Negative-Rake Scrapers—Plus or Minus

[Dennis J Gooding]

There has been a lot of discussion over the last few years about the benefits of negative-rake scrapers. NRS’s usually are defined as the result of grounding down the end of a conventional scraper at a slight angle from the original top surface then grinding the end to produce an included angle (usually) somewhat less than 90 degrees. The latter grinding operation (or a subsequent burnishing operation) supposedly produces a delicate burr that leaves a very smooth finish when properly used.

I have long viewed the NRS with more than a little bit of skepticism. With a little thought, it is obvious that, with an appropriate grind at the end of a conventional scraper, exactly the same wood contact geometry as a NRS can be obtained by raising the handle of the conventional scraper slightly. The only difference is a trivial difference in the direction of force on the tool rest.

Okay, so why do some folks claim to be able to tell a difference? Some possible reasons are:

Magic or Divine Providence. Pick your favorite brand

Ease of tool control. Perhaps holding the handle high leads to less controlled movements.

Psychological. The big guns say it works so it must be true.

Frankly, I have always leaned toward the last reason, because I have seen it in other aspects of woodturning technology. However, a fourth possibility occurred to me recently that I believe bears considering. It is

Anisotropy of the metal of the scraper. I believe that the metal stock from which steel scrapers are made is hot and/or cold rolled. Steel rolling is known to affect the grain structure of the metal in such a way that it is not the same in all three directions. Possibly, therefore, the grinding/burnishing burr raised on the rolled surface of a conventional scraper differs significantly from one raised on a face that has been ground at a slight angle to the rolled surface. It would be interesting to see comparative pictures of the burrs obtained by the two types of scrapers using identical materials and techniques. Why might this be important? Possibly even better results could be obtained by using other orientations of the steel or other steels that have been processed by other methods.

 

[Don C Davis]

I don't know if it's applicable to your thoughts Dennis, but one of the reasons powdered metals are popular in knife making is because they offer homeginity of steel structure. I can tell you that my favorite tool is a Crown PM roughing gouge--I guess the fact that a roughing gouge is a favorite is a little odd in and of itself, but when I started using this tool in place of the Sorby tool I originally started with, it held it's edge much better, and probably due to that alone it cut so much better and with less vibration than that Sorby, that I fell in love with it. To today it holds an edge as good or better than any other tool I have (possibly exceeded by some carbide tipped-possibly) but for a conventional tool it is wonderful. I have bought several other powdered Crown tools due top the performance of this first one---just FYI brother...

 

[Fred Belknap]

Dennis I doubt the grain in the metal ,if there is any, has any effect on how well a NRS works. I use NRS a lot and I hold mine flat on the tool rest. It doesn't take a lot of pressure to get a nice fine cut with gossamer like shavings. It works good as a sheer scraper but sometimes you need to move the handle in or out to get it to cut. My angels are about 25 degrees on the top and 80 degrees on the bottom. I only use a small relief on the top. I don't think there is any magic but they do work good for finish cuts.

 

[odie]

Good question, Dennis

I'm not sure I'm qualified to speak authoritatively on NRS's, but I did try them for a time a few years ago. My conclusions at that time are similar to your initial thoughts outlined in your post. I'm not convinced that simply holding both types of scrapers to a slightly different angle, so that the actual bur cutting edge is applied in the exact same manner, will produce different results. I no longer have a NRS, and they've all been converted back to standard scrapers. Fred says he mainly uses NRS flat to the tool rest, and I tend to think this is where a NRS excels......if indeed it has some benefits of physics that are not available to a standard scraper used similarly.

The real difference between the two types of scrapers is more than likely a matter of individual perception, rather than something that apparently cannot be explained by simple application of logic.

-----odie-----

 

[Glenn Lefley]

Is the burr presented to the wood at a different angle when using a scraper with handle lifted and a nrs straight on? We need a really magnified photo.

 

[Clifton C]

I use NRSers, altho, not all of my scrapers are. As to just raising the handle, it might appear to the wood to be the same as a negative rake scraper, but when it's time to make an actual cut, say on the inside of a box or bowl, how would you hold the tool in a consistent down angle throughout the cut? It seems the only scenario that just raising the handle would work as a NRS would be down the length of a cylinder or a facing cut (scrape) . If the tool is angled down, the tool rest has to be raised to bring the tip back up to where it cuts, also, the tool rest has to be pulled back from the work to accommodate the down angle. Just cutting a cove, the down angle of the tool could not be kept consistent throughout the cut, same with a bowl or box. When I use a NRS it's usually flat on the rest. It's a finishing cut, the shavings are an atom thick, maybe two, ok, lets just say they are really fine. Works better on dry hard wood, excels on exotics. I don't use them all the time, its just another tool in the tool box I can pull out when needed, and I yes, I might get a little smug feeling when I make wispy shavings that turn to dust when I try to pick them up...And, I can start sanding at 1200 grit. I started using NRS after watching someone who knew what they where doing. Standing at ease, no tension, the sound of the cut was just a hiss, I said I have to try that. Some of the engineers in the group tried to analyze it to the nth degree but the guy wouldn't take the bait, stating "well it works for me, so I use it".

 

[Dean Center]

I had exactly the same thoughts, Dennis, until I gave NRS a good tryout on harder woods. Now I'm convinced that I can get a better result with a properly prepared NRS than I could previously with a standard scraper, angled downward, or even at a shear angle. Since my skill may have improved in the interval, it's possible that it's not the tool making the difference, but it sure seems that a NRS is superior. I can't explain why that should be so.

 

[Bill Boehme]

There has been a lot of discussion over the last few years about the benefits of negative-rake scrapers. NRS’s usually are defined as the result of grounding down the end of a conventional scraper at a slight angle from the original top surface then grinding the end to produce an included angle (usually) somewhat less than 90 degrees. The latter grinding operation (or a subsequent burnishing operation) supposedly produces a delicate burr that leaves a very smooth finish when properly used.

I have long viewed the NRS with more than a little bit of skepticism. With a little thought, it is obvious that, with an appropriate grind at the end of a conventional scraper, exactly the same wood contact geometry as a NRS can be obtained by raising the handle of the conventional scraper slightly. The only difference is a trivial difference in the direction of force on the tool rest.

Okay, so why do some folks claim to be able to tell a difference? Some possible reasons are:

Magic or Divine Providence. Pick your favorite brand

Ease of tool control. Perhaps holding the handle high leads to less controlled movements.

Psychological. The big guns say it works so it must be true.

Frankly, I have always leaned toward the last reason, because I have seen it in other aspects of woodturning technology. However, a fourth possibility occurred to me recently that I believe bears considering. It is

Anisotropy of the metal of the scraper. I believe that the metal stock from which steel scrapers are made is hot and/or cold rolled. Steel rolling is known to affect the grain structure of the metal in such a way that it is not the same in all three directions. Possibly, therefore, the grinding/burnishing burr raised on the rolled surface of a conventional scraper differs significantly from one raised on a face that has been ground at a slight angle to the rolled surface. It would be interesting to see comparative pictures of the burrs obtained by the two types of scrapers using identical materials and techniques. Why might this be important? Possibly even better results could be obtained by using other orientations of the steel or other steels that have been processed by other methods.

I don't have any insight into how the steel is processed, but I have watched Stuart Batty demo his NRS at SWAT. I can agree somewhat with his rationale although I think the benefit may be rather subtle especially if you sometimes get a bit heavy handed with the scraper (which I am guilty of doing). If you look at page 23 of the Stuart Batty NRS Instruction Manual he shows the forces acting on a conventional scraper compared to the forces on a NRS. The geometry of how a conventional scraper is presented to the wood has a tendency to self feed so potentially you're on the hairy edge of stability ... and a tool is easier to control if it doesn't pull when you push.

I've seen all sorts of things purporting to be a NRS so it's no wonder that there has been so much skepticism about their benefits. I haven't tried it myself yet, but I think that Stuart Batty has the best approach. Grind the same angle on both sides so that the included angle is between 40° and 80°. He makes another good observation that you can get a larger burr on the edge when the included angle is smaller.

I have basically no experience using a property ground NRS, but watching SB was impressive.

 

[William Rogers]

I only really have one NRS that I use frequently. I grind it to 25 degrees both sides. I use it mainly as lsat pass for a better surface. Burr doesn't last maybe a pass or two. I have ground some cheaper tools to NRS, but really don't see reason to do that. I have two Thompson scrappers and they work so well I just don't think there is any reason to change them from conventional. However I guess I could call my skews NRS as I use them more that way vs using as the intended way.

 

[john lucas]

Dennis I used to think exactly as you until I started seriously using a negative rake scraper. The difference between tilting a regular scraper up and negative rake scraper is the force it puts on the wood. A regular scraper held with the handle high is tilted on the tool rest. This exerts a force against the wood. The negative rake scraper held flat on the tool rest doesn't exert the same force. I'm not sure that is the exact scientific wording for what happens but i have demonstrated it using thin winged bowls. If I use a negative rake scraper there is a noticeable reduction in chatter over using a regular scraper tilted down. It is also less grabby. when I worked on my square ornaments that have a small bowl turned in each side I played with several different tools to find out what would be easiest for new turners. For me the Hunter mini hollowing tools left the best finish but took all my skill to controll it when cutting past the 4 openings in the bowl. The negative rake scraper was extremely easy to use. A regular scraper tilted down tended to cut too quickly past the holes and it was too easy to change the shape of the bowls which changed how the hole looked. Here is a photo of one of the ornaments in case you never saw them.

 

[Bill Boehme]

Dennis I used to think exactly as you until I started seriously using a negative rake scraper. The difference between tilting a regular scraper up and negative rake scraper is the force it puts on the wood. A regular scraper held with the handle high is tilted on the tool rest. This exerts a force against the wood. The negative rake scraper held flat on the tool rest doesn't exert the same force. I'm not sure that is the exact scientific wording for what happens but i have demonstrated it using thin winged bowls. If I use a negative rake scraper there is a noticeable reduction in chatter over using a regular scraper tilted down. It is also less grabby. when I worked on my square ornaments that have a small bowl turned in each side I played with several different tools to find out what would be easiest for new turners. For me the Hunter mini hollowing tools left the best finish but took all my skill to controll it when cutting past the 4 openings in the bowl. The negative rake scraper was extremely easy to use. A regular scraper tilted down tended to cut too quickly past the holes and it was too easy to change the shape of the bowls which changed how the hole looked. Here is a photo of one of the ornaments in case you never saw them.

John, what you are describing sounds like the tendency of the conventional scraper to self feed. The tool contacts the wood below center and is angled down so the spinning wood wants to grab the edge and pull it further down. This means you have a balancing act of simultaneously pushing the tool towards the wood and pulling back when the tool is being pulled into the wood. And, I believe if there is a catch the tendency would be to lower the handle as you pull back which only exacerbates the dig-in.

 

[robo hippy]

Well, all this talk about the NRS is helping me format a video I have wanted to do for a long time....

First, why can't a standard scraper work like a NRS if you lift the handle up a lot higher? You get a 'trailing' cut. If you are using a card scraper and tilt it too far over, the cutting edge is acting more like a rake which tears, than a peeling/just barely off the bevel type of cut.

More acute/pointy vs more obtuse/blunt: You may get a larger burr on a more acute angled NRS, but it is a lot weaker, if for no other reason than there is little metal underneath it for support. The more acute angled NRS does not take a burnished burr nearly as well as a more obtuse NRS, say from 45/45 and up.

I have found that I get better finished surfaces with harder woods than with softer woods. I get a better surface when sweeping across the bottom than I do if I sweep up the sides where shear scrape seems to leave the better surface, the difference in grain orientation being the reason. Sweeping across the bottom you are pretty much going with the grain. Going up and down the sides, you run into end grain/side grain, and with/against the grain so there is always some tear out. I also get better surfaces If I am cutting end grain like box lids and bottoms, again because of grain orientation.

I have heard that scrapers are self feeding, but I have never noticed that scrapers do this. I tend to think that those who feel this way may feel it because they are using too big of a scraper. Never understood that mentality about having huge (1/2 inch thick and 1 1/2 to 2 inch wide) scrapers. This leads to getting too much metal into the wood at one time, and is far more metal than you would put into the wood with any gouge. My go to scraper is a 1 inch wide big ugly tool. I have no problem stalling my 3 hp Beauty with one, even on the low speed range. My feed rate is controlled by how hard I push into the wood, not by the specific tool or burr. Try as I may, my experience just doesn't back this up. I know I use scrapers more than most, and there is a possibility that it is just habit and experience so I feel it before it happens. You do not want a huge burr, but you do want a sturdy one.

Two biggest problems I am having and have had with the NRS, much more so on the more acute ones is figuring out that 1) a NRS is a high maintenance tool and I tend to try to cut way to long on it without going back to the grinder, and 2) you just barely touch the wood with the NRS. If you have to push at all, it is dull and time to go back to the grinder.

I seldom use M2 HSS any more. M42 and V10 only. Even with the delicate burr on an acute NRS, the M2 just does not hold up as well. Same for burnished burrs.

There is a NRS from Sorby that is a 'hardwood bowl' NRS. Bevel angles are 80/25 or so. It is used in bowls with the bevel rubbing. Inconceivable!

robo hippy

 

[Bill Boehme]

I have the Sorby hardwood scraper and I haven't found it to be worth a hoot. As a result it has sat literally for years not being used. I ought to regrind it to a SB type NRS to see if that works better for me. I'll admit that I haven't experienced a scraper being pulled into the wood unless I was doing something obviously wrong, but one selling point of the NRS is that it is practically goof-proof if pushed in level at the center line. If you do a video, you ought to look at the angle of the bur to the wood for both types of scrapers.

 

[Dennis J Gooding]

I don't have any insight into how the steel is processed, but I have watched Stuart Batty demo demo his NRS at SWAT. I can agree somewhat with his rationale although I think the benefit may be rather subtle especially if you sometimes get a bit heavy handed with the scraper (which I am guilty of doing). If you look at page 23 of the Stuart Batty NRS Instruction Manual he shows the forces acting on a conventional scraper compared to the forces on a NRS. The geometry of how a conventional scraper is presented to the wood has a tendency to self feed so potentially you're on the hairy edge of stability ... and a tool is easier to control if it doesn't pull when you push.

I've seen all sorts of things purporting to be a NRS so it's no wonder that there has been so much skepticism about their benefits. I haven't tried it myself yet, but I think that Stuart Batty has the best approach. Grind the same angle on both sides so that the included angle is between 40° and 80°. He makes another good observation that you can get a larger burr on the edge when the included angle is smaller.

I have basically no experience using a property ground NRS, but watching SB was impressive.

Bill, this link does not seem to work.

 

[Raul McCai]

I was jonsing to try one. I didn't like the price of entry. So I got some 3/8" steel flat bar stock and a half inch HSS tool bit cut the stuff to the shape I thought I wanted and TIG welded it together. I ground the negative rake underneath and a little negative from above. This gives me a point along the edge of sorts. I sharpen it by grinding u it upside down to throw up a burr.No need to refine the edge as it cuts great that way no chetter and Interestingly I can hog material away and use it to shave material off that is sub one thousandth of an inch So I gotta say the thing is pretty darn impressive.

 

[robo hippy]

If you do a video, you ought to look at the angle of the bur to the wood for both types of scrapers.[/QUOTE]

Some thing to ponder. I did get a 300X camera thing that links to the computer, but it doesn't show enough to really see a burr. I would expect a lot of variation in the individual burrs too from variable pressure on the grinder wheel and burnishing tool....

Most of the time I am turning wet wood, and that Sorby type NRS doesn't cut well in that. Had a piece of dry sugar maple, and it worked pretty well on that. Really strange to rub the bevel on that one...

robo hippy

 

[Bill Boehme]

Bill, this link does not seem to work.

Oops! I should have proofread my post better. It should be fixed now.

 

[Emiliano Achaval]

Dennis I used to think exactly as you until I started seriously using a negative rake scraper. The difference between tilting a regular scraper up and negative rake scraper is the force it puts on the wood. A regular scraper held with the handle high is tilted on the tool rest. This exerts a force against the wood. The negative rake scraper held flat on the tool rest doesn't exert the same force. I'm not sure that is the exact scientific wording for what happens but i have demonstrated it using thin winged bowls. If I use a negative rake scraper there is a noticeable reduction in chatter over using a regular scraper tilted down. It is also less grabby. when I worked on my square ornaments that have a small bowl turned in each side I played with several different tools to find out what would be easiest for new turners. For me the Hunter mini hollowing tools left the best finish but took all my skill to controll it when cutting past the 4 openings in the bowl. The negative rake scraper was extremely easy to use. A regular scraper tilted down tended to cut too quickly past the holes and it was too easy to change the shape of the bowls which changed how the hole looked. Here is a photo of one of the ornaments in case you never saw them.

I'm not alone in that once I tried a NRS I went Eureka! I resisted for a long time, then I finally got a Thompson one. If you try it, you will like it. I dont think that I ever bought a tool because a big gun said it was good, Oh, wait, I bought all of the Richard Raffan tools 20 years ago when I read his books, so,LOL, yes, beginners might be influenced by top turners...

 

[Emiliano Achaval]

Oops! I should have proofread my post better. It should be fixed now.

The link takes me to your website.... What are you trying to show us? Nice gimbal for your camera! Aloha

 

[Dennis J Gooding]

Oops! I should have proofread my post better. It should be fixed now.

Well, I think you missed again Bill.

 

[Bill Boehme]

The link is working fine for me. Are you guys looking at the link that says Stuart Batty NRS Instruction Manual in post #8? Dennis if you're looking at your quote of my post, quotes don't dynamically update. Emiliano, are you looking at my signature block?

 

[Dennis J Gooding]

The link is working fine for me. Are you guys looking at the link that says Stuart Batty NRS Instruction Manual in post #8? Dennis if you're looking at your quote of my post, quotes don't dynamically update. Emiliano, are you looking at my signature block?

Bill, here is what I see when I view your post:

 

[Bill Boehme]

I fixed the link in post #8. You are looking at post #17. There is no link in post #17 except for the link to my photo gallery in my signature block.

 

[Dennis J Gooding]

I fixed the link in post #8. You are looking at post #17. There is no link in post #17 except for the link to my photo gallery in my signature block.

Veeery interesting! The link now works with my ipad but bombs out with my Mozilla browser.

 

[Bill Boehme]

The issue is that the browser is caching stale data. You can try holding down the shift key while reloading the page to force it to load fresh data.

 

[Dennis J Gooding]

Well, I got a lot of illuminating responses to this post and it has changed my outlook quite a bit. The core question in my mind originally was “why wouldn’t raising the handle of conventional scraper, and readjusting the tool rest to match produce the same results as negative-rake scraper with the same included angle and burr?” My present conclusion is that in some cases it would, but with minor inconvenience. For example if one were scrapping the surface of a cylinder using a straight tool rest, I believe that the results would be indistinguishable. The penalty would be in having to hold the handle at perhaps an awkward angle. However, as Clifton C. pointed out, if one needs to swing the scraper from side to side or push it in or out to scrape a curved surface (interior or exterior) while using a straight tool rest, it becomes very difficult to manipulate the handle of a conventional scraper to mimic a negative rake scraper. In practice one probably would have to continually reorient the tool rest as one worked around the curved surface. (Or use a tool rest that matched the curvatures of the turning.) This problem alone would seem to doom the raised handle as an alternative to a negative-rake scraper.

Another issue that was mentioned was the possibility of self-feeding of a conventional scraper when the handle is raised above the scraping edge. Stewart Batty makes a point of that in the instruction manual for his NRS. John Lucas believes that he has detected a tendency toward self feeding in comparison tests between conventional and negative-rake scrapers on some of his work. I am somewhat surprised that there would be significant tendency to self-feed. While the downward cutting force on a tilted conventional scraper includes a small component that is directed toward the turning, the bulk of the force is directed downward onto the tool rest, adding to the friction of the tool rest that tends to prevent sliding of the tool. The use of a conventional scraper in a handle high position certainly is not uncommon and if there was any strong tendency for self-feeding I would think we all would have been aware of it by now.

My suggested possible reason for a difference between conventional and negative-rake scrappers, namely Anisotropy of the metal of the scraper, probably is moot at this point.

Hey, I may even grind down one of my scrapers and give NRS a try.

 

[robo hippy]

Dennis,
If you are going to be in Portland for the Symposium, stop by my booth, I will have a Robust Liberty set up, lots of wood, lots of scrapers and NRSs, and a huge variety of wood to turn into shavings.

robo hippy

 

[Dennis J Gooding]

Dennis,
If you are going to be in Portland for the Symposium, stop by my booth, I will have a Robust Liberty set up, lots of wood, lots of scrapers and NRSs, and a huge variety of wood to turn into shavings.

robo hippy

I will look you up.

 

[Emiliano Achaval]

The link is working fine for me. Are you guys looking at the link that says Stuart Batty NRS Instruction Manual in post #8? Dennis if you're looking at your quote of my post, quotes don't dynamically update. Emiliano, are you looking at my signature block?

Oops, yes, I guess I was clicking at your signature... Now I went to post #8 and click on the right link... Thank you for the help....

 

[Emiliano Achaval]

Dennis,
If you are going to be in Portland for the Symposium, stop by my booth, I will have a Robust Liberty set up, lots of wood, lots of scrapers and NRSs, and a huge variety of wood to turn into shavings.

robo hippy

I will stop by to meet you, say hello and I want to see other angles for the NRS. I tend to stick with what I have and works, but if I see first hand how it works, I might regrind mine. I will take some pieces of Koa for us to play with. Koa is the holy grail, she's very finicky, she doesn't like NRS. Got a tree a few months ago and she seems different , cuts nice and takes the NRS better... And to make us look good, I will take maybe some Milo, today I did a platter, the NRS leaves an almost glossy surface. There is a reason why Milo was one of the favorite woods of the ancient Hawaiians. Aloha

 

[robo hippy]

It has always been a mystery to me how different pieces from the same species can work so differently, and even different pieces from the same tree can seem like they are not even distantly related....

robo hippy

 

[john lucas]

Boy I'll agree on that. I have a fair amount of Osage Orange. One piece will thread easily and the next will tear out. Same with doing spiraling. One piece will spiral fine and the next piece chips. Wish I knew why.

 

[robo hippy]

Part of the reason I am doing a double space in Portland is to have a play date area. I want people to come in and play. My way of thinking is that the AAW needs to make this a standard for the Symposium. Since it is close to me this year, I can take a lathe in to play with. For a lot of vendors, it isn't possible to transport a lathe for personal use. I think a dedicated vendor demonstration area would be a huge hit, and help with sales as well... If nothing else, it is a good excuse for an extended play date...

robo hippy

 

[Emiliano Achaval]

Boy I'll agree on that. I have a fair amount of Osage Orange. One piece will thread easily and the next will tear out. Same with doing spiraling. One piece will spiral fine and the next piece chips. Wish I knew why.

My main wood is Koa, and I'm glad you guys don't think I'm crazy for what I said... People think Koa is Koa, right? Wrong! And glad to hear that other woods are like that... Another thing is the smell, sort of they all smell about the same, but different trees have slightly different smell too. Last year I got some Kiawe or white Algarrobo, this one was from an area with brackish salty water, very close to the ocean. It was oozing an almost purple sap, the wood was way darker, and it's the best for threading. The lighter color Kiawe is softer and harder to chase threads.... Can you guys imagine how long we could sit around a campfire and or a lathe with some Bourbon and talk story about woodturning in general??

 

[robo hippy]

After years of doing art and craft shows, I figured I need some sort of swatch book with wood samples so we could play "how many can you identify/guess". Half the people that come in are other woodworkers... That would be fun at the Symposiums too...

robo hippy

 

[john lucas]

I would lose. I'm the worst in the world at identifying wood. I used to be able to take group on a hike and name every tree and every flower. Now I'm lucky to remember Dandelion.

 

[hockenbery]

I would lose. I'm the worst in the world at identifying wood. I used to be able to take group on a hike and name every tree and every flower. Now I'm lucky to remember Dandelion.

I’m with you. I can ID the common trees. But a walk in the woods with Clark Davidson or Dave Barriger is a wonderful and humbling experience I have enjoyed quite a few times. They are the two turners that know trees better than anyone I have been in the woods with and that includes a couple PhD botany professors.

 

[Bill Boehme]

I know that this is supposed to be about negative rake scrapers, but since were off on a tangent about identifying trees, I cut down a small tree in the back yard about a week ago that I thought was a Mexican Plum, but I'm not so sure about that now. It has small sharp thorns on the twigs and leaves that sort of look like apricot leaves. The thing that got my interest, however, was that I turned a piece of the trunk which was about 1½" diameter and dripping wet into a small handle that I thought that I might use for a file. I fully expected it to split wide open as the wood dried, but surprisingly it hasn't. It is very smooth and tight grained which has led me to thinking about trying to do some thread chasing.

 

[john lucas]

We had a guy from TVA who runs their timber program come and talk to the club. He said there were 23 varieties of Oak. By the time it gets from the field to the truck it's down to 10. By the time it gets to the mill it's down to 5. By the time it gets to you it's either Red Oak or White Oak. Very funny. He did show us how to tell the difference but I think everyone forgot and it was back to White Oak and Red Oak.

 

[R Henrickson]

Apparently oaks also hybridize frequently. My mother was a field botanist and handled the tree identification course for the University of Kentucky. Oaks were frequently a problem. The oak in my parents' front yard was apparently of interest to the U KY department -- an interesting hybrid of pin oak and something else. And of course, each variety of oak has up to half a dozen different popular names, just within Kentucky,