transatlantic
Boom!
A lot of the box stores sell both. Can anyone tell me what the differences are please?
Whitewood/Redwood differences
- Thread starter transatlantic
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
Phil Pascoe
Established Member
Redwood is pine and I believe fir, whitewood is spruce. Joinery timber is usually redwood, construction spruce.
transatlantic
Boom!
So I should expect to pay more for Redwood?
Phil Pascoe
Established Member
Usually, sometimes sawn stuff isn't much different, but CLS (spruce) is usually the cheapest (and the crappiest).
Dan j
Established Member
Red wood is known as European redwood/red deal but the tree is scots pine, and whitewood will be spruce.
Redwood is slightly denser and more resinous. It is usually more expensive but buying rough sawn will reduce the price quite a bit.
As has been said Whitewood is usually sold as construction grade and is usually sold in a regularized form of some kind.
Redwood is slightly denser and more resinous. It is usually more expensive but buying rough sawn will reduce the price quite a bit.
As has been said Whitewood is usually sold as construction grade and is usually sold in a regularized form of some kind.
They're sold as Douglas fir and Larch... both have superior strength and durability over red/whitewood and so are able to command higher prices (particularly slow-grown Siberian Larch).
In practical terms, Redwood is generally suitable for internal joinery, especially if one buys a decent grade to avoid the worst of the knots, whitewood is much less suited to make joinery, hence being sold largely as construction material.
In practical terms, Redwood is generally suitable for internal joinery, especially if one buys a decent grade to avoid the worst of the knots, whitewood is much less suited to make joinery, hence being sold largely as construction material.
Found this table but only adds confusion. Scotts pine is separate from European redwood and Larch does not appear very durable but then they put it in twice at different durability http://www.woodworkersuk.co.uk/timber-durability.htm
Woody2Shoes
Impressive Member
Beau":zagxr6ly said:
I've got a sneaky feeling that table was compiled (or just pinched!) from a US site. Over there, redwood means something different - just one of loads of examples where people use the same name for different things and different names for the same things where natural products like timber are concerned! Scampi - are those shrimps or are they prawns or are they something completely different?!
In the UK, as others have already said, redwood normally refers to Pinus Sylvestris (Scots Pine). Spruce is different and doesn't have pinky orange heartwood, distinct from paler sapwood like redwood does. Spruce could be one of many subspecies/hybrids - many of the commercial plantations in the UK are some cultivar of Sitka spruce. Both spruce and redwood are from evergreen conifers and are generally said to be non-durable. However, I think it's fair to say that slowgrown timber (i.e. in a cold cold place in the baltics or Russia) is more durable than fastgrown (e.g. Canadian Western Red Cedar vs. British WRC). I'm happy to use good quality redwood for window and door frames etc.
Cheers, W2S
BM Trada 's online species database is more or less authoritive...
https://www.trada.co.uk/techinfo/tsg/
You may have to register, but it's free.
(Also, the difference in Larch durability described is partially due to the climate, with old-growth, slow grown material being more durable than, plantation slow grown [I.e. grown in a cold climate like Northern Finland or the Siberian Taiga] which in turn is more durable than that from UK or other warmer European climates; But also due to the relative prevalence of different larch subspecies due to said climatic differences... This is one of a number of reasons that designers, engineers and architects are advised to identify species by Latin name, or define required propeties, for any critical details rather than using trade names when specifying)
https://www.trada.co.uk/techinfo/tsg/
You may have to register, but it's free.
(Also, the difference in Larch durability described is partially due to the climate, with old-growth, slow grown material being more durable than, plantation slow grown [I.e. grown in a cold climate like Northern Finland or the Siberian Taiga] which in turn is more durable than that from UK or other warmer European climates; But also due to the relative prevalence of different larch subspecies due to said climatic differences... This is one of a number of reasons that designers, engineers and architects are advised to identify species by Latin name, or define required propeties, for any critical details rather than using trade names when specifying)
Similar threads
