# Lumber economics



## crquack (Oct 10, 2008)

I have been pricing out a project which will consist of almost entirely construction pine lumber. I was puzzled at certain pricing anomalies:

1) A cost of 2x x 10' is around 150% of the cost of 2x x 8'. Why are the extra 2 feet so expensive?

2) The cost of anything 2x is consderably cheaper per board foot than equivalent length and width of 1x (in case of 2x6x8' and 1x6x8' the latter is 3 times more expensive than the former). Why is the thinner lumber more expensive? Is this a universal thing or just a local quirk? Do people with the need of 3/4" planks buy the 2x lumber and re-saw?


----------



## tdublyou (Jan 8, 2010)

crquack said:


> I have been pricing out a project which will consist of almost entirely construction pine lumber. I was puzzled at certain pricing anomalies:
> 
> 1) A cost of 2x x 10' is around 150% of the cost of 2x x 8'. Why are the extra 2 feet so expensive?
> 
> 2) The cost of anything 2x is consderably cheaper per board foot than equivalent length and width of 1x (in case of 2x6x8' and 1x6x8' the latter is 3 times more expensive than the former). Why is the thinner lumber more expensive? Is this a universal thing or just a local quirk? Do people with the need of 3/4" planks buy the 2x lumber and re-saw?


The cost of 2x stock should work out to a given per foot price no matter the length until you get past 16' long. At that point you will see a premium attached for the longer lengths. If your pricing is not a consistent per foot number, I would look for a different supplier.
As for the 1x being more, that is fairly common due to the fact that the 1x is most likely pine whereas, the 2x is probably construction grade SPF (spruce, pine, fir) Also the more cuts the mill makes in a log, the more they loose to sawdust and time, therefore a higher price.
Hope this helps,


----------



## crquack (Oct 10, 2008)

I figured that on the 1x stock. I guess re-sawing the 2x would result in thinner than 3/4" pieces and would be only worth it if one were able to adjust for that and did a lot of it. And had a band-saw...


----------



## xplorx4 (Dec 1, 2008)

That is correct and why I need a bandsaw, I get almost all my stock up in Ohio just south of Columbus and it is all rough cut and must be processed to be used.


----------



## mcdonelldj (Apr 14, 2010)

xplorx4 said:


> That is correct and why I need a bandsaw, I get almost all my stock up in Ohio just south of Columbus and it is all rough cut and must be processed to be used.


If you resaw with a bandsaw, do you need to surface the wood when you're done?


----------



## allthunbs (Jun 22, 2008)

within a 100 mile radius of my place, there must be 20 sawmills, all doing softwoods. SPF (spruce, pine, fir) rough cut, undried 
2" = 1 3/4" 
6" = 5 3/4"

2x6x10' @4.25 per plank.
2x4 per linear foot @ $0.27
2x8 per linear foot @ $0.57
7/8" x 6" per linear foot @ $0.22
4" (16/4) x 4" (16/4) in Tamarack only at $0.90 per linear foot.


----------



## Gene Howe (Jul 10, 2007)

mcdonelldj said:


> If you resaw with a bandsaw, do you need to surface the wood when you're done?


It will be rough off the saw. How rough is dependent on many variables, e.g. the blade and your skill at re sawing.


----------



## rwyoung (Aug 3, 2008)

mcdonelldj said:


> If you resaw with a bandsaw, do you need to surface the wood when you're done?


Absolutely. 

For pieces that need some "precision" resawing, you should consider surfacing two adjacent sides BEFORE you start to resaw. The side that will run down on the table and the side that will run against the fence (flat or point style). Then as each piece is sliced off, you should re-surface the face against the fence so it continues to ride true.

If on the other hand you are going to use a sliding jig to hold the lumber, the jointing is less critical.

And if all you need it to rip it down smaller, the jointing is less critical so long as it can ride reasonably smooth past the blade.


----------

