I am building drawers and I would like to know if I am using Cherry for the front of the drawer. What would be the best secondary wood selection for the rest of drawer? I am thinking about Maple or Poplar.
I think Maple is more stronger and the color is better as the color will contrast when I make the dovetail. Is this a correct assumption? However, I am unsure if Poplar comes in different colors or even if it should be considered for this project.
I attached an artical that shows examples of drawers, this is exactly the result that I am looking forward to achieve.
Any recommendation is greatly appreciated.
Thank you,
Moataz
Replies
Either Baltic Birch Ply or the Maple will be fine.
Work Safe, Count to 10 when your done for the day !!
Bruce S.
I would suggest if staining do so before you assemble. Staining with a thin brush looks like no fun and tricky.
Either one is strong enough. Poplar is cheaper, but you can find several quite different shades in the same board -- brown, green, yellow -- so maple would be better for the effect you want. In my area, soft maple costs less than hard, but tends to have a slightly more red tone than hard, with occasional greyish streaks. It would still give you a good contrast with stained cherry.
Jim
You can use either maple or poplar, but maple is a more common choice for drawers. It is fine grained, stable, hard (even "soft" maple is as hard as cherry) so it wears well, makes good joints and is reasonably priced.
Glaucon
If you don't think too good, then don't think too much...
Not sure that baltic birch is a good choice. Although maple is a good strong wood, it seems that I if I recall correctly its movement rate is to different from cherry to work. It's either to little or too much but either way, not a good choice for the long run. Choosing something because it's common, doesn't make it right. As for staining before hand, not gonna work if you cut your dovetails by hand. You'll pare off enough wood after glue-up to remove stain.
May also consider pine for sides and bottom.
Chris
Edited 7/26/2008 11:37 pm ET by hdgis1
Disagree. Maple is (and was) one of the most common secondary woods used in drawer making. It will also last longer than poplar or pine. It is hard to think of a better wood.Glaucon
If you don't think too good, then don't think too much...
Popular among who? Cosmo builders who have convinced their buyers that maple is better, when in reality the only thing better is that those same builders can charge their client more. Now I will admit that it is harder than popular or pine. That can be a disadvantage unless you make all your drawer runners and such out of maple as the drawer will wear a groove in the runner much faster. And believe me, the runners are much harder to replace than attaching a new wear strip on a drawer. Their seems to be this myth going around that hard maple (which I assume is what we are talking about here) is more stable than some popular domestics, but the truth is that it is much less stable. Compare the following shrinkage expansion based on 8" wide board with moisture change from 6% to 12% - maple 9.9% (.18" change)
cherry 7.1% (.13" change)
walnut 8.2% (.15" change)
poplar 8.2% (.15" change)Pair up woods with as much change in dimension as maple and cherry, and you better worry more about cracking than whether or not your drawer is going to wear out. But hey, if pretty white drawers are you only concern, then by all means go right ahead. I would also love to see the historical precedence for using maple as secondary wood!Chris
Edited 7/27/2008 10:37 pm ET by hdgis1
You are wildly overstating your case.As has been noted by others, poplar, pine and maple have all been used as secondary woods for drawers. If you like poplar- hey, knock yourself out- but you are stating a preference and dressing it up as fact, with a few non sequiturs thrown in for good measure.A few corrections- I did not specify hard or soft maple- you assumed hard. But soft maple is a good deal more common than hard as a secondary wood. It's less expensive, and still plenty hard.Second, maple is stable. ALL wood moves with temperature and humidity. What matters is that the secondary wood and the primary wood move about the same- and the movement is minimized by the milling. Quartersawn wood is favored for this reason and has about half the movement of facesawn wood of the same species. You seemed to have elided over this "minor" point, but your stats didn't.Third, I would make the runners of the same wood as the drawer sides- whether that was maple or poplar. Hard to figure why you'd want to do otherwise.As for hysterical precedents, well many different kinds of woods have been used as secondary woods- the choice depended in no small part upon geography. Oak was often used in English 18th C furniture, eastern white pine in New England, poplar was very common, chestnut was used, particularly in Massachusetts; maple,gum, birch, yellow pine, cedar, even walnut- all have been used. Pine, while very common, also tends to show the most wear in antique furniture drawers- a reason to consider something else. For a more modern take, you might try FWW #180. Mario Rodriguez favors poplar, maple and pine. Go figure.Lastly the original poster (remember him?) asked a question that had to do with the appearance and finishing of a drawer with different secondary woods. If this is a prime consideration, then maple wins over poplar. It has a finer grain, a pale, consistent color and contrasts nicely with cherry. Poplar is only slightly cheaper (in my neck of the woods), and often has a green cast and variability in color that is better suited for the backs of chests than the sides of drawers. So, put me down for pretty white drawers- briefs or boxers...Glaucon
If you don't think too good, then don't think too much...
Non-sequitur huh...thats a big word. Since you didnt specify hard or soft, I did assume some things. Primary among them is that the original poster wants clean white drawers, not drawers with grey streaks and such. Now if he or she chooses to go with the quarter sawn soft maple then they may get white drawers but I bet they are going to have a hard time getting a large enough quantity that is wide enough to do a bunch of drawers over 5 inches. Of course I guess you could glue up a bunch of strips, but then why not just use maple ply? And yes radial shrinkage is less than tangential, and thanks for the lesson on wood movement. I forget that ALL wood moves, but I do know that you can expect all wood to have an average seasonal swing of 6 to 8%. So, here's the thing - you have the numbers - why not use any ole' piece of poplar that can be had and not worry about whether its flat sawn rift sawn or quarter sawn?At least we can agree that it makes sense to make your runners out of the same secondary woods!"Second, maple is stable" (your words. one among many who believe this!) Perhaps that should read, 'quarter sawn maple is stable'? Since you point out logical fallacies on my part, perhaps you should have reread this before you hit the post button - "well many different kinds of woods have been used as secondary woods- the choice depended in no small part upon geography. Oak was often used in English 18th C furniture, eastern white pine in New England, poplar was very common, chestnut was used, particularly in Massachusetts; maple,gum, birch, yellow pine, cedar, even walnut- all have been used." Seriously, I've used leaves to wipe my a$$ with but I'd rather use toilet paper for a number of documented reasons. Come on - name two recognized historical styles that frequently used maple as secondary wood. Your last little argument there kind of fall apart when you get to "maple - all have been used". By who? Oh yeah, I forgot, Mario Rodriquez! Just because I forgot the original posters question - The wood in the picture is poplar. If this is the look your going after, buy nice green poplar (not wet, but the color) , which is the heart wood and in about a week it will be a nice light shade of brown. Don't get the white crap that home depot of woodcraft pawns of as good poplar. Last point to the OP - you can use whatever kind of wood you like. Hell use wenge if it floats your boat. Just remember that its easier to replace sides than it is to replace a one of a kind piece of pure crotch mahogany!Chris
Edited 7/28/2008 12:56 pm ET by hdgis1
Glaucon, I've no wish to get involved in the wee spat going on between yourself and poster styled, I think hdgis1, even though I certainly do have in depth knowledge of wood movement and characteristics as well as knowledge of historical precedents and drawer construction techniques, you said the following:
"Third, I would make the runners of the same wood as the drawer sides- whether that was maple or poplar. Hard to figure why you'd want to do otherwise."
I can offer a logical reason to make the the runners and kickers out of a harder material than the drawer sides along with the slips you'll find in high quality hand made drawers. This of course assumes the drawer sides and slips run on the runners and kickers, which is one traditional form.
I'll leave you to puzzle out the logic of the harder, more wear resistant runners and kickers and softer less durable drawer sides and slips by answering the following question:
If your task is to repair drawers that no longer fit properly nor run properly due to age and wear and tear, which part of the two rubbing surfaces is easier and cheaper to get at and repair or replace-- the runners and kickers built into the cabinet, or the drawer sides and slips that are part of the drawer?
Slainte.Richard Jones Furniture
Richard,I wouldn't term it "wee".My rancor is part of my natural response to anyone who declaims the "(one) right way" to do something... life and woodworking have instructed me otherwise...As for your rhetorical question, I would say "neither". On this side of the pond, eastern white pine was a very common secondary wood for drawers... and many antiques show considerable wear on the drawers. Easier to replace than the runners and kickers? Yes. Something I would advise doing to an 18th C Newport block front desk? Not so much.If both sides of the equation are made from fairly hard, stable wood (English oak on your side of the puddle), the chance of either needing to be replaced is reduced. For most applications- drawers in desks, night stands, blanket chests, etc. this would be the case. For drawers holding very heavy objects- tools, files, etc. a steel suspension probably makes more sense. My own view is that if a piece is being made by hand today, I'd like to think it has as much a chance of surviving into the future as a piece by Duncan Phyfe. Given the time and cost of the labor, the difference in expense for various secondary woods seems minor. Using QS wood of the same species seems reasonable to me. YMMV.Glaucon
If you don't think too good, then don't think too much...
You can certainly repair the bottom of a drawer side to keep the drawer from damaging the drawer divider--without reducing the value -- if done properly. Remember the alternative is having to repair visible cockbeading on either drawwer or drawer blade. That repair would have a much bigger impact on value. On a Newport blockfront more specifically, the drawer likely was made with a separate piece nailed under the drawer bottom to provide the sliding surface. Almost as if it were made to be periodically replaced to account for wear.
Drawer slips, Glaucon, to us Brits anyway, are considered wearing parts, like brake pads in a car. Historical American furniture making generally lacks the refinement of drawer slips, and it's more common for those old American styles to feature thicker drawer sides without the slips.
That's something the best historical British furniture doesn't feature-- thick drawer sides are the preserve of country furniture and other lesser styles. To us a refined drawer of medium size has sides that are never more than 3/8" thick, and even that's getting a bit on the fat side. That would be in a drawer up to about 30" W X 20" D X up to 8" or 10" H-- thereabouts anyway. Dinky drawers, as you might see in in amongst the pigeon holes and the like of desks seldom use sides thicker than 1/4". The slip may or may not be present.
Is it always a good choice to make a drawer out of the same species where the sides are quarter sawn and the front is tangentially sawn? I think this is what you said in your closing statement, but I may have mis-read your meaning.
I wouldn't call that a good choice all in English oak for example as the shrinkage factors of the two different cuts are quite disparate. Tangential shrinkage is almost twice radial shrinkage at 8.9% to 5.3% (from 30% MC to oven dry). Obviously the greater the height of the drawer the more the disparity in the movement factor matters.
On the other hand 1/4 sawn Quercus robur or Q. petraea drawer sides and back material would work well with tangentially cut Swietenia macrophylla as the shrinkage factor of each is close to each other, ie, 5.3% as before for the oak and 5.1% for the tangentailly cut mahogany. Slainte. Richard Jones Furniture
Please have the decency to direct comments about me, to me. And in case you failed to notice, I never claimed that poplar is the one right way. I merely made the claim that it is a better choice than maple.Chris
i remember reading somewhere, i think it was thos mosher "poplar isn't popular with me" i say, use what you like,if its done right we won't be around when and if it fails
In the midwest and applachia yellow poplar was a common secondary wood. Works well and easy to cut.
The problem is that it is soft (almost like white pine) and drawer runners frequently wear down to the point the drawers do not fit well This will take a number of years. Antique poplar drawers are almost always worn, such they they need repair.
Possible solution is to use NK style of drawer slides or glue on a strip of maple or oak on the drawer runner bottom.
Sam
The best suggestion I can give you is to use Hoadley's "Understanding Wood" and find a secondary wood which has comparable radial and tangential shrink rates as your primary wood.
Regards,
Sean
you might consider quartersawn white oak. It contrasts nicely with the Cherry and is very stable. I did this on a Walnut night stand and it worked well. Of course this is more expensive than poplar.
Troy
A timely question since I'm building six drawer boxes today - and have just finished a job that included ~40 drawers. I make five piece boxes (sides, front, back, and bottom) from the secondary wood, then make separate fronts from the primary wood.
For the past year, or so, I've used 1/2" (ok, 12mm) "baltic" birch for drawer boxes. It looks good, is very stable and easy to work. I get it in unfinished 5' x 5' sheets and set up an assembly line process to cut the pieces, assemble the boxes, and install the glide hardware. The six I'll do today shouldn't take more than 6-7 hours to do.
I haven't used it yet, but one of my suppliers also sells it prefinished in either 5' x 5' sheets, or precut to various widths which can be ripped down to the required side/front/back dimension leaving only one raw edge. I may try it today. It will cost more, but not having to finish drawer boxes may make it worthwhile. - lol
Dave ,
Just wondering about the prefinished 1/2" can you glue to it or will your normal joint work on the drawer boxes be the same ? I also make the separate box but was under the impression that it could be a problem to glue to .
dusty
At the risk of being drummed out of here in disgrace, I'll confess that I don't glue my drawer boxes. I construct the boxes to work with whatever glide hardware I'll need and assemble them with brads. I've made hundreds of drawers over the years and have NEVER had a failure.
Drawers using those 3/4 extension glides that wrap under the sides get bottoms cut to the overall dimensions for the box. The glide provides the support for whatever load is in the drawer.
If I'm using full extension glides (like today's project), I cut dado's in the sides, front, and back to support the bottom, then brad them together.
In the interest of full disclosure, I'll also admit that I don't do dovetails. I like them just fine, but in my woodworking career have rarely met a customer who even knew what they were - and have never met a customer willing to pay for them.
I have a project in the planning stages that will probably require dovetails - but I won't get paid to do them. #2 daughter told us last week that we're gonna be grandparents and that I'll be making the kids bedroom furniture (Me and my big mouth!!). Since #2 daughter knows about some of the finer points of furniture making, I'm expecting that dovetails will be part of the job. That's ok with me. SWMBO will probably force me to get a dovetail jig. (heh-heh)
Dave ,
Just out of curiosity , why not use glue your drawer boxes ?
I build a similar box and use glue on the bottom groove and the corners and have also not experienced any failures after building a thousand or so .
Congratulations on the new arrival , consider it an opportunity to need more tools
dusty
Dusty -
I used to glue up my drawers, but a few years ago, I was making a shop cabinet and made the drawers before I made the carcass. Yeah, that wasn't real bright, was it? - lol
Sure enough, the drawers didn't work with the revised plan and had to be tossed. I made the new drawers without glue on the off chance that I might have to rework them and then decided to see if they would work without being glued. They've held up fine under some pretty heavy use and abuse and the glue bottle has stayed on the shelf since then.
Moataz - Whether to choose maple or poplar for a secondary wood in a cherry drawer depends greatly on how you plan to cut the dovetails. If you're using a machine (i.e., a router and a jig), either choice will work well.
If you're cutting them by hand, I strongly suggest to you to choose poplar. The contrast is compressibility between the drawer front and side is important in hand-tool dovetailing. No matter how good you are (and there are a lot of superb dovetailers out there), you will not get each joint perfect, so you want the harder and stronger wood of the drawer front to be able to slightly compress the wood of the drawer side - so you don't have to be perfect. If you choose a wood of similar or equal hardness to the drawer front, you run the substantial risk of splitting the drawer front if one of the joints is a wee bit too tight.
If you want to build the best drawer possible, use quartersawn material of some sort. White Oak would be perfect as another poster has already mentioned.
I have built a boatload of woodworking projects with Maple and stable is not how I would generally characterize the stuff (in its plainsawn iteration). I love the look of it but it seems to always get the Johnny Jump Ups when I use it.
Edited 7/28/2008 2:22 pm ET by BossCrunk
Poplar will do nicely!
MSW,
My vote is for maple. I like the how cherry and maple (unstained) look together. I think the grain of oak might be a bit stong against the cherry. That's just my personal taist issue, nothing more. I'm not fond of poplar. I use poplar or brown maple for paint grade woodwork. I don't care for the grain much. So I never use it unless I plan to paint it.
One more thought.. If you're drawers are contstructed as a drawer box with an applied front, and cost isn't the issue, but color contrast of the dovetail is what you're looking for think of this... Make the drawer box sides, back and bottom from cherry. Make the drawer BOX front from maple. The dovetails will jump out at the customer, but the main drawer box will match the rest of the woodwork.
Okay, I guess I'll go ahead and chime in.
I've used both soft maple and poplar for drawer sides (as well as some other odd balls like russian olive, green ash, boxelder, (type of maple), catalpa, etc., etc.)
I prefer poplar far and away over anything else when using handcut dovetails. It planes easily with no tearout, it is stable, and most importantly, it is the perfect wood for chiseling. Soft, with undramatic grain so that chisels are not inclined to follow a wild ride and split the wood. As noted by another poster, when joining a harder wood like cherry to a softer wood like poplar on dovetails, the cherry will smash the poplar producing a nice tight fit.
http://www.ithacawoodworker.com
I'll add a bit to the debate by tossing in a few choices not yet mentioned.
I like red oak for drawer sides because a) I like the look, b) it is hard and wear resistant, and c) I like to wax my drawer sides and runners and I think the open pores help hold the wax longer. (A fanciful notion, I'll admit. But that's my story and I'm stickin' to it!)I'd consider white oak a good alternative, but I don't like the looks as much, unless it's stained. If you're doing it by hand, oak's a bit harder to chisel, but when using hardwood sides, I'll trim close to the base with a coping saw and then simply cut to the line with a few taps on the chisel. Ends up taking about the same amount of time as doing them in softwood with chisel only.
I learned a lot about dovetails and drawers from Frank Klaus' articles, video, etc. He prefers pine. He says "it's hard enough", and he likes the pine smell the wood gives off as you use the drawers. It' tough to argue with the likes of Mr. Klaus. I'd use more pine ('cause I do believe him), but it's harder for me to find a nice stick of pine than it is to find nice oak or maple. Also, clear pine is more expensive here than the hardwoods.
I wouldn't use poplar for drawer parts only because I don't like the look of unfinished poplar. It always looks like "junk" wood to me -- too green-ish I guess. Don't misunderstand, I use a lot of it, just not unfinished and visible. To me, poplar says "paint grade trim". Otherwise, if you like the way it looks, go ahead and use it.
Finally, I've never seen a drawer that was adversely affected by wood movement (except where a drawer was fitted so poorly that it is difficult to operate when the humidity goes up). Hey, it's a drawer, not a watch! I wouldn't lose much sleep over a few thou' movement delta.
Mike Hennessy
Pittsburgh, PA
I haven't used oak myself, but certainly I have seen it used.Eastern white pine, although soft, also has a very low shrinkage coefficient, which may account for some of its popularity for drawer parts. I'd also point out that furniture made in the 18th C dealt with some major extremes of both temperature and humidity. In the US, Philadelphia (the second largest city in the English speaking world at the time), was the center of furniture making in the colonies. Philadelphia has very hot, humid summers and cold dry winters (the founding fathers sweltered at their meetings in May and June of 1776, the following winters Washington's troops crossed an ice filled Delaware River or froze at Valley Forge). There was no central heating, much less air conditioning. Furniture made at the time underwent major swings in both temperature and humidity in the space of a few months. Yet what survives of it seems to aged well despite wood movement.Furniture made today would seem less likely to endure these rigors. It's always a good idea to try to match the different woods in terms of their movement characteristics, but I think you can carry the point too far.I too am not fond of poplar on exposed parts- but that is a point of personal preference, poplar has been widely employed as a secondary wood.On a previous point, I was unclear to Richard about "both sides of the equation". I was referring to the drawer sides/slips and the runners/kickers.Glaucon
If you don't think too good, then don't think too much...
"On a previous point, I was unclear to Richard about "both sides of the equation". I was referring to the drawer sides/slips and the runners/kickers."
I wasn't sure if I'd got your meaning right. Anyway, not a problem and no harm done either way that I can tell. Slainte.Richard Jones Furniture
MIKE! Geeeeee
I wouldn't use poplar for drawer parts only because I don't like the look of unfinished poplar. It always looks like "junk" wood to me -- too green-ish I guess. Don't misunderstand, I use a lot of it, just not unfinished and visible. To me, poplar says "paint grade trim".
As I say... beauty is in the eye of the beholder.. I have a full wall of shelves MADE of that crap Poplar!
WAY cheeper than Oak or most ANY other wood you can find around Chicago. I find that if you pick out straight rough 'sticks' to begin with they, hardly ever warp or twist after. Not like pine does at least. By the way I like pine too.. But I do not use it very much. GOOD pine is VERY hard to find!
too green-ish ..
I sort of hear you.. Green is NOT one of my favorite colors either.. or is that colours?
But I have seen all sorts of colors of many shades in that wood.. I guess why I like it...
OK so it 'dings' very easy!
Yep and yep. I hear ya. I myself just don't like the look. Purely a personal preference.
Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PA
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled