I cut & mill many of my own maple trees. I specialize in old growth, trees that are between 150yrs & 350yrs old. I have seen no correlation between age & tioghtness of grain, and will say from personal experience that it's simply not true. Old growth does not have tighter grain lines. The growing conditions of the tree are what determine this.
As for shaft wood, 90%+ of todays shaft suppliers are selling vacuum dried sapwood maple. Try to find the guys that don't sell the vacuum dried, and you'll have maybe 2 suppliers to choose from. Try finding some that sell heart wood shafts. You won't. It doesn't exist unless you specifically ask for it & then I know of only one supplier who will accomadate that request. Thus, I cut my own trees.
As for quarter sawing, that is done while the tree is wet so that as the lumber dries, the stress is alleviated. Flat sawn lumber will urge to curl up with the grain as it dries, which causes everything from warps to curls to cracks. Lengths are taken to prevent this such as banding the ends of the boards & weighting them down to hold them flat through the drying process. It doesn't matter what you do with the lumber once it's dry. If it was initially flat sawn, then it's gonna have internal stress. Sure you can resaw it to mimic quarter sawn lumber but it's a waste because this is something that has to be done BEFORE the lumber is dried. Any saw operator worth his own salt can explain this. It's ancient technology.
The point is, if there's any truth to old wood being better, then it's because of the age & with age comes stability. It's not because the grain is tighter. This past winter I cut a few logs. The smallest was birdseye & it was just barely 10" diameter. The tree had roughly 150-175 grain lines from bark to pith. It literally looks like a stack of paper. I'll get pics when I get it from the kiln. About 200 yards away was a veneer tree, very tall & perfectly straight with no visible defects. I cut it for shafts. It was only about 70 years old & had a range 0f 4-18 gpi. The birdseye tree was nearly all creamy sapwood while the shaft tree was mostly red heartwood. These trees came from the same virgin growth forest. It's a very clear testament to the characteristis of the wood being almost totally controlled by the growing conditions, nothing else. I cut four logs that day with varying characteristics. The only thing I could find to relate to their unique personalities was geographical position in which they grew. The birdseye was on the north side of the hill, on a narrow ridge top, growing under a canopy of giants. The veneer tree was growing near the bottom of the hill in a cradle/bowl between two high points. It was a very tall tree growing on a flat. I could draw the conclusion that the sun, soil & water were what controlled the vast differences in these trees, both sugar maple, both within a visible distance, both in the same ancient forest. I could easily argue that age has nothing to do with the wood. But I won't because I simply don't know for sure. Neither do scientists. So until somebody knows something & can undeniably prove it, it'll be speculation. With speculation comes mysticism. In this case, mysticism says old wood is better. I say BS. Prove it.
As for shaft wood, 90%+ of todays shaft suppliers are selling vacuum dried sapwood maple. Try to find the guys that don't sell the vacuum dried, and you'll have maybe 2 suppliers to choose from. Try finding some that sell heart wood shafts. You won't. It doesn't exist unless you specifically ask for it & then I know of only one supplier who will accomadate that request. Thus, I cut my own trees.
As for quarter sawing, that is done while the tree is wet so that as the lumber dries, the stress is alleviated. Flat sawn lumber will urge to curl up with the grain as it dries, which causes everything from warps to curls to cracks. Lengths are taken to prevent this such as banding the ends of the boards & weighting them down to hold them flat through the drying process. It doesn't matter what you do with the lumber once it's dry. If it was initially flat sawn, then it's gonna have internal stress. Sure you can resaw it to mimic quarter sawn lumber but it's a waste because this is something that has to be done BEFORE the lumber is dried. Any saw operator worth his own salt can explain this. It's ancient technology.
The point is, if there's any truth to old wood being better, then it's because of the age & with age comes stability. It's not because the grain is tighter. This past winter I cut a few logs. The smallest was birdseye & it was just barely 10" diameter. The tree had roughly 150-175 grain lines from bark to pith. It literally looks like a stack of paper. I'll get pics when I get it from the kiln. About 200 yards away was a veneer tree, very tall & perfectly straight with no visible defects. I cut it for shafts. It was only about 70 years old & had a range 0f 4-18 gpi. The birdseye tree was nearly all creamy sapwood while the shaft tree was mostly red heartwood. These trees came from the same virgin growth forest. It's a very clear testament to the characteristis of the wood being almost totally controlled by the growing conditions, nothing else. I cut four logs that day with varying characteristics. The only thing I could find to relate to their unique personalities was geographical position in which they grew. The birdseye was on the north side of the hill, on a narrow ridge top, growing under a canopy of giants. The veneer tree was growing near the bottom of the hill in a cradle/bowl between two high points. It was a very tall tree growing on a flat. I could draw the conclusion that the sun, soil & water were what controlled the vast differences in these trees, both sugar maple, both within a visible distance, both in the same ancient forest. I could easily argue that age has nothing to do with the wood. But I won't because I simply don't know for sure. Neither do scientists. So until somebody knows something & can undeniably prove it, it'll be speculation. With speculation comes mysticism. In this case, mysticism says old wood is better. I say BS. Prove it.
Last edited:
I have no idea, and perhaps they don't either. But, the point is, particularly in cue making, I don't think ANYTHING is too goofy...
