Finally split the “mystery wood”... Elm?!

[MikeB]

It's definitely not boxwood. Boxwood is extremely slow grown with almost invisible growth rings and a yellowish colour.
I would also say it's not laburnum, the heartwood doesn't look dark enough and laburnum bark is not that rough (it's usually a greenish brown and quite shiny).
I would put my money on that being black locust (robinia pseudoacacia). It was often planted in the uk as an ornamental tree but I believe it's quite a good bow wood.

[bownarra]

It's definitely not boxwood. Boxwood is extremely slow grown with almost invisible growth rings and a yellowish colour.
I would also say it's not laburnum, the heartwood doesn't look dark enough and laburnum bark is not that rough (it's usually a greenish brown and quite shiny).
I would put my money on that being black locust (robinia pseudoacacia). It was often planted in the uk as an ornamental tree but I believe it's quite a good bow wood.

Zoom in! The end grain is wrong for black locust. Trust me that is labernum, check the pore diffusion...... Bark oftens varies and isn't a great indicator of tree type. Heartwood colour of an end grain piece can often be confusing too.

[bownarra]

Just like yew it heat bends beautifully.
Yes the 30" piece is long enough...just!

[turmoiler]

In my opinion it's mulberry, not boxwood or laburnum because its rings are porous, thick and demarcated. It could be bl but I think that the rings are too thick and it has too much sapwood. I have seen lots of mulberries and that is what it looks like the bark and the wood

[Tommy D]

Ok ... the chaps on the arbtalk forum are all saying black locust...

I guess the take home message seems to be whatever it is of the 3 it’s still bow wood!!

I still really want it to be Laburnum though...

Will try and get my friend to send some more pics of some of the other parts of it...

[GlisGlis]

In my opinion it's mulberry

+1

[dylanholderman]

Post some more pics once you get it split open, fresh heartwood color might answer the debate.

[MikeB]

It's definitely not boxwood. Boxwood is extremely slow grown with almost invisible growth rings and a yellowish colour.
I would also say it's not laburnum, the heartwood doesn't look dark enough and laburnum bark is not that rough (it's usually a greenish brown and quite shiny).
I would put my money on that being black locust (robinia pseudoacacia). It was often planted in the uk as an ornamental tree but I believe it's quite a good bow wood.

Zoom in! The end grain is wrong for black locust. Trust me that is labernum, check the pore diffusion...... Bark oftens varies and isn't a great indicator of tree type. Heartwood colour of an end grain piece can often be confusing too.

You're right bark does vary a lot even within a species but laburnum bark is very distinctive and I've never seen it with fissures and colour like that before. It's often shiny with a sort of blistered looking surface. I see a few people are suggesting Mulberry which is quite a likely candidate, always has a thick sapwood like this.

[Tommy D]

Here are a few more pics of some of the bits lying around from the same tree...

[Tommy D]

Fun day with an old friend and also got round to splitting the “mystery wood” ... Laburnum, Black Locust or Mulberry are the contenders...

Wood is quite stringy... it had a musty almost fish oil smell when we split it...

Here are a few photos...

[Pat B]

It doesn't look like locust to me on the inside.

[dylanholderman]

still looks like mulberry to me, but iv'e never worked laburnum so i don't know how similar it looks to mulberry.
i also agree that it doesn't look like locust.

[PatM]

Black Locust also seems to really tend to the three rings of sapwood scenario.

[Tommy D]

Could this be elm? I’ve heard elm is stringy...

[dylanholderman]

maybe?
but iv'e seen that level of stringy-ness from Osage and mulberry before, heck iv'e even had maple split stringy like that before.
i will say that the elm i have split before was way WAY stringier then what you have there.