Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-20-2014, 04:37 PM
 
Location: Santa FE NM
3,490 posts, read 6,509,504 times
Reputation: 3813

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jaypee View Post
I think if you are a builder or in the construction business, you already know that "2x4" is a naming convention and not the actual measurements.
And I think most customers at Lowes are NOT builders or in the construction business. Some are, to be sure, but for home-builders and contractors there are many, many better sources for lumber than Lowe's, Home Depot, etc.

Those of you who've yelled 'frivolous lawsuit' apparently overlooked something. This action was begun by a District Attorney's office, not some ambulance-chasing lawyer; not some citizen with dollar signs in his eyes. It is true that California's consumer protection laws are among the best in the nation. In fact, most of the current national consumer protection laws, and protection laws in general (e.g. smoking regulations), originated in California. From time to time we get one wrong; most of the time we get them right.



I also note that much (if not most) of the wailing-and-gnashing-of-teeth in this thread comes from people who have failed to designate their states of residence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-20-2014, 05:00 PM
 
Location: southern kansas
9,127 posts, read 9,367,405 times
Reputation: 21297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nighteyes View Post
And I think most customers at Lowes are NOT builders or in the construction business. Some are, to be sure, but for home-builders and contractors there are many, many better sources for lumber than Lowe's, Home Depot, etc.

Those of you who've yelled 'frivolous lawsuit' apparently overlooked something. This action was begun by a District Attorney's office, not some ambulance-chasing lawyer; not some citizen with dollar signs in his eyes. It is true that California's consumer protection laws are among the best in the nation. In fact, most of the current national consumer protection laws, and protection laws in general (e.g. smoking regulations), originated in California. From time to time we get one wrong; most of the time we get them right



I also note that much (if not most) of the wailing-and-gnashing-of-teeth in this thread comes from people who have failed to designate their states of residence.
What difference does it make? Stud lumber is priced by the board foot determined by the actual size of the board regardless of what it's called. No one is being ripped off buying a '2x4' that's 1.5" x 3.5". I don't quite get what exactly the DA's office is protecting the consumer from.
I really don't care one way or the other if they force everyone in the lumber industry to label everything the 'actual size'. That's fine. But if this little piece of consumer protection was so important, why has it taken 50 years for them to get around to it.

Not sure why it matters to you, but I have no problem showing what State I'm from.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2014, 07:15 AM
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,974 posts, read 27,005,313 times
Reputation: 15645
Quote:
Originally Posted by catdad7x View Post
What difference does it make? Stud lumber is priced by the board foot determined by the actual size of the board regardless of what it's called. No one is being ripped off buying a '2x4' that's 1.5" x 3.5". I don't quite get what exactly the DA's office is protecting the consumer from.
I really don't care one way or the other if they force everyone in the lumber industry to label everything the 'actual size'. That's fine. But if this little piece of consumer protection was so important, why has it taken 50 years for them to get around to it.

Not sure why it matters to you, but I have no problem showing what State I'm from.
Exactly! To add to this, why exactly is 1.4 million dollars attached to this? Couldn't a cease and desist order have done the same thing?

Just because it's "the D.A." does NOT mean it's not some "ambulance-chasing Attorney" as they do run for office or judgeship right?

I'm glad Nighteyes thinks so highly of CA laws and lawmakers, having been born and raised in the Nanny state of CA and then left for my families sanity/safety I've seen how the rest of the country laughs at, and shakes their heads at CA antics.

I think more counties in CA need to do more of these kinds of things! It's great for the economy of other less insane counties and states.

Reason for nomenclature when dealing in lumber products:
High production builders demanded smooth surfaced lumber to work with, rather than the rough sawn lumber primitive mills had been cranking out that was then hand planed on site About the same time, dried lumber became popular for its dimensional stability and resistance to mold.

Running the formerly rough cut 2×4 through a planer (to create smooth surfaces) and the drying process created a finished piece of lumber which measured 1-5/8” x 3-5/8”.

In the late 1970’s today’s standard sized 1-1/2” x 3-1/2” dry 2×4 was created. Besides ½ inch being easier to measure than 5/8 inch, we can only assume some brilliant bean counter in a sawmill office determined this would allow the recovery of one extra 2×4 board out of every log!
Ref:http://www.hansenpolebuildings.com/b...-truly-2-by-4/

Last edited by jimj; 09-21-2014 at 07:26 AM.. Reason: clarification
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2014, 09:25 AM
 
Location: Cold Springs, NV
4,625 posts, read 12,292,316 times
Reputation: 5233
This thread attempts to show a California bias, but fails to prove it. Why do other retailers meet California's criteria?
http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/dms/programs/qc/labelingreq.pdf

I'm amazed that so little common sense can be found, and the rush to misguided judgment abounds. Clearly, Lowes violated state law that others complied with, and got caught. They have been fined numerous times for flagrant violation such as lead poisoning, and others. I there no reason in such silly posts? Does anyone actually wonder why this may have occurred?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2014, 11:12 AM
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,974 posts, read 27,005,313 times
Reputation: 15645
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWillys View Post
This thread attempts to show a California bias, but fails to prove it. Why do other retailers meet California's criteria?
http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/dms/programs/qc/labelingreq.pdf

I'm amazed that so little common sense can be found, and the rush to misguided judgment abounds. Clearly, Lowes violated state law that others complied with, and got caught. They have been fined numerous times for flagrant violation such as lead poisoning, and others. I there no reason in such silly posts? Does anyone actually wonder why this may have occurred?
How exactly do you KNOW others complied? Did you visit Home Depot and every other lumber supplier?

Flagrant violations? In CA that could mean a whole lot of different things. A company my brother works with was cited for violating air quality regs.
What did they do? Well, they paint stain onto wood products and they made the fatal error of leaving the stain can open.
Yep, between strokes/dipping the brush the can was open. So in order to comply they have to hire someone to stand there and open/close the can between each stroke/dip.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2014, 11:46 AM
 
Location: southern kansas
9,127 posts, read 9,367,405 times
Reputation: 21297
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimj View Post
Exactly! To add to this, why exactly is 1.4 million dollars attached to this? Couldn't a cease and desist order have done the same thing?

Just because it's "the D.A." does NOT mean it's not some "ambulance-chasing Attorney" as they do run for office or judgeship right?

I'm glad Nighteyes thinks so highly of CA laws and lawmakers, having been born and raised in the Nanny state of CA and then left for my families sanity/safety I've seen how the rest of the country laughs at, and shakes their heads at CA antics.

I think more counties in CA need to do more of these kinds of things! It's great for the economy of other less insane counties and states.

Reason for nomenclature when dealing in lumber products:
High production builders demanded smooth surfaced lumber to work with, rather than the rough sawn lumber primitive mills had been cranking out that was then hand planed on site About the same time, dried lumber became popular for its dimensional stability and resistance to mold.

Running the formerly rough cut 2×4 through a planer (to create smooth surfaces) and the drying process created a finished piece of lumber which measured 1-5/8” x 3-5/8”.

In the late 1970’s today’s standard sized 1-1/2” x 3-1/2” dry 2×4 was created. Besides ½ inch being easier to measure than 5/8 inch, we can only assume some brilliant bean counter in a sawmill office determined this would allow the recovery of one extra 2×4 board out of every log!
Ref:Framing Lumber Sizes: Why isn't a 2x4 truly 2" by 4"?
That's the way I remember it too. When I got my first job in an RV factory in 1970, the measurements for stud lumber were 5/8" rather than an even 1/2". I think it changed somewhere around '76 or '77. Some time later sheet plywood started getting thinner from the 'call size' as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2014, 12:52 PM
 
Location: North of Canada, but not the Arctic
21,096 posts, read 19,703,590 times
Reputation: 25612
So, in a pre-1970's building, the 2x4s are an eighth of an inch wider?

...and in a home built in "the olden days", they are actually 2 inches by 4 inches?

I support a law requiring actual dimensions, but this lawsuit shows how bad our legal system is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2014, 01:32 PM
 
Location: southern kansas
9,127 posts, read 9,367,405 times
Reputation: 21297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retroit View Post
So, in a pre-1970's building, the 2x4s are an eighth of an inch wider?

...and in a home built in "the olden days", they are actually 2 inches by 4 inches?

I support a law requiring actual dimensions, but this lawsuit shows how bad our legal system is.

Yes. The house I currently live in was built in the 1920's. Last year I had wind damage to my roof and during repairs some of the original framing was replaced. The old lumber was a full 2" in thickness, and were full width (4" and 6"). They were also held together with square nails.
In the 70's 2x4's were 1-5/8" x 3-5/8".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2014, 12:17 AM
 
7,473 posts, read 4,014,781 times
Reputation: 6462
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV8n View Post
California may be the land of fruits and nuts, but I actually agree with the court on this one (although not necessarily the amount of monetary damages).

A 1.5 x 3.5 inch beam is not the same as a 2 x 4 beam. If you are buying large quantities of them for a building, it could really cause problems or cost money. First of all, you'd have to pay someone to spend time measuring all of them to see if you really got what you needed - a smaller beam would have less structural strength and may not meet the requirements of the architect or structural engineer. It could also mess up overall dimensions of the building. If they got the wrong size, they'd have to take time to return them to the store, which costs the builders money.

Even flat screen TVs give actual dimensions in addition to saying "48 Inch Class" or something like that. And the size of a TV is much less important unless football is on.

You cannot buy a "2x4". They do not exist. The only way is to buy a 4x6 and cut it down on a saw,or have them custom sawn at a saw mill.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2014, 12:41 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
14,317 posts, read 22,381,429 times
Reputation: 18436
Default Absolutely

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendell Phillips View Post
Truth in advertising and consumer protection are not frivolous matters.
Excellent comment. Nothing more to say in this thread.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top