Replies

1. 
   mufti | May 24, 2006 06:16pm | #1

               Last time I bought any, England, board foot. Are you coming?

2. 
   Napie | May 24, 2006 06:27pm | #2

   I have seen it listed wholesale by the cubic meter, tha's a lot of timber, about 420 bf.

1. 
   citrouille | May 24, 2006 06:48pm | #4

   American export lumber to Europe measured by board feet.
   Europeans sell retail by the cubic meter and of course by fractions of it.
   (at least the countries I am familiar with: Switzerland, Italy, France, Spain).
   American Hardwoods are often sold wholesale by board feet.C.

3. 
   ring | May 24, 2006 06:42pm | #3

   By the cubic meter, at least as far as I know in France, Italy, Germany.

   I'm gonna pass up this opportunity to rant about how much better the metric system is once you make the switch...

   DR 

1. 
   Daggs | May 24, 2006 09:36pm | #6

    

   By the cubic meter, at least as far as I know in France, Italy, Germany.

   I'm gonna pass up this opportunity to rant about how much better the metric system is once you make the switch...

   DR

   Ring, you don't have to convince me.  I'm a big user of the metric system.  I wish the US would change, dammit.

   This is the example I always use:  Quick, how many feet in a mile and a half?  While you're using the calculator, let me ask you another question.  How many meters in a click and a half?

1. 
   JMartinsky | Jun 01, 2006 01:58pm | #20

   "Ring, you don't have to convince me. I'm a big user of the metric system. I wish the US would change, dammit.This is the example I always use: Quick, how many feet in a mile and a half? While you're using the calculator, let me ask you another question. How many meters in a click and a half?"Is this really useful knowledge? More important than "which is the best system" is being proficient in the system that one uses. Here in the states, I work regularly with some gents from Eastern Europe and they are generally proficient in both systems. One big difference is that their math skills seem far and away better than their American counterparts. In particular, HS grads. John

1. 
   Daggs | Jun 01, 2006 06:13pm | #22

   Is this really useful knowledge? More important than "which is the best system" is being proficient in the system that one uses. Here in the states, I work regularly with some gents from Eastern Europe and they are generally proficient in both systems. One big difference is that their math skills seem far and away better than their American counterparts. In particular, HS grads.

    

   Yes, it is.  Let's say you have to walk to point X a mile and a half (2404 meters) at a heading of 90 degrees.  Your pedometer only measures yards and meters.  Would you rather convert 1.5 miles to feet, and then to yards, or would you rather just walk until your pedometer says '2404'?

   Metric is also much easier to use when doing any kind of work that involves accelleration, as gravity in metric is 9.8 m/sec*sec, but in english it is 32.something feet/sec*sec.  Don't even get me started on mass.  WTF is a slug?

   I agree, it is more important to be fluent in both systems.  I just wish that someday the US would wake up and realize that the rest of the world deals in a decimal mass/volume/length system.

   And don't even get me started on 'knots'.  Nautical knots, not this board 'knots'.

1. 
   JMartinsky | Jun 01, 2006 07:47pm | #23

   I want you to know that the following is all in good fun:If did have to walk the distances as described, I would scrap the pedometer, in favor of my GPS, and just for fun set it to nautical miles, or if the distance was great enough,.......minutes. Or for that matter, I could just whip out my sextant and take a reading! Personally, I am not a fan of the metric system, mainly out of familiarity. It has its uses, I'm sure, but back in the early 70's they tried pushing that on us in grade school and it never took. That was same time period when the eco-nuts were claiming that we were entering the next ice-age. Think they were wrong about both? John

2. 
   tinkerer2 | May 25, 2006 06:48am | #11

   -- rant about how much better the metric system is --

   Awe, come on and rant.  It would save me a lot of trouble

3. 
   Napie | May 25, 2006 05:29pm | #12

   OK, if that French invention is so wonderful and the cure to all our ills, why is it we Neanderthals that still think, in halves, quarters, eights, etc, (please note that we do think that way, it is far more natural to divide by halves, not tenths), can still out innovate, out produce, and generally defeat anything we set our minds too.  Remember, those “advanced” metric using nations have had running 10% plus unemployment rates for the last DECADE.  Yeah, give me some of that.

    

   (I know, the system of mesurment is not the reason for their employment situation, but let's quit holding them up as a goal to work towards...) 

1. 
   ring | May 25, 2006 06:04pm | #13

   Well, well...  Let me qualify this first by saying that since I lived in the US until age 21, my mind actually does think in inches and fractions like yours, as well as metric which has become a second second nature to me.  I feel perfectly at home in either system, and not emotionally attached to either.  So, from that perspective, I can tell you that for 99% of the things we commonly do, the metric system is easier, more widely applicable, and less prone to mistakes. 

   Which is not to say that there is anything to envy in the work ethic of the French, or their atrocious economy.  You know perfectly well that the one has nothing to do with the other, and that even the most primitive backwater might have something valuable to teach.  But then, if logic had anything to do with it we would all be using metric already, no?

   I actually have a very fond feeling for the archaic measurements still in use in the US.  Where else can you get a cord of firewood, or a bushel of apples?  Keep up the feet and inches, guys.  It's really endearing.

   DR 

2. 
   dwolsten | Jun 01, 2006 09:32am | #17

   can still out innovate, out produce, and generally defeat anything we set our minds too.

   Dude, this isn't 1942 anymore. We (meaning the USA) don't out innovate or produce anyone anymore; everything's designed in Taiwan and made in China now. We can't even do the big stuff right anymore; we used to be able to land people on the freakin' Moon left and right, with few problems and no deaths. Now we can't send people into LEO without seriously worrying about their Shuttle blowing up, and we're running around like chickens with their heads cut off wondering what we're going to do about a replacement for that ill-conceived, overpriced behemoth.

   As for metric vs. English, English still has its place in certain things, but overall metric is far superior. Quarters and halves may be fairly easy to think about, but when you get into 64ths, it's just ridiculous. 29mm is a lot easier relate to than 1 and 9/64 inches. Do you work on cars? I do, and it's a hell of a lot easier dealing with bolts in metric sizes than fractional ones. It sure took the American automakers long enough to figure that one out. BTW, there's another counterexample for your "out innovating"; Japanese and German cars have been far ahead of American cars for decades.

1. 
   citrouille | Jun 01, 2006 01:47pm | #18

   What most people don't realise is that we already use the decimal system with money and I never heard anybody bitch about that !The real beauty of the metric system is that everything is related:
   A cube 100mm x 100mm x 100mm (a cubic dm) holds a liter of water.
   A liter of water weighs a kilogram (kg).And please let's not get into temperature ! Freezing at 32 degrees ?C.

2. 
   Napie | Jun 01, 2006 06:03pm | #21

   I’m sure glad you are not running any of our industries, you’d just lie down and die…  Let’s see, have you heard of Microsoft, Google, Boeing, General Dynamics, (the M1A1 Abrams has NEVER been defeated in battle, ever), Ruger Firearms, General Electric, (big jet engines),  Trane, (HVAC equipment) Cleaver-Brooks, Amgen, S.C. Johnson, just to name a few companies in quite varied industries that are dominated by Americans.<!----><!----><!---->

   <!----> <!---->

   So, a few problems with NASA? Who else has even come close to what we have accomplished?  Yes, two fatal shuttle flights, but as the odds go, we smoke anyone who has ever even attempted it.<!----><!---->

   <!----> <!---->

   As to the Chinese and Taiwanese, what do they innovate? Tell me about any NEW design the have, sure, they copy and build cheap, but anything new comes from HERE. <!----><!---->

   <!----> <!---->

   So, tell me, who can really challenge us, huh? Maybe if you had your way they could, but there are lots of innovative people in this country who are up to the challenge and look forward to the next big thing, vs. looking backwards and crying in their beer.<!----><!---->

3. 
   citrouille | Jun 01, 2006 01:54pm | #19

   The last time we defeated anybody was before I was born !C.

4. 
   SgianDubh | May 24, 2006 07:11pm | #5

   We buy it either by the cubic foot or cubic metre in the UK. It depends on the merchant and the buyer. It's pretty easy to flit between one and the other measure using 35.31 ft³ per m³. Slainte.

   Richard Jones Furniture

5. 
   GHR | May 24, 2006 10:00pm | #7

   I buy lumber in the US from a place that sells by the cubic meter.

1. 
   Daggs | May 25, 2006 12:33am | #8

   really?  Where at?  and how do they do the fractions of a cubic meter?  cubic decimeters?  What's the smallest unit that they sell by?

1. 
   GHR | May 25, 2006 03:07am | #9

   They usually ship containers to Europe so they measure and price in cubic meters.They will sell single logs, flitch sawn to the buyer's specs. They also sell square edged curly cherry - 25bdft and up. $3000/m3 gets clear unfigured cherry logs or square edged OK curly cherry. $4500/m3 gets some VERY NICE clear curly cherry logs.$/bdft __ $/m3
   _5.88 ___ 2500
   _7.06 ___ 3000
   _8.24 ___ 3500
   _9.41 ___ 4000
   10.59 ___ 4500
   11.76 ___ 5000
   12.94 ___ 5500
   14.12 ___ 6000I just paid $4500/m3 ($2545 plus $335 shipping) for 1 log - .612m3 (260 bdft 8/4 x 14-21" wide) of the best curly cherry I have ever seen.I have e-mailed the suppliers website location.

2. 
   citrouille | May 25, 2006 03:18am | #10

   Fractions of a cubic meter as 0.5 for 1/2 - 0.25 for 1/4 and so on.C.

6. 
   Moksha | May 25, 2006 11:01pm | #14

   A little humor on this subject, I lived in England for four years and the first time I went to the do-it-yourself place -- I was shocked to find shrink wrapped pine 2x4s. The price took your breath away. At the end of that four year period I moved to Germany where lumber was a bit closer in price to what we pay in the USA. There seemed to be a lot more people in Germany who had wood working as a hobby.

7. 
   eddiefromAustralia | May 25, 2006 11:25pm | #15

   Hi All,

   You can buy a single board at a m3 rate - I do it all the time.

   Going rate for Jarrah is about AUD3-4000/m3.

   Just multiply rough sawn length by thickness by width by price.

   If you buy by the pack (approx 1m3) it's obviously cheaper.

   Cheers,

   eddie

    

8. 
   Keithuk | May 25, 2006 11:39pm | #16

   In the UK softwood is sold in mm sizes before planing.
   So you buy 50mm x 25 mm section wood (aka 2" x 1") and it is actually about 47mm x 22mm.
   It comes in multiples of 300mm (just under a foot) lengths.

   Hardwood is switching to metric sizes, but you 25mm thick hardwood will typically plane down to 25mm, rather than 22mm. It used to be charged by the cubic foot, but most merchants quote a cubic foot and a cubic metres price.