Talk:Cord (unit)

Face cord

This may be NPOV, but the existence of a "face cord" is a means of selling less wood for almost the price of a cord. Stepp-Wulf 02:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC).

I'll try not to offer a POV, or if I do I'll label it as such. I bought a new home with a fireplace about 8 years ago. When I started buying firewood from sellers who advertised in the local newspaper I ordered a "half cord of firewood." I had a firewood rack that measured 8 feet long by 4 feet in height. The first vendor filled it half full. I objected and he said that he had delivered a "half cord." I told him to pack it back up. The second vendor did the same thing, and I reluctantly paid him. Over the years, I have discovered that all firewood sellers will fill my 4 foot high by 8 foot long rack with firewood that is cut about 16 to 18 long (not 2 feet long) and call it a "face cord." It still irks me. IN MY OPINION, they should call a cord a "cord," and then charge what the market will bear. 74.192.207.49 (talk) 23:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

the picture

the picture of the Cord is pretty useless without some means of gauging its size. To me it looks much bigger than 4' high.

114.77.28.174 (talk) 13:04, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Cord elsewhere

In France, Belgium, and Switzerland, people still use the "cord" to measure wood to be burnt in a fireplace. In other circumstances (i.e. forest surveying), they measure wood in steres. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.45.178.123 (talk) 06:13, 16 March 2010 (UTC) Also according to John Winter (royalist) the term was used in 1628 in England!Leutha (talk) 20:43, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Measurement Canada

I just noticed that Measurement Canada wants to discontinue the term 'cord'. See the link here. I'm not a wiki editor but I figured you guys would like to know 142.165.85.36 (talk) 03:07, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Cord (unit) and Cord-foot

What's the relationship between Cord (unit) and Cord-foot? TuckerResearch (talk) 18:57, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

They seem to be the same thing. We should combine them, redirect Cord-foot here. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 19:22, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

It does appear that a cord-foot is a subdivision of a cord, doesn't it? TuckerResearch (talk) 22:09, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, sorry, you're right. But we should still combine them, redirect cord-foot here. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 02:15, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

As I have just done. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 13:48, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Which is, I think, the right thing. TuckerResearch (talk) 16:48, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Face cord?

Now, what about the "face cord"? (See face cord on Google.) Perhaps I'll add when I get time. TuckerResearch (talk) 16:50, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

It is mentioned in the story already. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 17:20, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Well, don't I feel like a dummy... TuckerResearch (talk) 19:25, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cord (unit). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130922162702/http://www.jwiwood.com/faq/rick.html to http://www.jwiwood.com/faq/rick.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140224013741/http://www.consumer.org.nz/reports/firewood/standard-measurements to http://www.consumer.org.nz/reports/firewood/standard-measurements

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:30, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Definition

The "compact" part of the description "aligned, parallel, touching and compact" is not terribly precise. I've heard it said that the wood should be laid "loose enough for a mouse to run through, but too tight for the cat to follow," which may be fractionally more precise, but still leaves somewhat to be desired.

I have not been able to find a source for this, but thought I should mention it here in case anyone wants to do a more rigorous search. Or, if nothing else, to have a chuckle.

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 18:48, 11 December 2017 (UTC)