I hate to disappoint you Horkn and others but we get lots of Americal elm we can split with one swing! Yes, we get some of the other too but most of ours will split nicely.
Every bit of our American elm is stuff best left to hydro's. Yours must be less German than ours, because we have a ton of stubborn Germans here in southeast Wisconsin.
That's not much difference really. But that's only one chart, and IMHO that particular chart is the least trusted. Most btu charts have the elms all within a couple hundred btu's of each other and none over 19 mbtu's per cord. However, it's all btu's
When I was kid, most old timers wouldn't even consider burning Elm due to the difficulty of splitting it. We're talking back in the days before splitters were around like they are now. There was just much easier wood to work with. My uncles would leave the Elm out back to rot rather than try to mess with it.
It doesn't rot very well either. Lol It burns great though if you take the effort to run out through hydro's. My wife loves burning elm. I get it because there's a bunch of it dead standing, and a summer in the stacks and it's really ready to burn.
As I mentioned in the "Big Red" thread, the big rounds split like a dream. I wonder if that (as well as your easy-splitting American) is due to the fact that our wood was standing dead for so long? Or are just the big rounds easier to split? Well, there's less than a 2M BTU difference between Red Oak and White Oak, and I think most here would say that White burns noticeably better. Is this the chart you don't like? There are a couple I don't agree with, like White Oak the same as Red Oak at 24. And I see Red Maple listed elsewhere at 18.7, not 18.1. Can you provide links to a couple BTU lists you like?
Woody, being dead for a long time does make a huge difference with elm. That is why we don't have much problem when it comes time to split it. Cut it sooner though and it can be a bear!
Nearly all the American elm I cut and split is dead standing. It's all stringy around here. It's basically down to the same thinking that the French use to describe how each particular climate and soils alter the taste of the same grape varieties. It's called "terroir". That will affect how trees burn, split, grow, etc. It will also affect btu's most certainly. You always hear that craggy gnarly pieces of wood burn longer and have more btu's. White oak, burns differently than red oak due to the cellular structure of white oak. Getting back to wine, or whiskey for that matter, all oak barrels for aging booze is made from white oak. If you made a barrel from red oak, it will leak. White oak barrels don't leak because the cell structure won't allow it. As I see it, that cell structure difference between red and white oak is more why it burns "better" or different than red. Most charts have white and red rate the same, or very similar in btu's. Btu's have nothing to do with longevity of the burn, just the total amount of heat. I take the highs and the lows out for the wood btu charts. Or I just average the totals. There's the chimney sweep's chart, as well as several forestry charts.
I haven't burned much American Elm. Not sure how much Red Elm you've burned? It would be interesting to hear from some folks who have burned a lot of both, and hear how they would compare their BTU outputs. The sweep's chart has Sugar Maple at the same BTU as Black Locust. I think not, not even close, and I have burned a lot of both. Maybe I've got some kind of funky soil. BTU is the same per pound of wood regardless of specie. BL splits are noticeably heavier than Sugar Maple splits. We've burned quite a bit of both those as well, and White cranks out high stove temps quite a bit longer, for us anyway. I would take it all day long over Red. Have you got a link to some of the forestry charts you mentioned?
Sugar maple is extremely good firewood. It's better than oak IMHO. However, yes, I'd agree with you that any locust is better than sugar maple. I'd take my favorite, and abundant in my woods, shagbark hickory over any of those though. Beech, is a close second, despite being lower on some charts than sugar maple. Here's a link about white oak cell structure. White Oak: The Perfect Wood For Barrels - Black Water Barrels As far as red vs American elm, I trust the charts, on average that is. I burn American elm, because that's what I have around here. From what I recall from people that do process red elm, beyond the smell, is that it seems easier to split than American elm. There's so many forestry btu charts that you should have no issue finding a few.
Hey, I found a couple. There are so many lists that we can usually find one to support what we already think is true. I tend to use the ones that support my experience, but every list usually has a few ratings that I don't buy... https://my.extension.illinois.edu/documents/1722110809110911/Nebraska producing, harvesting and processing firewood.pdf https://www.extension.iastate.edu/forestry/publications/PDF_files/PM1850_ref_handbook.pdf https://extension.umd.edu/sites/default/files/_docs/publications/FS926WoodFuel.pdf Just saw this...good one! I spent my first 30 yrs. in SE WI so I know what you're talking about. Then I moved here...the weather and the trees are different but the stubborn Germans are the same.
That's why I don't quote 1 charts btu ratings.. They are best when aggregated. Plus I use the throw the high and low out scientific method. I'm 50% German, 50% Norwegian. So I get the stubborn thing.
Well, if it ain't red elm it's gotta be Siberian elm. The leaves are way to small to be American elm. I'm going out later today to take more pictures including a couple of a huge mystery elm. And maybe it ain't elm at all?!?
