Thread: How to measure wood (what is a cord?)

In N.Z the only way you can sell fire wood is per cubic metre, and this measurement is taken when the wood is thrown not stacked.

I'm glad this is how we do it after reading about cords!

Great pictures above, gotta love winter when the sun is shining and you have ranges like that to look at

Originally Posted by tramp bushler

The view coming home tired with a load on . I think late winter is the best time of year . .

From north ( left) to south . Mt Sanford , Mt Drum, Mt. Wrangel . Mt Blackburn is to the south out of the pic .

Beautiful. I spent most of 55 and 56 up there, mostly on Shemya and St. Lawrence. Saw a lot of Alaska from Fairbanks, Anchorage, Nome and all the little villages inbetween riding the Wien, Reeves, etc. just trying to get to duty stations.
Wonderful country.

Harry K

Originally Posted by Dozer Man

No need to defend myself...I was just repeating something I read in AS somewhere.

About the 8x8 log.....What about a 4' dia. x 8' long log? It would fit in the "4x4x8" jig perfectly, but if would only produce an actual volume of 100.48 cu. ft. of wood. Well, until you cut it into 16" lengths and split it into pieces of firewood and stack them into 3 - 4'x8' "1/3 cords"........Anybody care to guess how that would fill out the 4x4x8 jig after cut and split???? Just curious.

It wouldn't fit and the smaller you split it the more overage you will have.

Harry K

Originally Posted by Dozer Man

No need to defend myself...I was just repeating something I read in AS somewhere.

About the 8x8 log.....What about a 4' dia. x 8' long log? It would fit in the "4x4x8" jig perfectly, but if would only produce an actual volume of 100.48 cu. ft. of wood. Well, until you cut it into 16" lengths and split it into pieces of firewood and stack them into 3 - 4'x8' "1/3 cords"........Anybody care to guess how that would fill out the 4x4x8 jig after cut and split???? Just curious.

Ya I screwed up there . Too tired . . It woyld probably come out to around a cord . But I'm not much at math.

Anyone know the math .

Harry . There was still most all the bark on this country back then .
I got home in 78 . Flew in to Kodiak on Wien . I went in the USCG to get here . When I got out in 82 I stayed . I've been almost everywhere in the state . Still have a few things to see . The Chain is sure a different kind of place .

Originally Posted by tramp bushler

Harry . There was still most all the bark on this country back then .
I got home in 78 . Flew in to Kodiak on Wien . I went in the USCG to get here . When I got out in 82 I stayed . I've been almost everywhere in the state . Still have a few things to see . The Chain is sure a different kind of place .

Transport back then was on wild and wooly side. I guess we got hardened to it. I cam off St.Lawrence Isle in spring '57 and got stranded in Nome waiting for a flight out. They were closing the air station there at the time and the rations were WWII Crats. Got old after the 1st week and very old after that. Each day tromp down to the ops shack and ask about flight out. "nothing today" was the usual. Got there one monring and a C124 was entereing the pattern with one fan out. Turned final and lost anohter fan. touched down on the ice covered runwayi and wiped out the side marker lights on the runway by going mostly sideways. True story. Stepped in and asked "Yes, that 124 should be going back this afternoon". "PUT ME ON IT!"

Never did understand how they stayed in the air, I swear one could walk faster than they flew...at least it seemed that way when riding one.

Harry K.

Well , on the bright side , you could have been eating mukluk .

Travel out west is pretty tough .

Originally Posted by tramp bushler

Well , on the bright side , you could have been eating mukluk .

Travel out west is pretty tough .

Tried it once at Gambel. It's one of those things that need to be left off the bucket list.

Harry K

Originally Posted by turnkey4099

Tried it once at Gambel. It's one of those things that need to be left off the bucket list.

Harry K

Well I just read the whole thread from start to finish......there is a very important factor to the measurement of wood that no one has touched on or perhaps articulated properly. I realize that other parts of the country have various and somtimes dubious terms for volumes of wood. The closest anyone has come in this thread is John's post #23 but he did not follow up with further explanation.
First I think most of us would agree that a cord of wood (or fraction thereof) is the only real and legal measure of wood and is defined as 4' X 4' X 8'........or 128cuft...right??? OK are we all on the same page?? Now while this is true it only applies to round wood that is cut 4' long and stacked 4' high and 8' long. Remember this measurement is the sum of many averages figured in by the inventers of this measurement unit. Scaling wood is always and average at best and the honest scaler will be very aware of the fluctuations of judgement and measure to the plus and minus of that average line and keep it as close as possible to even. But back to the 1 cord measure....the reason that this measure only pertains to round wood 4' long is that once cut to lenght, split and restacked firewood will without exception take up less space than 128 cuft. It will drop down to 96-98 cuft from 128cuft when processed into 16"...12" it drops even lower to around 92 cut and stacked. However if you cut the wood to 24" split and restack that size will come back up in volume to around 108-110 cuft. ........I can hear you guys hissing from here LOL!! Don't believe me..... do it yourself....it's just the way it is. Start with a 4' x 4' X8' pile of round wood and process it restack and see if these figures aren't with +- 5%. Again these are averages of scale and will vary slightly depending the varibales of size and straightness/ knots etc. of the round wood started with. There are also accepted volumes of thrown in a pile processed wood as John said again the volume measure will vary as to the length the 4' wood is split and cut to. His figures are corect but I will add that 24" fit and split comes in at around 220 cuft thrown in a pile.

Though I really like Tramps pics of Alaska his load is no closer to 2 cord than I am to Alaska. Though his length is 8' and the height is probably close to 4' at the headboard it tapers badly toward the rear so I would probably scale that at more like 1.5 cord at best. I've been scaling saw logs, loads of pulp at the mill, and firewood on trucks for yrs. This is not my opinion... as I said do it yourself if you doubt my figures and get back to me if you find me wrong.

Top of the gloves on top of the front stakes is 4'8" . . can you see the gloves. . .

the rear stakes are 3'3" tall.

Can't dog is a good handle for you.
I know this load is 2 cord. I hope where u are is as close as you get to Alaska.

What a thing to read first thing on a sunday morning.

Originally Posted by Cantdog

Well I just read the whole thread from start to finish......there is a very important factor to the measurement of wood that no one has touched on or perhaps articulated properly. I realize that other parts of the country have various and somtimes dubious terms for volumes of wood. The closest anyone has come in this thread is John's post #23 but he did not follow up with further explanation.
First I think most of us would agree that a cord of wood (or fraction thereof) is the only real and legal measure of wood and is defined as 4' X 4' X 8'........or 128cuft...right??? OK are we all on the same page?? Now while this is true it only applies to round wood that is cut 4' long and stacked 4' high and 8' long. Remember this measurement is the sum of many averages figured in by the inventers of this measurement unit. Scaling wood is always and average at best and the honest scaler will be very aware of the fluctuations of judgement and measure to the plus and minus of that average line and keep it as close as possible to even. But back to the 1 cord measure....the reason that this measure only pertains to round wood 4' long is that once cut to lenght, split and restacked firewood will without exception take up less space than 128 cuft. will drop down to 96-98 cuft from 128cuft when processed into 16"...12" it drops even lower to around 92 cut and stacked. However if you cut the wood to 24" split and restack that size will come back up in volume to around 108-110 cuft. ........I can hear you guys hissing from here LOL!! Don't believe me..... do it yourself....it's just the way it is. Start with a 4' x 4' X8' pile of round wood and process it restack and see if these figures aren't with +- 5%. Again these are averages of scale and will vary slightly depending the varibales of size and straightness/ knots etc. of the round wood started with. There are also accepted volumes of thrown in a pile processed wood as John said again the volume measure will vary as to the length the 4' wood is split and cut to. His figures are corect but I will add that 24" fit and split comes in at around 220 cuft thrown in a pile.






Though I really like Tramps pics of Alaska his load is no closer to 2 cord than I am to Alaska. Though his length is 8' and the height is probably close to 4' at the headboard it tapers badly toward the rear so I would probably scale that at more like 1.5 cord at best. I've been scaling saw logs, loads of pulp at the mill, and firewood on trucks for yrs. This is not my opinion... as I said do it yourself if you doubt my figures and get back to me if you find me wrong.

Around my area a rank is suppose to be a third of a cord 16 inchs by 4 ft by 8 ft but now customers ask for 20 inch by 4 ft by 8 ft to be a rank this is another reason I do now sell bulk firewood . They say fireplace hold 20 inchs long so it must be 20 inchs long to be a rank. Right or wrong call some body else for wood I'll stay with bundled firewood.

I think bndled wood would be good. I have too limited a market

Originally Posted by Cantdog

Well I just read the whole thread from start to finish......there is a very important factor to the measurement of wood that no one has touched on or perhaps articulated properly. I realize that other parts of the country have various and somtimes dubious terms for volumes of wood. The closest anyone has come in this thread is John's post #23 but he did not follow up with further explanation.
First I think most of us would agree that a cord of wood (or fraction thereof) is the only real and legal measure of wood and is defined as 4' X 4' X 8'........or 128cuft...right??? OK are we all on the same page?? Now while this is true it only applies to round wood that is cut 4' long and stacked 4' high and 8' long. Remember this measurement is the sum of many averages figured in by the inventers of this measurement unit. Scaling wood is always and average at best and the honest scaler will be very aware of the fluctuations of judgement and measure to the plus and minus of that average line and keep it as close as possible to even. But back to the 1 cord measure....the reason that this measure only pertains to round wood 4' long is that once cut to lenght, split and restacked firewood will without exception take up less space than 128 cuft. It will drop down to 96-98 cuft from 128cuft when processed into 16"...12" it drops even lower to around 92 cut and stacked. However if you cut the wood to 24" split and restack that size will come back up in volume to around 108-110 cuft. ........I can hear you guys hissing from here LOL!! Don't believe me..... do it yourself....it's just the way it is. Start with a 4' x 4' X8' pile of round wood and process it restack and see if these figures aren't with +- 5%. Again these are averages of scale and will vary slightly depending the varibales of size and straightness/ knots etc. of the round wood started with. There are also accepted volumes of thrown in a pile processed wood as John said again the volume measure will vary as to the length the 4' wood is split and cut to. His figures are corect but I will add that 24" fit and split comes in at around 220 cuft thrown in a pile.

Though I really like Tramps pics of Alaska his load is no closer to 2 cord than I am to Alaska. Though his length is 8' and the height is probably close to 4' at the headboard it tapers badly toward the rear so I would probably scale that at more like 1.5 cord at best. I've been scaling saw logs, loads of pulp at the mill, and firewood on trucks for yrs. This is not my opinion... as I said do it yourself if you doubt my figures and get back to me if you find me wrong.

The legal definition of a cord does _not_ say it has to be cut 4' long and left in the round.
That is from the way early days of big fireplaces and steam engines. If it applied back then (I doubt it), it for sure does not now.

The only way bucked, split and piled 4' long 'round wood' comes up to less space than you started with is if the logs are _EXTREMELY_ crooked to begin with. There have been way more discussions on the subject that should be necessary as several experiments have been run proving that split/stacked wood "swells" the volumn. Several table top expiraments have aslo been listed that anyone can do on their table top and prove it to themselves.

I've been cutting, stacking, etc firewood at 10+ cord for over 30 years and know that no matter how you try you can't split a round and get it into a smaller space than nature made to start with...in fact you can't even get it into the _same_ space unless you reassemble it into the original round.

Harry K

You will find in the firewood business as any business some body will change the out look on size and price. Man at the cafe told me he would not buy gravel from me because I charge to much. Problem is I don't sell gravel so see. Later fellows