Hi everyone on this thread:

Sorry for coming in late to comment but I just noticed this topic.

I have extensive experience in regards to muley sawn, versus band sawn marks as far as true restoration practices are concerned.

Looking directly at the face of a Muley sawn board or plank, you will notice that the tooth marks are not at a true right angle to the sawing plane.

There is a reason for this--the Muley blade which is approx 72" in length is purposely leading ahead at the Upper end by approx. 1/2". This lead is needed because the blade as it comes upwards on its journey lifts clear of the cut and gives room for the log to move ahead which is happening simotaneously with the motion of the blade.

When you look at the face of a band sawn board it is almost unanimously at a right angle and has a finer cut due to the fine teeth. The muley blade has teeth 2" in length and at 2.25" spacings.

As noted above the log passing through a band mill at high speed will create a similar tooth pattern maybe 2" apart, whereas the muley mill the similar marks will be only 1/2" apart, this would be one stroke of the blade, and the log cannot advance anymore than the blade is advanced or purposely leaned at the upper end.

I don't knopw if any of this makes any sense but I hope so.

Bandsawn lumber is the next best thing that can be used in place of muley sawn lumber for many restorations, at UCV we were lucky to have approx 20000 bd feet of pine lumber sawn each year that is dedicated to restoration work there.

I have seen original muley sawn lumber that was sawn in mills that advanced their blades more than 1/2" at the upper end, the saw left tooth marks that were 3/4" in spacings.

Good tpic

NH