OK, so first of all this is not a topic about how to hew timbers, of which there are several already. This, rather, is a topic about the trees that are to be hewn.

Anyone who has ever hewn very much at all knows that some species can be hewn quite easily, whereas others require a good deal more work, and others still simply are not worth it, and should be sent to the sawyer in stead.

So in your experience, and historically, which are the best tree species to hew by hand? Which are the tough ones that you'd rather not if you don't have to, and which do you think should be avoided at all costs. I am asking this because there are several species available to me that I have never worked before, but before I cut down any trees I want to know is it worth it? (I am working on a specific project for myself that requires only hand hewn timbers be used, so sending them to the sawmill is unacceptable)

Where I live the following tree species are available, which of these are good? (Note: I know some of them are from expereince, and common sense tells me that others aren't, but I'll list them all for the benefit of others)

Oaks, in many different forms. White oak is more common than the others. Ash, once again in many different varieties -but in danger of the approaching ash borer, basswood, beech, bluebeech (american hornbeam) Buckeye, Kentucky Coffeetree, Cottonwood, Elms of a few different varieties, Hackberry, Shagbark, Shellbark, Mockernut, and pignut hickory -all 4 common, Sycamore, Black walnut, black cherry, honeylocust, ironwood (hophornbeam) hard and soft maple -very prevalent, Some introduced white pine stands here and there, Redceder, sassafras, tulip poplar. -That's quite the list I know, but it will hopefully help you to think about the properties of certain trees

As long as they are fresh, green I would not be afraid to try them. I can't speak for the bulk of the hard woods. I have chopped on a small amount of red oak and poplar both worked nice. White pine has more knots, depending on the tree. Knots can frig things up but such is life.

I would like to read other comments on these species. Are some stringy, do they juggle nicely as in the sections pop off with less effort? Twisty grain?

What to send to the mill? Higher grade logs, use the lower quality or sized stuff from thinning. Think of the stand and what would be best for the job. The less you have to remove from the log the easier it will be, and more efficient.

How many acres do you have to work with?

Just a few thoughts.

Tim

As for hard wood, here is some of my experience:

Hickory is easy to work with, it cuts nicely and splits very easily. It is also usually twist free. Hickory is very hard though, and that wears you down and your blade edges as well, and since it is so hard any sharp angle can cut into your skin very easily. I wear tough goatskin gloves when working with it. The juggles come off very easily if you pop them off from the end.

Ash is pain in the neck. While it often grows straight and has good long lengths on it most of the time, for some reason it just does not like to be hewn. I don't understand this really, it is fairly easy to cut with hand tools, and ash firewood splits very straight and easily. So why does it hew so hard? Ash would not be my first choice, definitely.

Hackberry is another wood I have some experience with. It is actually not as bad as you might expect it to be if you have ever worked with it otherwise. For firewood, hackberry is a pain to split. It is so stringy that it is about impossible to split a good sized chunk in one blow. However it cuts very easily, and if you split of your juggles from above instead of popping them off from the end it is definitely manageable, especially if you split off the juggles a little at a time instead of trying to remove all that wood all at once. This works because if the wood has less resistance toward the splitting side, it will bed out easier, and so require less efort to pull or cut through the grain. The question is does hackberry have enough strength to work for framing timbers?

Cherry is another surprise. Cherry never grows straight (as in not twisted), and if you want to split it don't expect to get a good split off of it, it just doesn't happen. For firewood it splits easily, but in long leangths you quickly see that it does not split straight. Cherry is one of those woods that the old timers avoided because it doesn't split (they avoided it for things like fence posts and riven lumber) As with hackberry, cutting off the juggles from above rather than popping at them from the end is the best approach. If you do this, the twisting of the wood essentially becomes a non-issue. Now cherry is a wonderful wood, it is stunningly beautiful, very strong and durable, and very rot resistant. My experience with cherry comes from hewing out timbers from a long dead tree. The tree had been dead and on the ground for maybe 20 years, yet it had yet to rot beyond the sapwood at all, other than a little tiny bit along the occasional bug hole. That should tell you a little bit about the durability of Indiana black cherry wood.

Now if should explain something in case you didn't catch on. I mentioned 2 different ways to remove the juggles, and so I should talk a little bit about my hewing techniques so you understand what I am talking about.
I always put the log up on high stands, at about waist high. And I always keep in mind to take good, confident strokes with my axes. good confident strokes are less likely in my opinion to come back and hurt me. it's the timed, sloppy strokes that don't dig in to the wood and deflect out with the potential to damage my shin or knee. I don't always score, if the tree is relatively close to the size of the finished timber than it isn't always worth the effort, especially on certain species (ash, for example. I find it is easier to cut ash than to split out pieces of it) If I do score, I do it in 1 of 2 ways. 1: I stand atop the log and swing the axe, using its own weight and perhaps some of my own body weight by bending my knees to make the cut, which is made at a fairly shallow angle (because it will penetrate better at a shallow angle). 2: Me and a partner stand facing the log, taking turns chopping at a specific spot. We work on opposite sides of the notch. Smaller, arrow-bited axes work the best for this. This way is a lot of fun, but requires that 2 people be present. It is faster than scoring from above as well, and probably more precise as well.
Now the question of removing the juggles. For me, this depends mostly on the specific log I am hewing, and maybe a bit on my mood at that moment. For some species, such as those that do not grow very straight (like cherry or perhaps sycamore)or stringy wood (like elms or hackberry) I find it best to work at the juggles from above. I sit straddling the log (I place the logs at the height that allows me to sit on the log with my feet still touching the ground) and chop down at the juggle, splitting it off. This doesn't yield nice big chunks, but it works. a short handled axe works the best for this in my experience.
Now if the wood is straight and splittable, I do it the common way. I stand on top and swing (or rather let the axe fall) at the ends of the juggles, popping them off (hopefully) in 1 to 3 swings.
With both methods, after the bulk of the juggles have been split off, I take my axe and clen off most of the rest of the juggles, my aim here it to bring the face down to about 1/4 inch from the line. It's only then that I bring out the broadaxe, which I think leaves a better finish when it has less wood to cut off and so can be swung in long, sweeping strokes.

Splitting the juggles from the end can be quick and easy, however it requires that the wood cooperate with you. Hard to split or twisted wood just seems to fight against you if you try to split it off from the end.
Cutting of the juggles from the top (it is just about as much cutting through the grain as it is splitting it) in theory should be slower, but if splitting off the juggles requires you to fight against the wood anyway or else place your scores excessively close then this method really does work a lot better. And on some species it's the only way that works at all (and there's not always a logical explanation for this, in my experience. You just have to learn the temperament of different kinds of wood I guess) The Germans seem to always split the juggles from the top, Americans for some reason decided to always do it from the ends. I think it has mostly to do with the kinds of wood they were working with. The colonists learned how to hew with immaculate white oak. If that's what you have then of course you will split from the ends, it's so easy to do! But when they began to move to other wood, either because they moved further west or because they had cut down the old growth oaks, they were used to splitting from the end, and so that's the way we still do it today. Personally, I developed my style by studying techniques from around the world. It's because of the Germans that I split some wood from the top rather than from the ends, and stand beside the log with a partner to score the faces. It's also because of the Germans that I sit on the log while hewing. It's because of the Japanese that I sometimes don't even score at all. It's because of the Americans that I sometimes pop off the juggles from the end, and stand on top of the log to score when working by myself.

Sounds like you already have a pretty good handle on things, but here's my tuppence..

Good oaks hew nicely
Tulip poplar hews very nicely
white pine hews pretty nicely
good logs of maple, hickory, and walnut are ok to hew
avoid elms, sycamore, horn and hophornbeams.

I would only try the lesser used species if you get a kick out of that sort of thing.

If you want the hewing to be as efficient as possible, get clear, straight extremely green oak or preferably tulip poplar logs barely big enough to get the size timber you need.

What ever you do don't lock your self into one method. I agree.

I should try some tamarack some day.

Tim

Sometimes we don't always get the ideal timbers in high supply. Sometimes we stick to lower stuff because it's what we can get and still stick with our ideas of using local stuff, or stuff just that needs thinned out. The idea of putting everything to use in one way or another and not wasting our resources.

What do you guys know about cherry? We have some old barns in our area made with cherry, and people love to make things out of the old cherry beams whenever they can get their hands on them. These are the oldest barns, which in our area were built mainly in the 1870s or 80s (This area wasn't settled until the 1840s and 50s, and then cabins were the first things built)

Cherry seems like one of those things that you would avoid, yet it was used.

And so was elm.

There is a lot of wood that you would think of as not being ideal that was used in the old days.

white oak, cherry, maple, hickory, elm, walnut, chestnut, ash, beech, pine and poplar -these are all known to have been used in Indiana. Tulip poplar was actually the preferred tree for log cabins in Indiana when it as first settled for some reason, and some of these cabins are still standing 200 years later. I wonder if some of our modern wood wisdom isn't as wise as we think (I always heard that poplar should never be used outside, for example) I wonder if some of our modern wisdom applies only to sawn lumber, and not so much to hewn and/or riven wood.

I'd really be interested in finding the strength and span abilities of Hickory and maple, because I can get lots and lots of these very easily. Sugar maple grows everywhere around here!

I wonder if we haven't forgotten that there are things out there other than oak and pine and fir. We seemed to have known that at one time. I enjoy studying the old barns around here, and trying to guess their age and who built them by their joinery, profiles, etc. Sometimes I get very confused trying to determine the wood species used on them, often I think they actually have mixed species, or at least things I don't expect to find because I generally expect oak. I have found ash, hickory, cherry, and then some that for some reason I just can't figure out at all. There is an old 2 story log cabin that I have had a hard time trying to determine the wood species.

Hi D.L.

I am on much the same wavelength as yourself when it comes to critical appraisal of the timber employed in old building construction. I have found elm cruck blades still in service today that are over 600 years old. We plan to fell some standing dead Wytch elm next week in our woodland and then have a go at hewing that out so I will report back on progress made (or not!).

Many timber framing companies in the UK prefix their names by the word oak (e.g. Oakwrights) but I have found over 23 different types of trees growing in our woodland and I am keen to experiment with them all.

It can be quite difficult to determine what species is employed in an old building due to the build up of smoke blackening and / or limewash / paint coatings.

[img]http://public.blu.livefilestore.com/y1pU...ging.jpg?psid=1[/img]

I have even seen materials stuck over timbers and then painted with patterns which now preclude any kind of determination.

Is there an easy way to identify timbers employed ?

Regards

Ken Hume

p.s. why won't my photo display in this post ?

to echo much of this, the quality of the wood is a huge influence in selecting a piece to hew. maybe this is obvious but clear is really preferable, as is green.

basswood is mentioned in the first list, and is super pleasant to hew. like buttah. even more so than white pine.

i would add balsom fir to the list- sometimes considered a 'junk' wood, but easy to square up and often clear at the bottom length or with small pin knots that hew easily.

i've had good luck with white birch too. it happens to do very well here in Northern Ontario, with the best trees on a lot often being of that species. but then sometimes you get into a twisty one that wants to stay round.

Yes, unfortunately we are largely limited to those trees that happen to grow in our local woodlands. This particular region is dominated by hardwoods, with the occasional stand of white pine and here and there a redceder. But at the same time, I am not the only one involved here so it is still good to list other trees that I don't have.

I feel that there are some who agree that 'inferior' species are usable. And I do believe that a slight modification of technique can open up a whole world of possibilities to us as hewers.

For example, the other day I was hewing some hickory. I scored the log using the German method, where 2 men stand facing the log with small axes and cut down at the notch. This method is incredibly fast, a single notch can be made in a fraction of the time that it takes to stand atop and swing down between your feet. I would highly recommend this method to anyone who has the availability of a second worker.
When it came time to pop off the juggles, i stood atop and began to swing at the ends. However I quickly discovered that the grain was somewhat contrary, and so decided to change my approach. I then sat on top of the log (as stated earlier I position the log at about waist height so that I can comfortably sit on it with my feet on either side still touching the ground)and chopped down at the juggles. I adapted my approach to the characteristics of the log, allowing me to work much more efficiently than if I had stuck with only 1 single approach throughout. I actually think that chopping down at the juggles leaves you a much cleaner face that is much easier and faster to finish off with the broadaxe. I am seriously considering abandoning end splitting on all but the straightest, cleanest logs because the advantage gained when finish hewing does seem to outweigh the extra time and effort taken splitting them from the top rather than from the end.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j506cXGvOPg

That video shows some good examples of 2 of the techniques I use, two man scoring and chopping from the top, just in case you do not know what I mean.

I should also note that I do not have the narrow-bitted, straight-faced axes like the Germans typically use to score. I just use whatever axes happen to be available to me at the time. A short handle is certainly an advantage. My axe collection is growing all the time. Basically whenever I see an old axe on ebay selling for less than I know it could be worth with a little work and a new handle, then I buy it. I also like to collect axes from Central Europe whenever I can find them. The tools you have certainly affect your technique. If all you have is an American felling axe and a large broadaxe, then you simply can't use a lot of the techniques that I like to use.

Fascinating techniques. Keep the ideas flowing. Sure was raining hard in that video!