Years back when Midwinter was active I believe she scrounged some from the dump. Obviously not a big wood but it was very dense she stated.
I had 8” diameter lilac, so i split it; it was dense. Dry it burned well. MHL68 just curious why you put ash in different category than maple?
There is ZERO DOUBT that a question like this will get opinions on here! But it's one of those somewhat volatile questions, like which make or style of vehicle is best, which brand or size of saw is best, what gun is best etc etc. How does the "other site" define "quality"? Is it based on just btus given, or is it a combination of factors like btu, drying time, ease to split, how long it lasts in a given storage condition etc etc...the list goes on. It all depends on context. A pi to station wagon may be perfect for your needs, while I really need something like an F450 flatbed. Some folks say hedge, black locust or shagbark hickory is the best (based mainly on btus). For me, that'd likely make my heating application go nuclear. So I'm learning that I like a mix of oak, ash, maple, elm, hackberry etc. But if one has no firewood, anything burns better than a snowball.... In my opinion, it all depends on how a person defines "quality"....
I think it was Paul bunion who said all dry firewood had same BTUs per pound; this was fascinating to me. Changed my hoarding pattern
That's basically true...but many softwoods actually have a slight advantage, per pound. 8600 BTUs/lb is the commonly used average number...
Nope, no such thing! Remember there’s a plethora of wood users (hoarders) here and many will have different opinions on “best” firewood ranking..The best wood is usually what you can source close and is free
Certainly not my list...just something I found on-the-line. It was just a basic generic list I found and was looking for what opinions here would be on a list like this. I knew it would not be agreed upon across the board. Just wondering what the opinions here would be on how WAY off base it was or how semi, in a general basis, it may be relevant.
For me locust is almost useless when burned by itself during very cold weather. Fills the stove with coals and doesn’t throw much heat. Works pretty well to stuff the stove for an overnight burn if you are home the next day to feed the fire with pine or cottonwood to burn the coals out. Have had the same problem with apple wood. I think they both work better for shoulder season than during the bitter cold times. YMMV.
I tend to agree although I wouldnt call it shoulder season wood Id be cooked out. For me all the black locust goes nuclear off gassing for the first hour or 2 then yeah its just a giant lingering coal. So maybe 2 splits at most at a time usually just one though. Im sitting on a cord of it trying to figure out the best way to work it in. Mixing a piece of pine with the hardwoods will give a quick burst of heat nearly as good and not leave me with a stove full of coals.
Totally agree. I have actually started using high coaling woods (what most would consider "the good stuff") for shoulder season fuel...I find it off gasses good for an hour or two (which provides the temp increase for the house) then the long lasting coals provide the low level heat needed to maintain that temp long term, without driving the house temp up a lot more. During the cold snap we just came through on n off over the last month or so I found myself loading pine and other low coaling woods when the house temp was dropping and the Kuuma had a belly full o coals...had I been around the house to reload more throughout the day, I would have been using all, or at least mostly, "shoulder season" woods on the coldest days to keep the BTUs pumping into the house...less peaks and valleys in the house temp that way. I know, I know, that totally goes against traditional wood heat thinking, but with modern EPA stoves, it's true. I have no doubt that an old school stove could/would be red hot burning locust, hickory, Osage, etc...
