Thread: Valuable Stolen Timber (~US $1,000 per kg)

When it comes to exotic timber value there is little relevance between single piece and cubuc metre pricing.Particularly spectacular pieces can take on the same inflated value as gem stones and a similar appraisal method applied to both. Working as a timber wholesaler, I have seen some pretty nice stick and some pretty sweet deals. Some almost too sweet to be true. They are not the norm and infact, few and far between. Hence the newsworthy factor. It often became my task to follow up on notable sales and the usual outcome was a gross exaggeration on what had actually transpired.

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

...... But so many colonial era red cedar chairs have survived - some are in museums, far more are still in daily use. Their average age is ~150 years! ....

Graeme, I can vouch that the reason some of those chairs are still in one piece is because folks like myself & Auscab have put considerable effort into repairing them! But granted, some have survived the odds for a very long time, those I've seen are mostly of quite a robust build, which no doubt helps. But having said that, LOML has a rather fine little cedar thing that she keeps in the bedroom - it is strictly for decoration & the occasional duty as a 'clothes horse', I don't think it ever gets sat on.

Nah, we have plenty of more suitable woods than Toona for chairs - your Blackwood is one, & it's a local for you...

Cheers,

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

Engineering-wise, perhaps the most complex piece of furniture is a simple chair as it is used and abused. Stresses everywhere, especially where teenagers exist! But so many colonial era red cedar chairs have survived - some are in museums, far more are still in daily use. Their average age is ~150 years!

Perhaps demographics and trees may have changed?

I'm a 6'3" 150kg boofhead. Not too many of us around 150 years ago!

I was down in Tassie at the Beaconsfield Mine. They've a display of clothes and shoes - the woman's selection were incredibly tiny. The signs stated the display was not exaggerated. The waists I could put two hands around. The shoes like a modern child's. The mens display showed they were a bit bigger, but not by much.

Second, the trees.

I'd think that the tree availability of the past were slow grown and old, probably selectively harvested. Modern trees seem to be harvested quickly, strip cut and into the mill koalas and all. No problem with the forestry technique (except the wildlife!), but old and slow seems better for some things - especially spindly chairs

Originally Posted by woodPixel

...... but old and slow seems better for some things - especially spindly chairs

Actually, although it seems counter-intuitive Wp, old & slow-grown does not necessarily equate to tough with wood. I once thought like you, but Bruce Hoadley says otherwise & he's got experimental data to back it. There is no doubt the wood of older 'cedar' is denser than wood from young trees, but it also tends to be more brittle. Cedar is not a very tough wood at the best of times, it tends to snap like a carrot rather than bend & splinter. I've just finished working with some dense, dark cedar salvaged from an old door that was probably 100yrs old, so the wood in that would have been harvested back when the choice stuff was still around. It was reasonably dense & seemed to be in very good condition, but it was awful stuff to work with, dusty & very difficult to saw straight & tended to crush rather than cut under the sharpest chisel edges!

IMO, Toona is a very unsuitable wood for chairs of most types & the 150 yr old chairs Graeme mentions have survived by the grace of chair-gods rather than any inherent qualities of the wood. It can make a very convincing substitute for mahogany & in fact that had at least as much to do with its popularity initially as its easy-working properties because European settlement occurred right in the middle of the "age of mahogany" for furniture and the well-to-do were thoroughly wedded to the mahogany look. Had light-coloured woods been popular at the time, I suspect woods like the various Flindersia species (which includes Qld Maple), & some other woods with much better toughness and densities & working properties similar to mahogany would have been slaughtered first, but Maple had to wait another century before fashions changed & its turn came to be used (in the same indiscriminate way).

Toona makes an excellent facsimile for mahogany, but can't match its toughness by a long shot. I should point out that the bed head above is a mixture, I used mahogany for the legs because I joined the long rails with bolts & cedar would have crushed & continually loosened & been a right pain in that context. The legs also take the brunt of the wear & tear such as occasional knocks & dents which Toona doesn't take too kindly to. If you know your woods you can spot which is which, but it takes a close look & most folks would never know.......


Oh yeah - I certainly wouldn't advise anyone your size to sit on LOML's little cedar chair!

Cheers,

Originally Posted by IanW

... IMO, Toona is a very unsuitable wood for chairs of most types & the 150 yr old chairs Graeme mentions have survived by the grace of chair-gods rather than any inherent qualities of the wood. It can make a very convincing substitute for mahogany & in fact that had at least as much to do with its popularity initially as its easy-working properties because European settlement occurred right in the middle of the "age of mahogany" for furniture and the well-to-do were thoroughly wedded to the mahogany look. ...

Logically, I must agree with Ian .... but I am not convinced.

The colonial era was the era of mahogany, and Georgian designs were produced long after they had been superceded in the UK. Go into any antiques shop or exhibition and you will see mahagany and cedar chairs that are virtually identical - same designs, same era, same wood appearance - but pick one up - if its heavy it's mahogany, if its light it's cedar. And so many of the cedar chairs have survived - in spite of them being cedar, and few of them would have been nursed by Ian's darling or her predessessors.

Ian's chair-god must have been a very busy chappy, or there is something else involved.

Originally Posted by GraemeCook

.......Ian's chair-god must have been a very busy chappy, or there is something else involved.....

Graeme, I have no documented evidence to support this, it's just an opinion based on my own limited experience, but my answer to the above would be that there were a LOT of cedar chairs made and a proportion of them have survived due to gentler owners or superior construction, or both. Mahogany chairs fail too, I've repaired several of those, but not at the same rate as cedar chairs of a similar design. I reckon if you pick up every mahogany-like chair you meet & give it a shake, you'll discover another way to determine the wood. On average, the cedar chairs will be looser in the joints than the mahogany examples, ....

But the person who's opinion would really count (Auscab) doesn't frequent this section much. I think he's repaired more antique furniture than almost anyone else in the country, so whatever he said on the matter would carry far more weight than my opinions...

Cheers,

Perhaps cedar chairs were perceived as more flimsy, so people used them less? Ergo, they survived the test of time by virtue of them being unused?

Originally Posted by woodPixel

Perhaps cedar chairs were perceived as more flimsy, so people used them less? Ergo, they survived the test of time by virtue of them being unused?

WP, I think some folks are just naturally more careful than others, and not every family had boofheaded teenagers who liked to lean back & tilt chairs onto their back legs. THAT tends to sort out the structural soundness of a chair, as I have discovered on more than one occasion....

P'raps that's what kick-started my woodworking....

Cheers,

I have been working and selling timber for over 50 years. Cedar is one of my favourites. As it was in Colonial times. Why? Light and durable and yes, I grant you, soft. It glues well, takes a good finish and has some nice figure, easy to work and the bugs hate it. In short, it would have to be the easiest timber to deal with. But hang on you say, you said yourself that its soft. Yes it is but that means when bruised, fibres and cells are not broken, only crushed. A bit of steam strategically applied with a wet flannel under a hot iron and the surface is blemish free. Magic.
So what about the weight? Today, we trot off to the furniture store, select a piece of timber furniture made from Who Knows What and have it delivered if large, or tossed in the car for the journey home. Colonials also trotted off. Literally. Horse and dray. The lighter the cargo the better.
Ten family members (average sized jamily in those days) meant ten chairs and a large table, eight beds, one a double, so much the same weight as ten beds, robes, dressers, tallboys etc, etc. I reckon if you had asked the horse he would have voted for Cedar.
P.S. In fifty years I have only had one of my cedar chairs returned for repair (after a 21st birthday party.) I asked no questions, made the repair and returned it to the customer, no charge. I wrote on the under side of the seat, " Please respect me."