I'm trying to identify the species of wood that this stump came from. The pictures I took are at
As for the last picture, I'm pretty sure it is of an Oak stump, but not
100% sure.Thanks
Since you only showed a weathered piece of log w/ no remaining bark and absolutely no clear view of either end or side grain, it's pretty tough to make even a guess on the first. If you really want someone to have a reasonable shot at it, at least give a new surface on the end and preferably part of the side...
Yes, the second is an oak, again w/ an weathered face not positive but I'd venture white oak. Also, just as a if I had to guess, based on what little view there is of the first, I'd suspect oak up fairly high on the list as well, but it does seem a little amber in color altho that could simply be lighting....
What he said.
But I'll hazard a guess that it is redgum.
White oak, possibly.
Don't think so. To me, the bark looks wrong for oak. My guess is sugar maple. I'll bet this one's pretty heavy, too, and really hard.
Actually, it's not that heavy, at least when compared to the first log. The first log pictured is about twice as heavy as the second one pictured. Its grain is so tightly packed, you can see all those little tiny curls, that shows you how dense it is, and why it's so heavy. Sugar maple, ay? I'll be glad if it is a maple, that would mean it's a hardwood with good split resistance, which is what I want.
Doug Miller wrote:
In that case, there's no way it's sugar maple, unless the first log is soaking wet -- sugar maple is one of the densest North American woods, nearly as dense as white oak. Bark on #2 still looks like maple to me, though, and based on your description of the weight, I'm now more inclined to think silver or red instead of sugar.
What he said again. We had timber specialists in to try to identify timbers in a historic building. Without taking samples for microscope examination the only statement they could make on any wood just by eyeing it was "Not Oak".
Tim W
I've posted a new pic of the one side of it, attempting to show the rings.
Raffi.
Tim W wrote:
Sorry, but that's not very helpful. Trying to identify wood from a view of the end grain is a fool's errand. About the only additional information that end view gives is that it's definitely not red oak.
Split the log, or saw or plane a little bit off one side, so that some view of the grain _other_than_ an end view is possible, and post a photo of that.
As for the second log, you said in an earlier post that it's much lighter weight than the first one, and I speculated that it's perhaps either red or silver maple. Light weight, with that bark, there are a couple other possiblities, too: catalpa or cottonwood.
Here, also, a view of the grain parallel to the trunk of the tree would be very helpful -- as would knowing where you're located.
Sat, Dec 16, 2006, 2:30pm (EST-3) snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com (Raffo) puzzedl exclaims: I'm trying to identify the species of wood
Easy. If it's free, its popular wood.
JOAT Where does Batman buy gas for the Batmobile?
I thought it was nuclear.
where are you from (or at least where did the chunk come from?) my guess is elm, but that's just a guess. I don't think anyone can be sure without a closer look.
The second one looks more like cottonwood than either the red or silver maples growing in our yard. There is a cottonwood in the neighborhood as well. It also bears some resemblance to an elm we had to cut down.
How dry are the logs? Most any log will be heavy if it is still wet.
Planing/cutting to show side grain will go a long way to ruling out some of the posiblities.
The first one looks like oak or possiblily elm.
r> > >I've posted a new pic of the one side of it, attempting to show the > >rings. > > >
Rather than have this be all guesswork and speculation, maybe OP could provide some info, like geographic area where trees grew, and site conditions.
Suspect first may be black birch, more strongly suspect second is white oak.
Knowledgeable local could probably name both in seconds.
JHomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.