Back at my old job, the boss talked about how wood used before tree farms were common was much heaveir and stronger than wood that you’d find at the local hardware store today. He claimed that the intense watering and fertilization of the farm trees caused them to grow faster, but since the rings were wider (and therefore fewer in any given piece of wood), they were not as strong.
Is this the case and if so, how much of a difference are we talking about.
Yes, that makes sense. Slower growth does result in stronger lumber.
As to how much of a difference, I don’t know. Google on ‘Machine Stress Rated’ lumber (MSR) to get an idea of how lumber strength is measured. It’s not a simple thing as it depends on which property of the lumber you are interested in. (bending strength vs. horizontal shear strength, for example.)
I don’t know about the rings, but a 2x4 used to measure 2x4, instead of the 1.5x3.5 today.
Plus, you could drive a nail through one without it splitting along the grain.
I beg to differ…
A 2" x 4" piece of lumber would be called dimension lumber.
The old standard for “2x4’s” was 1-5/8" x 3-5/8" and were called studs.
Tne new standard for “2x4’s” is “1-1/2” x 3-1/2" and again called stude.
Don’t know the year change was made.
Used to be, though, you could get rough, unplaned 2x4’s that really were 2x4. Heck, maybe one still can, but not at most lumberyards.
Sure you can, just ask for dimension lumber. It’s always been available.
My mother used to saw lumber out in the sticks around here and they actually did make a 2x4 2" by 4" standard… I suspect it’s regional, but for the regular city lumber yards, yeah the newer common standards and so forth mentioned usually apply. You can also get any kind of cut you want directly from a saw mill, if you got the money and contacts that is.
There is still “old wood” being cut, sold, and grown today as well - it’s just not as plentiful as it used to be (check out all the protesting of cutting old-growth forests). Even some tree farms grow what could be called old-growth wood… Merv Wilkinson on Vancouver Island comes to mind. Then again he’s older than dirt and by no means a millionaire from his 50+ years of managing his little forest. Also there always was weaker wood produced from fast growing trees in certain locations - this is just more common now.
As to how much stronger old-growth wood may be, sorry I don’t have cites. It just seems to make sense. Look at a 2x4 with rings 1mm apart and one with rings 10mm apart; the first is more dense. I’m still hesitant to say yes or no though, since I haven’t seen any real studies on the subject. It could just be something builders estimate from experience or even simply assume to be true. Still waiting for a good answer here… 