I dont know why they have to lie about it. At $5/8ft board you'd think I paid for the full 1.5.
Is nobody gonna call out OP for wearing socks with sandals? …and, ostensibly, while preparing to do carpentry?!?
That’s like a cardinal sin squared!
2x2 lumber at Home Depot is now 1.28x1.28. Nominal size is supposed to be 1.5
Submitted 6 months ago by Blackout@kbin.run to mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world
https://kbin.run/media/b0/fb/b0fbad7b78f7e20115a0c9a7305cf1369cca1a8d7d8c67f7d4477fa0f34050f5.jpg
Comments
Agrivar@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Coreidan@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Nah nothing wrong with wearing socks with sandals when you’re home. Do what ever the hell you want.
But I do agree with wearing proper footwear while doing dangerous things.
fatboy93@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Oh absolutely. I wear socks with sandals because my soles sweat and make my sandals sticky.
But yeah, wear proper attire for the work you do!
bluewing@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Can’t you see those are safety sandals. And just like safety squints, are approved PPE across the whole 3rd world industrial sphere. OP will be perfectly safe.
SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Obi@sopuli.xyz 6 months ago
At least the socks aren’t white.
refalo@programming.dev 6 months ago
don’t forget the unbranded Chinesium calipers.
Mitutoyo or bust.
bluewing@lemm.ee 6 months ago
For a machinist yep. For home gamers, a waste of money. They don’t have the knowledge of where and when to use them nor the skills to get accurate repeatable measurements. So for OP’s use whatever CCC, (Cheap, Cheerful, Chinese), caliper he’s got is good enough.
It’s the definition of “nominal size is what ever we say it is” that pisses me off. Buying wood/lumber is the worst offender of Nominal sizing, but even metals are getting worse. I used to buy a round bar of say, ASA1018 and it would be +0"/-.002". It’s now +0/-.006", (that’s +0/-.05mm and +0/-.15mm for those living in Boca Raton). At the end of my career as a toolmaker I was often forced to purchase oversized stock and waste time turning said stock into the actual sizes required.
oatscoop@midwest.social 6 months ago
My toolbar calipers are cheap hardware store ones. They’re accurate enough and I’m not out much when they inevitably get damaged or lost.
Death_Equity@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I can accept the poor quality tools that might be off by a few hundredths, but using imperial on precision measurement devices is unforgivable.
Grass@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
I regularly wear socks and sandals along with shorts and a sweater
irreticent@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Sounds like a Rick and Morty episode.
AceFuzzLord@lemm.ee 6 months ago
I don’t condone it, but I’ve done something similar once in a Boy Scouts meeting as a scout. Had sandals on and I don’t remember the full meeting, but at one point we were chopping wood with an axe. I did it, but that’s not my brightest move. There was also a time where I was getting my metalworking badge and entered the forge one time for a kinda free time work on your project thing with shorts on by mistake. Nobody stopped me in either case. This wasn’t pre-2000s, so I’m not sure how I got away with either event considering safety is usually taken much more seriously nowadays.
JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 6 months ago
My COVID home-improvement project was hardwoods. Something like 1000sqft. Never did it before. Did 90% of it wearing no more than basketball shorts and flipflops. W/e. Only a few toe injuries.
some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 6 months ago
Um, wait. I would think that violates some sort of law (but I guess maybe we haven’t codified this?). I mean, building plans expect standards in materials, right? So how can a building meet codes if the materials are not within the expected specs?
RidgeDweller@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
Agreed, seems like some kind of weights and measures violation.
captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
I’m going to guess they can get away with this because 2x2s aren’t intended for structural use. I’ve never built one into a floor, wall or ceiling.
SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Used for furring strips everywhere. Line a block wall with them and sheet it.
STOMPYI@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Sounds like the situation here… good call
FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 6 months ago
It’s probably 2x2PT or something. There are standards for board widths.
frezik@midwest.social 6 months ago
The 2x4s that have been sized this way do meet structural code. It was found that a full 2x4 is way over spec’d for what they were used for, so why bother wasting extra parts of the tree?
Pretty much everything built with dimensional lumber in the last century has been done with undersized 2x4s, and it’s fine. The name stuck for historical reasons. Companies that build houses and order this stuff by the pallet all know what the real size is, and so do building inspectors.
GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
Rough 2x4s were 2" x 4". Then we started finishing them for better consistency, taking about 0.5" from each dimension. Later we started using saws with narrower kerfs to have less loss due to saw blade width, better cutting and planing systems so the rough size could be smaller and still have the same finished size, then they lowered finished size some more.
derf82@lemmy.world 6 months ago
These are even smaller than that. A standard 2x4 is 1.5x3.5.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Pretty much everything built with dimensional lumber in the last century has been done with undersized 2x4s, and it’s fine.
It’s fine, folks. Nothing to see here.
some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 6 months ago
Thanks for the explainer.
bluewing@lemm.ee 6 months ago
You simply change the expected specs…
XeroxCool@lemmy.world 6 months ago
2x2PT has been 1.25x1.25 for as long as I can remember (10 years or more). It’s only the pressure treated deck stuff for railings. This does not apply to the rest of the 2x lumber, as those are still 1.5 actual. I got Simpson corner 2x2 brackets for crazy cheap way back but ended up not really using them. The 2x2s are warped to hell and a ripped 2x4 was too big in the original 2x dimension.
Windex007@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I’m wondering if it’s a regional thing? I just looked online for pressure treated 2x2’s and all the ones I’m seeing (home hardware, home depot, advantage lumber, etc) list as actual being 1.5x1.5
el_abuelo@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
Why is 2x2 meant to be 1.5x1.5 and not 2x2?
pythonoob@programming.dev 6 months ago
Premill size vs sale size. Something like that. Probably not the correct term.
Similar to how steak is measures in precooked weights.
VeryNiiiice@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
2x4 is the rough cut dimensions from the sawmill. They end up smaller after drying (wood can hold a lot of water) and planing.
phx@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
*Planed/straight wood versus raw lumber. It threw me off when I first started building stuff and summed that a 2x4 was actually 2"x4" in all my measurements/plans
*Or it would be straight if you’re lucky and don’t pick from the top of the bin at Home Depot
towerful@programming.dev 6 months ago
The old * uncooked weight
insufferableninja@lemdro.id 6 months ago
TBH that looks like a furring strip, not dimensional lumber
Blackout@kbin.run 6 months ago
It's possible they stocked the wrong thing, but it was rung up as Pressure-Treated so maybe they applied the wrong barcode?
wjrii@lemmy.world 6 months ago
It’s still a bit small, but pressure treated being a little smaller than framing lumber is not necessarily a secret:
prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
I appreciate you covering your open toes, safety socks so you’re compliant.
A_A@lemmy.world 6 months ago
How is it in countries using the metric system ?
in France :
mara-materiaux.com/…/8094-lambourde-38x63-mm-long…LAMBOURDE 38x63 mm long.4 M TRAITE Unité de vente : le mètre linéaire 1.42 € /m
5.68 € /(4 m)So, this is aprox ($6.?) for one “…2x3x(~13ft)…”
(treated wood)
… verry expensive, yet, upfront size disclosure.Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Nothing is immune to shrinkflation aka merchant gouging
vk6flab@lemmy.radio 6 months ago
Looks oversized to me, that’s 3.25 cm x 3.25 cm, looks like they could take it down by 40% and still call it a 2x2 😇
PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Distributors send their junk to home stores because they know they won’t reject it.
BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Is their entire stock like this every time, or just this one batch?
RagnarokOnline@programming.dev 6 months ago
Good thing you checked, that’s ridiculous. If I’d cut a dado for some mixed stock and found out some of them were 1 & 1/3 instead of 1 & 1/2, I’d be pissed.
distantsounds@lemmy.world 6 months ago
LordCrom@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Well shit. That explains alot
possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 6 months ago
There is quite a lot of deviation with lumber these days. If you need something the right size go for a higher quality and then measure them until you find the one you are looking for.
StaySquared@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Wait… if you were building a home with this lumber, at least parts of it, wouldn’t this technically hurt the integrity, or better yet, be less structurally sound? Or am I a dumb dumb?
Carighan@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Shouldn’t the normal size be 2? Given, well, the name?
InEnduringGrowStrong@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
You’d think so, but no.
Short story is the ‘nominal’ size is the size before going into a planer to smooth the faces.
Yes, it makes little sense, like many things related to construction stuff.
cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Yeah sorry. The tree was originally 50ft tall so we call the pieces that. But you only get 3ft
Is like buying 1200lbs steaks because that’s what the cow weighs before it gets parted
dukatos@lemm.ee 6 months ago
90 mile beach
maniacal_gaff@lemmy.world 6 months ago
It’s not a 2x4 it’s a “2x4.”
lgmjon64@lemmy.world 6 months ago
captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
The two-by-fours at your local home center are not 2 inches thick or 4 inches wide…not anymore at least. They spent several weeks at that size though. The sawmill cut them to that size to stack and kiln dry, and then when removed from the kiln they are then milled straight and square. Used to be they would sell the rough stock to carpenters who would do the milling themselves, but then they figured out that the railroads were charging them a fortune to ship a lot of wood that was going to be ground to sawdust anyway, so they started milling the boards before shipment. Same amount of construction lumber arrives at the construction site and it took less fuel for the locomotive to deliver it.
pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 6 months ago
Lol. Trying to find lumber that’s straight and square is a pipe dream these days.
aBundleOfFerrets@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
Lumber is weird because it has been industry standard to lie about dimensions since before the US existed so it’s just kinda a thing they get to do
cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 6 months ago
No its not Maybe in the US? At least here, it is and has to be, very precise especially when it comes to industry quality. It is precise down to the mm!
themeatbridge@lemmy.world 6 months ago
It’s not exactly a lie, just a standard. Nominal board sizes were based on the unfinished lumber size. Another 1/4 inch is taken off each side to get a smooth surface that makes it easier to work with.
Here’s an old image (reddit warning)
www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fexternal-p…
that shows the rough cuts of boards from a log. When they look at a log, they determine how many of each size they can get from it, and at that point, a 2x4 is 2 inches by 4 inches.
RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Not entirely true. I lived in a house that was just over a century old. The framing was exactly what it said it was, a 2x4 was 2” by 4”. Same for all the structure. These were mill cut, but still pretty clean. It was WW2-ish and after that we started to get planed lumber that gave us 1.5x3.5. It wasn’t even until probably the early part of the 1900s that lumber started to become “dimensional”, as in the standard sizes we know of today.
Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
How could you use bundle when Business is the collective noun?
Magnetar@feddit.de 6 months ago
As if american measurements have ever made sense. Look up how they measure screws or wires and despair.
shalafi@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Or shotgun shell sizes and loads.
“It all started in 1840 when the dram was a common unit of measurement…”
AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 6 months ago
It’s a wonder they manage to build anything. They have pocket calculators dedicated to the building industry. It’s surreal.
kibiz0r@midwest.social 6 months ago
How do they measure despair?
afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 6 months ago
The European wire gauge system makes no sense. There I said it. I don’t need to know the O.D. of the wire, I need to know the amp rating. The O.D. only becomes an issue for bending radius and there is a chart for that as well. Nothing is stopping some a**hole from making a wire almost completely out of plastic that has the O.D. of a typical 14AWG but can’t carry any serious amount of current under the European system. Under the AWG you always know what the current capacity is.
And while we are at it, you might as well standardize your wire sizes based on copper. You are never going to use anything except copper. So your units should reflect the material. I am building a chemical skid, that has nothing to do with the distance between the equator to the north pole.
Also when is the last time you were running wires that you needed a mm of precision? Meanwhile a fraction of an amp really does matter. So should not the thing that does matter be reflected in the product?
someguy3@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
The convention is 2" before milling. Milling takes off 1/4", so the result is 1.5".
dan1101@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Why was that ever accepted? I don’t care what size it was before milling. If I buy a 2x2 I want a 2x2.
MisterFrog@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Is this a joke? (I know it isn’t).
Why would I want to know the dimensions of the unfinished product? I’m not a construction worker, so honestly is there any reason?
kn33@lemmy.world 6 months ago
They were when the name was made, but due to changes in the manufacturing process, they aren’t anymore. The name stuck, though.
popsci.com/two-by-four-lumber-measurements-explai…
sukhmel@programming.dev 6 months ago
So they can measure precisely, after all
astanix@lemmy.world 6 months ago
It’s due to the milling to square it.
You can get rough cut 2x4 or 2x2 or anything that are actually that size but by the time you trim and square it you will end up at the measurements sold in big box stores
Dabundis@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I think this commenter is trying to say that the nominal size of a 2x2 is 2" by 2" (and it looks like they typo’d nominal to “normal”)
The actual size of a 2x2 is 1.5" by 1.5", and OP incorrectly calls these dimensions nominal
frezik@midwest.social 6 months ago
It was done for largely sensible reasons.
youtu.be/WaJFudED5FQ?si=7j005FmfJVr_JQL_
In short, a 2x4 was originally 2x4 inches, full stop, but it was found that this size wasn’t necessary for the strength being applied to them in construction. We were wasting lumber for no reason. They went through a few cycles of sizing down as the actual needed strength was understood better. The naming convention stuck, though.
weeeeum@lemmy.world 6 months ago
It’s weird because it’s the size of lumber BEFORE smoothing the edges. Manufacturers take this inch a mile and the 2x4 (as well as all other dimensional lumber) has gotten smaller and smaller.
BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 6 months ago
No.
www.lowes.com/n/…/nominal-actual-lumber-sizes
mipadaitu@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Even if it was 2" from the lumber yard, it would shrink or expand quite a bit depending on the moisture content. Expecting natural products to be an exact size would be crazy, especially when talking about construction lumber.
Now this is a very extreme case, but it was probably milled to 1.5" soaking wet, and shrank a bunch after drying out on the rack. That’s also a big reason why they’re all warped.
Auli@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
O that’s the size before planing.