Cockbead question

Since I had the whole log, I was using the very outside bits that were flat sawn, and turning them on edge to get a quartered face. I like that notion of getting the rail grain continuous with the drawer, it would be nice to see some of the same swirl/ribbon extend that way. Thanks for that insight. Small bits like that are what the eye sees and the conscious misses. Well, perhaps Jeff's cow follows the grain that closely.
 
mIke- Actually, we take more time paying attention to this stuff than they did back then. I haven't seen a bombe with all draws and blades in order. Usually a couple, or even three are in the same order ( just the draws, not blades) and the other one is another board.-Al
 
I have noticed that on the bombe's, and wondered why. I am not sure if you align them all from one wide plank the thing might look unbalanced-all the cathedrals pointing the same. Or maybe the wide boards were more expensive then, too. You would need something just as big as it would take to make a case end to cut all 4 drawers from. I sometimes wonder if the big lumber was just as hard or maybe more so to acquire then. I met a fellow once that said he had logged in brazil in the early 70's and he indicated it was not uncommon to find logs that were really too big for their saws. I guess with a pit saw you could have sawn a giant log in the 18th century, but it would seem difficult to move if gotten very far from a body of water.
There are probably fellows here that have studied the old records of lumber purchase, and noted if there were different costs based on size. Mahogany I am thinking of here. I guess I have wandered off the cockbead subject. Perhaps a reply on lumber/size/cost might be best placed in a new thread.
Sorry about that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top