Is this Honey Locust?

Iheartwood said:
Ryan, I think you nailed it. I calculated the density around 37 lb/ft3 and wood database lists red elm at 38. I’m certainly no expert on end grain ID, but the end grain of my piece looks very similar to red elm examples I’m seeing online.
Click to expand...
Interestingly, i got a load of 8/4 chestnut yesterday, and it was more chatoyant than the 4/4 from the same source. I still think your piece is red elm, but i found this curious since that was one of the most obvious indicators that your wood wasn't chestnut. Evidently the chatoyance of chestnut can vary.
 
2feathers Creative Making said:
I believe the chatoyance guide that @chatometry put together could be helpful for that. Chatoyance varies from tree to tree. Slower growth would give a higher chance of chatoyance
Click to expand...
Broadly speaking, I have not seen a wide range of chatoyance within a single species for similarly figured woods. This Chestnut is also supposedly all from the same lot - though not necessarily the same tree. Its from Ocooch, and there's a thread going here on WB that details some of the history of the Chestnut.
 
Maybe conflating them. Since figure tends to produce changes in chatoyance but not necessarily in the rest of the board around it. You may be right. I am a bit sleep deprived right now. My wife had a stroke last Thursday and I am still not quite back to normal...
 
chatometry said:
My first thought was catalpa.
Chestnut and elm both have some chatoyance - see



On elm I never saw, however, such a bright surface like in your first picture.
Anyway, it's a wonderful piece; I suggest you to sand it up to #2500 to make the most of that figure!!!
Click to expand...
To be clear, I wasn't saying Chestnut has no chatoyance. I was just saying that it doesn't have as much as Ryan's piece, and I was also saying that the chatoyance seems to vary within my own Chestnut supply. Ryan's piece reminded me of Birch due to the level of chatoyance, but its clearly not Birch. I think Red Elm looks right, but I do have some Catalpa somewhere that I could compare to as well.
 
2feathers Creative Making said:
Maybe conflating them. Since figure tends to produce changes in chatoyance but not necessarily in the rest of the board around it. You may be right. I am a bit sleep deprived right now. My wife had a stroke last Thursday and I am still not quite back to normal...
Click to expand...
I hope she (and you) recover swiftly!
 
2feathers Creative Making said:
Maybe conflating them. Since figure tends to produce changes in chatoyance but not necessarily in the rest of the board around it. You may be right. I am a bit sleep deprived right now. My wife had a stroke last Thursday and I am still not quite back to normal...
Click to expand...
This is very upsetting. Hope and pray she recovers fully. Chuck
 
Here is a photo of Red elm, Ulmus rubra, from Keim wood supply. The issue I have is the ulmiform pore structure is almost always seen in any cathedral grain layouts. See the wavy pattern below? You can see it below Big Ry's thumb as well. However, this pattern is not always the case as seen with several samples on the hobbithouse site.

1792240449568.webp
From the sawyer's point of view, they were thinking 'honey locust'. Slippery elm gets platy bark when it reaches larger diameters (16"+). The color of the bark can also be similar between Honey locust and Slippery elm. Both can have a 'piss-like" smell when milling. Next I think of location. Where was the tree harvested? When looking over USDA FIA tree density maps, Slippery elm is far less common in the eastern portion of PA. It is planted as a street tree sometimes, but quite rare in the wilds until you get closer to central PA.

Still thinking about this one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top