one of the invisible or underdeck fastening options.  A friend used the under deck fasterners for an all mohagony deck and it looks really fantastic.

2. 
   hammer1 | Oct 30, 2003 08:34am | #15

   I love Alaskan Yellow Cedar, sometimes called Cypress but I have had a hard time finding it in New England lately.

   Dark Red Merante is nice also. Don't forget Eastern White Cedar.

2. 
   jeffreysherow | Oct 28, 2003 08:05pm | #2

   add Ipe,  sometimes referred to as ironwood, to your list of woods to consider.

3. 
   jonsherryl | Oct 28, 2003 08:45pm | #3

   Randy, whether by intellect or accident, the rank order in which you list the woods in your post pretty much reflects their relative decay resistance.  Teak and genuine mahogany both rank among the most durable timbers in the world.

   ...But as you suggest, decay resistance and durability in various exterior applications gets to be a very complex subject. In fact, it's so complex that even the Forest Products Laboratory doesn't attempt to quantify it much beyond categorizing species into one of three groups: Resistant, Moderately Resistant and Non Resistant.

   The problem is, different woods seem to employ different "strategies" for combating decay. Some, like redwood and cedar, gain resistance partially because they are able to shed moisture very quickly, since their vascular cells are basically hollow tubes...While white oak gains some of its resistance from the fact that its vessels are clogged with a foam-like substance called tyloses that helps the wood resist absorption of moisture.

   Virtually all woods rely to some degree on the antiseptic qualities of their chemistry (extractives)...and the extractives in some woods, like teak, rosewood and lignum vitae, include copious quantities of oils, resins and/or waxes that also help to "waterproof" them. Teak comes to the party with pretty much a full arsenal in that it is loaded with oil and antiseptics.

   Also, the wood Jeff has suggested; ipe, has outstanding decay resistance. In fact, it contains a toxin (lapachol) that is so similar to what is produced by teak that woodworkers who become allergic to one of these two woods tend to also become allergic to the other.   

   
   

   ---

   Edited 10/28/2003 1:49:13 PM ET by Jon Arno

   
   

   ---

   Edited 10/28/2003 1:51:43 PM ET by Jon Arno

1. 
   StanleyNiemiec | Nov 01, 2003 06:55am | #24

   After a long and purposeful absence, I decided to check back at this website to see what was happening.  What I found was astonishing.

   It is a real tragedy that you continue to provide individuals with erroneous information as cited, for example, in your written statement above.  There are at least 6 incorrect statements besides certain obvious errors of ommission. 

   The reality is that I have found better things to do with my life than to correct all your mistakes and misguided theories vis a vis wood science and technology and further opt not to be personally demeaned and degraded in that process. 

   My suggestion to you is that if you want to present yourself as a "wood technologist", you should take the time to learn the basics so at least you can talk intelligently on the various issues.

1. 
   brulew | Nov 01, 2003 03:49pm | #25

   Thanks stopping by the booth.  Now take your combination soapbox/pedestal and go back to your ivory tower and leave the reality of the world to us plebians. 

1. 
   StanleyNiemiec | Nov 01, 2003 09:25pm | #27

   The day after you have learned your trade in the finest furniture conservation shop in Chicago, attained your Master of Science degree in Wood Science and Untilization from a reputable University (like Penn State), after you have worked for 7 years at the Forest Products Department at Oregon State University in an extension, industrial worker continuing education program and initiated and published original research, have created a line of products (per attached images) involving complex and ornamental wood machining, and can design and make custom furniture items (per attached images) I will accept your criticisms.  Until that time however, anything you say to me is about as meaningful as the bleating of sheep were it not for the fact that that it reeks of ignorance and intolerance.  However, rather than continue to be demeaned and degraded at this site by various individual as yourself, I will respect your wishes and refrain herein from ever again contributing.

   It is said that ignorance is bliss  --  I hope you are happy!

   
1. 
   forestgirl | Nov 01, 2003 11:19pm | #28

   Stanley, I'm sorry you aren't feeling valued here -- I must have missed the thread where you were "demeaned and degraded" though I know it's a not-uncommon experience, periodically, here at Knots.

   I must say, however, that early on in your participation people tried to explain that we didn't always want or even need the abosolute "nth" detail about the science of wood.  Tailoring your message to the audience is an important part of communicating, and it seemed to be hard for you to grasp that concept and put it into practice.

   Tailoring your attachments wouldn't be a bad idea either -- 248 KB is 8-10x the appropriate size for posting in a forum. 

   forestgirl -- you can take the girl out of the forest, but you can't take the forest out of the girl   ;-)

   Edited 11/1/2003 4:19:52 PM ET by forestgirl

2. 
   wop | Nov 01, 2003 11:40pm | #29

       Actually I sort of like details which is why I look at posts of this sort. The information that can be sorted out of the posts by yourself and by Jon Arno I find valuable.thanks for your past contributions even if you no longer post. Most of what is posted on this forum is just repeat info the actual new stuff on material and design is rare.

                                                Philip

3. 
   brulew | Nov 02, 2003 01:46am | #30

   Ah yes, it's my fault.  Spare me. 

   Of course, I'm not sure if you and Jon have a long standing relationship and your entrance back to the site was nothing more than playful one-upmanship however, it sure was pompous. 

   And now your retort to reeks of arrogance.  

   "Yes, BruLew and all who visit this site, bow at my feet for I have not only spent years protrate to the higher mind but have climbed the very mountain you all now journey on.   Alas, my skin is as thin as the parchment on which I have built my self-importance and I shall go, taking with me the light that guides" 

   So who are you NIEMIC1, friend or foe?

4. 
   jonsherryl | Nov 02, 2003 04:14am | #31

   >>"Of course, I'm not sure if you and Jon have a long standing relationship and your entrance back to the site was nothing more than playful one-upmanship however..."<<

   Bru, I should probably give you a little background here.

   Stanley and I do not have a long standing relationship, nor do we know each other professionally. He first loomed onto my horizon about 4 or 5 years ago when he challenged a Q&A I had written for Fine WoodWorking magazine...I had made the point that anatomical features of a wood contribute to its durability in exterior applications. Stanley, being a competent and well trained wood technologist, took me to task on the grounds that a wood's decay resistance is a function of it's chemistry and not its anatomy. In other words, a wood resists decay based on the antiseptic qualities of its extractives. This same topic has subsequently come up several times here on Knots, and it never fails to resurrect the same controversy.

   Stanley is absolutely right that, in the living tree, the antiseptic qualities of its extractives (i.e., how toxic the tree's chemistry happens to be with respect to decay organisms) is the key factor (if not the only factor) in the decay resistance of its woody tissue (the only other physical factor is that the tissue in a living tree remains pretty much saturated, which also inhibits aerobic decay organisms). Even once the tree is cut processed into seasoned lumber, the toxicity of its extractives still plays a major role in how well any given species resists decay...and therefore how durable the wood will be in an external application. In fact, if the wood is used in an application where it's moisture content is perpetually kept above 20%MC (but not fully saturated), it's natural toxicity remains virtually the soul source of its decay resistance. This is because the fungi that cause decay require an MC above 20% in order to metabolize. If the wood is kept within this moisture range (between 20%MC and the Fiber Saturation Point...and also at favorable temperatures and with access to free oxygen) only the wood's natural toxicity stands in the way of decay.

   Where Stanley and I part company is that I support the concept that other factors contribute to preventing a wood from decaying once it is put into use in typical external applications. These factors include the wood's anatomy and also other properties of its extactives (other than toxicity) that help the wood avoid lengthy exposure to the environmental conditions that promote decay. In other words, if a wood's anatomy allows it to shed moisture quickly...or retards its ability to absorb moisture, the wood will be less affected by decay organisms in an environment where the equilibrium moisture content averages well below 20% and the wood is exposed to only brief periods of precipitation (which is the case in most temperate climates.) Said another way; since decay fungi go dormant in wood with a moisture content below 20%, their ability to do damage over time is retarded by how well a wood is able to keep it's MC below 20% most of the time.

   For example, we can paint or varnish wood to help it shed precipitation more quickly and thus protect (actually just retard) it from decaying. Interestingly, though, it's been demonstrated that coating a wood that is otherwise relatively durable in exterior applications, primarily because of its ability to shed water quickly, may actually cause an increase in the rate of decay.

   ...Anyway, the essential point here is that a wood's durability and long term performance in real-world exterior applications is not a simple matter of its chemical decay resistance.  

   Edited 11/1/2003 9:30:21 PM ET by Jon Arno

   Edited 11/2/2003 11:34:34 AM ET by Jon Arno

2. 
   jonsherryl | Nov 01, 2003 04:45pm | #26

   Welcome back, Stanley. I've missed you.

   ...And especially when this topic of wood durability comes up...Like I said in an earlier post: the devil is in the details. 

   Edited 11/1/2003 9:47:16 AM ET by Jon Arno

3. 
   UncleDunc | Nov 02, 2003 06:43am | #32

   >> ... I have found better things to do with my life than to correct all your mistakes and

   >> misguided theories ...

   If you're not going to correct the mistakes you see, why exactly did you post? I don't see anything in your message that adds anything at all to the discussion.

   >> ... and further opt not to be personally demeaned and degraded ...

   So it's OK for you to demean and degrade Jon and BruLew but you don't want anybody demeaning and degrading you? No doubt you'd rather have us kneel and knock our foreheads on the floor and proclaim, "We're not worthy! We're not worthy!" but I don't foresee it happening. I'm surprised nobody ever told you in the midst of all that expensive training that what goes around comes around.

   It's a shame that anyone here would demean or degrade you, but if that's what it takes to make you feel unwelcome, I guess I can live with it.

   And BTW, what's up with the font in your reply to BruLew? Did somebody tell you that really manly men have big, thick fonts?

   Edited 11/1/2003 11:45:04 PM ET by Uncle Dunc

1. 
   jonsherryl | Nov 02, 2003 02:59pm | #33

   Now you've got me curious, Dunc...What's a font?

1. 
   UncleDunc | Nov 02, 2003 07:16pm | #35

   In the printing and book design industries, a typeface is a set of character shapes, like Times Roman or Helvetica, and a font refers to a particular size. In the computer world, font has swallowed typeface and now refers to both the shape and the size of the characters. I was using the computer sense of font. But I'm sure you already knew that.

   In my browser, message #28 is rendered in a typeface that is larger than the default and noticeably bold. I've seen this happen by accident when a poster is copying from some other document, but since the message that #28 is replying to uses the default font, I assumed that the large, bold font was a deliberate choice. My snarky comment was intended to suggest that by deliberately choosing that typeface, SN was indulging himself with a d*ck size argument rather than offering anything useful or positive.

   It could be argued - with some justice - that accusing SN of having a d*ck size problem is no more substantive than him accusing you and BruLew of being ignorant, to which I would answer, "He started it."

4. 
   ChipTam | Oct 28, 2003 08:49pm | #4

   You might want to add larch (aka tamarak).  If locally available it's pretty inexpensive but I've heard that it is difficult to dry properly (it has a tendency to check) and is very hard.  I've considered using it for a deck but may go back to pressure treated stuff.

5. 
   BobSmalser | Oct 28, 2003 09:26pm | #5

   You eastern folks shouldn't forget Sassafras.

   And as a westerner with an active sawmill operation, I'll add that durability has a whole lot to do with grain.....tight-grained DF and WRC, either shade-grown or old-growth, is a whole lot more durable than plantation-grown Home Depot stuff.

   We occasionally see even rot-prone old-growth W. Hemlock used for boat planking and frames because it bends well....especially in Alaska where choices are limited...in a cold climate it holds up pretty well.

6. 
   fdampier5 | Oct 29, 2003 04:25am | #7

   I use Black walnut and Tamarack due to it's rot resistant properties.

     Someday if I ever figure out how to post pictures I show you my house that uses black walnut timbers on the exterior here in Minnesota.  I could have used white oak however it tends to check too much for my taste and that to me detracts from it's weather resistant properties.  (all of my interior timbers are white oak)  

7. 
   JMartinsky | Nov 02, 2003 06:02pm | #34

   Ipe, VERY tough stuff. My first choice.

   John