Thread: Oak - "Real" vs "Tassie"

I thought I'd do a quick update on the outcome of all this. The seller offered to refund the money, minus the shipping cost and let me keep the timber. That suited me OK - although I had no use for the stuff, my dad wants shorter lengths of timber to make boxes etc, so he's going to take it as he should be able to get plenty of useful small bits out of it.

Also, I've been offered a decent lot of american oak by another bloke - this is good KD Prime grade timber, originally bought from one of the big wholesalers, leftover from some extensive renovation work. There's about 0.65m3 all up, all 50mm section. I'm getting it for $930 plus a bit of freight. So not bad at all really.

All's well that ends well

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

Just another difference in the oaks.

The Quercus species or true oaks are less dense than the "imposters." Silky oak, Casuarina Oaks (Bull, Forest, She etc) and the "Tasmanian Oak group are all more dense, particularly the latter two.

The Casuarinas in particular are very harsh on tools.

Regards
Paul

Where I work we use both Tasmanian "oak" and American Oak (a true Quercus) and I have to disagree with the Tasmanian type being more dense than a true quercus, particularly American Oak. I think the messmate part of Tassie oak is very close in density but the mountain/alpine ash varieties are in my opinion less dense. I don't have my copy of K. Bootle's "Wood in Australia" to hand but I think it would confirm this.

Hope that helps

Liam

Originally Posted by wachenga

Where I work we use both Tasmanian "oak" and American Oak (a true Quercus) and I have to disagree with the Tasmanian type being more dense than a true quercus, particularly American Oak. I think the messmate part of Tassie oak is very close in density but the mountain/alpine ash varieties are in my opinion less dense. I don't have my copy of K. Bootle's "Wood in Australia" to hand but I think it would confirm this.

Hope that helps

Liam

Liam

As Bootle's bible was about 300mm from my hand as I read your post..

ADDs as follows:

European Oak (Q. Robur) 700Kg/m3
Japanese Oak (Q. Mongolica) 650Kg/m3
American Oak (Quercus spp.) 750Kg/m3

Mountain Ash (E.Regnans) 680Kg/m3
Messmate Stringybark (E.Obliqua) 680Kg/m3
Silvertop Ash (E.Sieberi) 820Kg/m3

River Sheoak (C.Cunninghamania) 770Kg/m3
Rose Sheoak (C.Torulosa) 920Kg/m3
W. Australian Sheoak (C.Fraserana) 720Kg/m3
Bull Oak C.Luehmannii) 1050Kg/m3

So in principle there is not much in it with the American Oak being the most dense of the true Oaks and the Casuarinas tending towards the most dense of the "imposters." I threw in the Bull Oak to make my story more credible, but it is not regarded as a commercial species.

Well, I'm just off to eat a very small portion of humble pie.

Regards
Paul

I had a feeling Bootle might have corroborated it, thanks for the quick research Paul.

My subjective view at work comes from lifting 5m long boards of the two types, Tas Oak and American Oak, you can certainly feel the difference with the true quercus, much heavier in comparison.

Regards,

Liam

750 kg/m3 for American Oak - that means I'm going to have half a tonne of timber to lug down to my shed...

You need to specify what type of American Oak, too. The figure you quoted from Bootle is probably a White Oak, whereas Red Oak is less dense - around 620 according to Hoadley, and much nicer to work with than White Oak in my (limited) expereince. As with any wood, there is going to be a lot of variation due to growth conditions & soil type, etc, but some WO can be tough stuff to work with hand tools - tougher than average Mtn. Ash, for example.

English oak is a 'white' oak, I believe, but the little bit I've handled was much nicer to work with than the American WO I've struck. I guess any barrel-maker would know.......

Cheers,

Originally Posted by IanW

As with any wood, there is going to be a lot of variation due to growth conditions & soil type, etc,
Cheers,

IW

You are absolutely right with regard to variation. Also plantation timber will be less dense than forest grown as will species grown away from their natural environment (eucalypts grown outside Australian for example).

There is a lot of variation. "ADD" is average dried density and to some extent tries to allow for variances. It will fail with just a single example. The American Oak quoted was identified as white oak, but as it referese to "Quercus species" it probably covers a number of varieties within the Quercus family.

It is quite likely you have had a less dense variety of white oak. The same happens out here with Meranti. Some is quite dense while some is very light.

Regards
Paul