BLUECREEPER Poster Award #4!
The Forestry Forum is sponsored in part by:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Unless you have nice big logs, quartersawing seems like a waste. Whereas through sawing will give you the most lumber in the end including some quartersawn....thoughs?
I realize the difference but what are the benefits of each?
Quarter sawing doesn't produce as much lumber as flat sawing.
QuoteQuarter sawing doesn't produce as much lumber as flat sawing.I wouldn't imagine he will be truly QS the log. With the "modified" QS method descibed often here on the forum there shouldn't be any more waste than flat sawing. Of course he then will end up with about 50/50 QS and rift sawn lumber.As alway's Tom layed it out perfectly - your end use is the determining factor towards the "best" sawing method.
I’ve read most of the books written by the some of the finest craftsman in American. To me it is most interesting because these guys sometimes have completely different ideas than us sawyers. As a group, they shy away from grade sawing as it promotes long and narrow. It’s my impression they would throw away the tape, NHLA rules, and let the log decide how it wants to be sawed. Flat sawn and wide is beautiful with 180-degree rotations. Quarter saw only when ray fleck is required. George Nakashima in his book Soul of The Tree is a vocal advocate of through and through sawing sometimes called sawing in the boule. He even went so far as to say something to the effect that any other method is wasteful. It would be easy to discount the man but he walked the talk for 50 years and his works commands prices in the thousands…something that cannot be ignored or discounted. Just wish I was smart nuff to understand.
Started by MrMoo on Sawmills and Milling
Started by qbilder on Sawmills and Milling
Started by POSTON WIDEHEAD on Sawmills and Milling
Started by Russ on Sawmills and Milling