Douglas Fir shafts

[snag]

I ran across this chart that shows the weight of wood. It listed the weight of these arrow woods:
Douglas Fir 33
Sitka Spruce 28

As I recall cedar was lower in weight than these. Just interesting to see the difference. I have been enjoying fir as I make and shoot arrows. Thought others might like to see this. The last 80#-85# shafts I bought ran about 480grs. Good weight and straight! Even in the lower spines you still get pretty good weight. I find them to be very durable too.

[Orion]

I'd be surprised if Cedar is lighter than Sitka spruce.  I've shot Doug firs on and off over the years.  Good, tough mid-weight shafting material.  Was often difficult to find good Doug fir though.  Often the grain runoff was pretty bad.  Just took delivery of a dozen Doug firs from Surewood Shafts.  It is without a question the best Doug fir shafting I've ever seen.  I'll be chasing elk this fall with the arrows I make from them.

[Russ Clagett]

Love those doug firs!

Tough though....they tear up the little taper tools...

Surewood can't be beat for straightness!

[snag]

You're right Orion. POC is 30. Just barely heavier than sitka spruce.

[Old York]

Okay, help me out - just what units are you chaps speaking here? Good thing my old chemistry teacher didn't see this, he'd mark you hosers all up with red ink, big fat "F", NO credit, etc., etc.    !

[huey]

I've have trouble tapering fir with a taper tool. The tool bites into the shaft and splits it or takes a chunk out. I do like the character of fir, straight, little more weight, flies well and seems to take a hit better. I don't have a disc sander and have not figured out how to use a taper block with a belt sander.

[portugeejn]

It must have been the particular lot of Sitka Spruce I bought, but it was heavier by a bit than the POC I'd purchased in the past.  

I shoot the Doug Fir shafts from Surewood now.

RonP

[stump man]

I'm not familiar with your numbers snag.  Mass weight in wood is usually figured by specific gravity, with the value of 1 being equal to water. Thus anything with a value of less than one will float while anything over one will sink.


The forest service link:
 http://www2.fpl.fs.fed.us/TechSheets/softwood.html


They list POC as .39 green or .43 dry

Sitka    as     .37 green or .42 dry

coast doug fir as - .45 green(37%),.48(12%),.51(ovendry)

inland d fir as .46 green(34%),.50(12%),.52(ovendry)

interior north- as .45green(30%), .48(12%),.50(ovendry)

interor south -as .43 green(30%), .46(12%),  NA is ovendry

Note:  They list 4 different regions within the U.S. for fir because it's properties very as to where it comes from/grows. POC and sitka both are limited to the coastal region thus their properties are fairly constant. If they were available from the other regions i would venture their properties would very also.

Note:  the values listed for POC and Sitka don't identify as to what moisture content the samples were taken at so there may be error in comparing them. I'm assuming "green" for both POC and sitka would be at the 37% since they both come from the coastal region as the fir.  "dry" I can only assume means "ovendry"

Surewoods come from the "inland west" catagory (cascade range)not the coast, thus the numbers favor them not only in mass weight but in both spine and rupture strength.

 If you have more information on this "chart you ran accross" I would love to see it. Perhaps it is a weight for a given mass somebody has recorded outside the boundries of specific gravity.  I'm currently working on just the same thing within the boundry's of Doug fir itself from the inland west region. Preliminary math looks to be .02 lbs/cu. in.(@30% mc)as a cutoff line.  Anything over will be made into surewoods, anything less will not.

stump

[snag]

I'll check the source. I thought it was a gov't source. I've got it bookmarked on another computer at work. I'll post it tomorrow. Thanks, David

[Surewood Bob]

I'm sure it is specific gravity you are talking about David. I can borrow the book that Steve Savage has that lists the specific gravity of hundreds of types of wood. Remember it is necessary to use a dics sanding type of tool to taper Doug fir. The grain will lift if you do not.
By the way, glad you like the shafts Jerry. Keep us posted on that elk hunt! You have elk in Wisconsin??

Fir Stick

[Bjorn]

The Doug Fir shafting from Surewood is without a doubt first class. Straight, stiff, skinny and nice grain. Really good value!

[SlowBowinMO]

The Surewood shafting is as good as it gets, we're pleased to be able to offer them.  

[snag]

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/wood-density-d_40.html
Here is the site Doug. It is density of seasoned wood. I got the POC info. from another site though. You are the expert on this stuff. So I am sure your info. is more accurate. I was just going by what this "engineering" site said. I am assuming that different batches of wood and spine weight and growth ring numbers per inch would vary also...?

[snag]

Thanks for listing this site Doug. It obviously is a much better source of info. on wood than the one I found!

[Orion]

Bob:  We have a few elk in Wisconsin.  They were reintroduced several years ago.  Not a huntable population yet, and it will be difficult to establish a season if the population ever does reach a critical mass.  I'll be chasing them in Colorado this year.

[stump man]

Snag:
  got the link.  Pretty good stuff.  What they refer to is a specific weight or weight per unit volume. In this case lbs/cu. ft.(ol york).  Not the standard refrence to water or specific gravity as in most instances.

It's hard to compare numbers from different sources/charts unless you know the moisture content at which each of the samples where taken. The chart you refered to says "seasoned and dry". Their definition may be different than mine but mine equates to about 18% moisture content here in the Willamette Valley if sampled in Dec-Jan.  Or perhaps as low as 10% if you sampled in Eastern Oregon in say July. 8% = 2 1/2 lbs difference in our one cubic foot sample.  More extreme yet is if our sample is still green and in the woods with a 35% moisture content.  Your 33 lb one cubic foot sample turns into less than 25 lbs once it drys to 10% moisture content. Less than the Sitka number refered to.

Very few of the charts (even the forest service)state moisture content of their samples.  It is sad and it makes it very hard trying to tell the differences.

[Old York]

Snag & Stump, the "density" makes sense now, thanks for the links.

[snag]

Stump, we would think there would be one standard at one specific moisture level...? Guess this is just like finding parts for your car!

[Paul Mattson]

If anyone is interested in wood, check this site out.  
 http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/

[Paul Mattson]

I forgot to mention, that I just got in a good selection of Surewood shafts. These are some of the best wood shafts that you will find.