dpb wrote:


But, I'd guess the mill won't resaw 3/4" stuff even if asked; a
sawmill bandsaw is going to take a pretty good kerf compared to a
resaw in a typical woodworker shop and I doubt seriously if they have
any good way to feed the material already sawn--they slice it off a
log at probably 4/4 and then surface to 3/4.

That remains the outstanding question, and the one my son has to take up
with the mill. As far as the kerf goes - it's farily negligible when one is
talking about a rough cut, full 1" plus dimension lumber - but I don't think
I mentioned that.


If you want to try to save a little on material by going thinner, if
it is a relatively small mill used to custom work your better chance
will be to ask them to saw some to finished 5/8 or 1/2 from the
git-go but don't expect to save half; they're going to charge on the
bd-ft basis of the raw stock it took to get the finish and you'll
probably only save a quarter or a little over.

A very real possibility -- which I had mentioned to him. It seems the guy
has stock stickered and will kiln dry what you order. That's what got my
son thinking about asking to have the stock resawed. As for the custom mill
aspect - that is very much the case here. Perhaps different from the more
metropolitan areas, getting custom work like this done around here is a lot
easier and a lot cheaper than most might be accustomed to. Still not sure
if we are stretching the definition of this though.

All the same, my questions are more around the matter of whether this idea
would pose any real problems.

All in all, I'd bite the bullet and go conventional I think...there's
a reason it's been that way lo! these many years.

Not a bad thought in its own right. I'm just finding myself now asking if
that is because of some conventional thing, or if there is a real reason.
To be fair - a lot of standards became standards simply to standardize.
Modern engineering knowledge has revealed a lot since those standards were
established.

--

-Mike-