>original shrinkflation
Really nigger?
Talking out of your ass because you don't understand lumber.
2x4 are the rough cut (rough sawn) dimensions.
Dimensional lumber "finishes" smaller when they cut it straighter, smooth the surface, and radius the edges.
Yup, now I know you are retarded
Rough-Sawn vs. Finished: When a log is initially cut, it's a "rough-sawn" 2x4, meaning it's 2 inches by 4 inches.
Drying and Shrinkage: As the wood dries, it shrinks, reducing its dimensions.
Planing: The wood is then planed (or surfaced) to create a smooth, finished surface, further reducing the size.
Standardization: In the US, the lumber industry standardized these sizes in the 1920s and 1960s.
Nominal vs. Actual: The "2x4" designation refers to the nominal or rough-cut dimensions, while the actual finished dimensions are smaller.
Length Remains: The length of the lumber (e.g., 8 feet, 10 feet) is typically accurate.
Point being, it's not shrinkflation as some retard posted
No.
The problem is the drying and subsequent shrinking and warping. The mill can cut straight but the lumber twists, bends, and shrinks inconsistently after it's initially cut from the log. This is why subsequent milling is required to straighten the boards and give them a uniform dimension after they are dried. It's not shrinkflation