1x8

This is a forum for intermediate to advanced woodworkers. Show off your projects or share your ideas.

Moderator: admin

Hobbyman2
Platinum Member
Posts: 2673
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2017 12:52 am
Location: Ohio

Re: 1x8

Post by Hobbyman2 »

JPG, it would be easy to beat the topic to death and still nothing would change , if losing 3/4 inch { = a whole board from a log}, is a new standard one would think the lumber king would offer a product to repair old work. JMO ,some times shims are not as good as 2 boards the same thickness , If I want a 1 inch finished board from my local mill I just tell them and they rough cut one 1 3/16 to 1 1/4 inch and we are good to go a year or two later after it has dried and been ran through the planer .if I need a 3/4 board they cut it to 7/8 - 1" ,then my router bits all work right , my saw cuts work right , it saves a lot of planing ,just saying there is a huge difference in the dimensions of the finished product from the big box and what comes out locally . just my .02
Hobbyman2 Favorite Quote: "If a man does his best, what else is there?"
- General George S. Patton (1885-1945)
User avatar
jsburger
Platinum Member
Posts: 6585
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 4:06 pm
Location: Hooper, UT

Re: 1x8

Post by jsburger »

JPG wrote:
Hobbyman2 wrote:John , if that were so then why dont they just rough cut them a bit thicker ,just saying . maybe they are harvesting new growth now and the tees are smaller in diameter ? I can't explain it .

Again the 1x8 dimension is that when it was in the tree!
The rough cut dimension is a saw kerf less.

If one increases the rough cut dimension to say 1", it would than be called a 1(+kerf) x ..

The description(1x..) is what was started with(in the tree), NOT what the end result dimension is.
Exactly and that is what I have always thought.

When you measure rough cut lumber in old houses (1920 or before for example) much of that lumber was sawn locally. There were no industry standards. A 2X4 was normally 2X4 rough but maybe not always. Size didn't necessarily vary by the sawyer but the builder used what he had as long as the flat surface (top of the floor) was level. 2X6 mixed with 2X8 for example.
John & Mary Burger
Eagle's Lair Woodshop
Hooper, UT
User avatar
JPG
Platinum Member
Posts: 35600
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 7:42 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky (TAMECAT territory)

Re: 1x8

Post by JPG »

Hobbyman2 wrote:JPG, it would be easy to beat the topic to death and still nothing would change , if losing 3/4 inch { = a whole board from a log}, is a new standard one would think the lumber king would offer a product to repair old work. JMO ,some times shims are not as good as 2 boards the same thickness , If I want a 1 inch finished board from my local mill I just tell them and they rough cut one 1 3/16 to 1 1/4 inch and we are good to go a year or two later after it has dried and been ran through the planer .if I need a 3/4 board they cut it to 7/8 - 1" ,then my router bits all work right , my saw cuts work right , it saves a lot of planing ,just saying there is a huge difference in the dimensions of the finished product from the big box and what comes out locally . just my .02
Quite true when one side of the conversation ignores well established facts and standards.

Buying rough cut lumber from a local mill is in no way relevant to STANDARD DIMENSIONAL STRUCTURAL LUMBER SIZING.

I do feel your frustration, but have learned to live with what other folks do/say a long time ago. Still that does not prevent me from attempting to bring others up to speed so to speak.

As Spock has often uttered LIVE LONG AND PROSPER!
╔═══╗
╟JPG ╢
╚═══╝

Goldie(Bought New SN 377425)/4" jointer/6" beltsander/12" planer/stripsander/bandsaw/powerstation /Scroll saw/Jig saw /Craftsman 10" ras/Craftsman 6" thicknessplaner/ Dayton10"tablesaw(restoredfromneighborstrashpile)/ Mark VII restoration in 'progress'/ 10
E[/size](SN E3779) restoration in progress, a 510 on the back burner and a growing pile of items to be eventually returned to useful life. - aka Red Grange
Hobbyman2
Platinum Member
Posts: 2673
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2017 12:52 am
Location: Ohio

Re: 1x8

Post by Hobbyman2 »

jsburger wrote:
JPG wrote:
Hobbyman2 wrote:John , if that were so then why dont they just rough cut them a bit thicker ,just saying . maybe they are harvesting new growth now and the tees are smaller in diameter ? I can't explain it .

Again the 1x8 dimension is that when it was in the tree!
The rough cut dimension is a saw kerf less.

If one increases the rough cut dimension to say 1", it would than be called a 1(+kerf) x ..

The description(1x..) is what was started with(in the tree), NOT what the end result dimension is.
Exactly and that is what I have always thought.

When you measure rough cut lumber in old houses (1920 or before for example) much of that lumber was sawn locally. There were no industry standards. A 2X4 was normally 2X4 rough but maybe not always. Size didn't necessarily vary by the sawyer but the builder used what he had as long as the flat surface (top of the floor) was level. 2X6 mixed with 2X8 for example.
=============

No disagreement there John,I have seen homes built entirely from walnut ,from the studs to the rafters and floor joist , right down to the flooring and trim .Like many I grew up going to a lumber yard not a saw mill . my generation was spoiled so to speak. now I envy the Amish folks who mill their own lumber you can go to nearly any 100 year old Amish home or barn and the lumber they cut today is basically all cut the same .
Hobbyman2 Favorite Quote: "If a man does his best, what else is there?"
- General George S. Patton (1885-1945)
Post Reply