What's the best way to make solid wood stair treads?

[Ty Williams]

I'm working on renovating my newly-bought house. We're switching all of it from carpet to hardwood. The stairs are an open-riser design and were constructed as simply a 36" wide 2x10 ( back when they were slightly bigger, I guess) supported on each edge by angle iron screwed into the side of the stringers. I'd like to make solid maple treads to match the maple hardwood floors going in. My initial thought was simply to take 8/4 maple, round over the edges slightly, cut it to length, and screw it in place. However, I'm having trouble finding 8/4 maple wide enough to make the treads. The existing treads are 38x239mm (1.5x9.4"). I'm not able to find 8/4 maple wider than about 150mm (6") in sufficient quantity locally. That leaves me in a bit of a bind and I can think of only two options.

1) Get some of the narrower 8/4 boards, edge joint them, glue them together to form a wider plank, then cut to finished length and width

2) Get a bunch of 4/4 boards and make a "laminated" plank where there's 2 layers of boards on top of each other, each layer consisting of two boards edge jointed together, with the seam between the boards in each layer staggered so there's no vertically lined-up edge joints. Then cut to final size.

3) Anything else you guys might recommend?

So, #1 is the least work but highest cost. Is there any downside to doing it this way? Having a seam all the way through the tread worries me a bit, but it'll be a long grain to long grain glue up, so it ought to be very strong. I just get a wiggins about the glue line failing and plunging through the stairs one day. #2 just seems like an awful lot of time, which is something I don't have much of right now. In theory, I can see it being stronger since there's no seam running through the full thickness of the tread. Does this also make it less likely to warp over time than a solid 8/4 tread?

Thanks guys.

[Sam Murdoch]

Yes to # 1. That will be very very strong and will allow you to joint and flatten all your stock then cull out the least of the straight before you do the glue up. I really like using a Festool domino for this type of glue up as it pretty near perfectly aligns the top faces which eliminates lots of clean up and more planing after the glue up. The dominos do not significantly add any integrity to the glue up however so no matter if you don't use them. The face to face joint properly glued will be plenty rugged.

You haven't said that you are making new stringers too but if you are I would then mortise the stringers to receive the treads rather than simply screwing them in place. Ideally you would set up the mortise so that you could then glue and wedge the treads in place from the underside. I think screwing into the end grain of the treads is the most problematic of your plan. If not housed treads I would consider adding some 1 x cleats to the stringers on which the treads would sit. Or even adding steel angles and recessing or slotting the treads to rest on or slide over the angle. If you were to slot the treads to slide over the angles I would keep the slot in the bottom 3rd of the tread to optimize the bearing surface.

Stand by I'm sure you will get more options.

[Ty Williams]

The stringers are not being replaced unless I find something unexpected as I get into this. The existing treads are NOT screwed through the end grain and the new ones won't be either. As mentioned in the first post, the current setup has the treads sitting on top of angle iron (same job as your recommended cleats) which I'll be re-using.


Good to hear that the easiest option is the best one :lol:

[Sam Murdoch]

Oops - sorry I guess I read through that part too fast I just read that the treads were screwed in place. Maybe that was the subliminal inspiration for my suggestion . Anyway - sounds like you are good to go.

[Jason Roehl]

This is what I would do:

http://www.bairdbrothers.com/10-12-H...ads-P3510.aspx

You also need to consider how the new flooring and new treads will affect the rise from step to step:

http://www.co.stevens.wa.us/landserv...WAYSECTION.pdf (you should check code with your local authorities--they may use a residential building code that varies from this--it may not matter now, but if you sell and it gets inspected, you may have an expensive correction that holds up a sale. It's also a well-known safety issue--large variations in riser heights are hard for pretty much everyone to navigate.)

[Art Mann]

Fortunately, not every State or locale forces one to re-engineer his house to meet current building codes when he sells it.

[Jason Roehl]

Fortunately, not every State or locale forces one to re-engineer his house to meet current building codes when he sells it.

True, nor am I advocating one completely rebuild their stairs. However, this particular bit of code is based on extensive observations. I've done lots of work in houses that are under construction--with unfinished stairs. That means they don't have to meet code until they're done, so, in anticipation of the chosen floor coverings, the riser heights may be inconsistent. I'm fairly coordinated and somewhat athletic, yet I have to pay attention when I go up and down said stairs so that I don't stumble. It's worth the extra effort in measurement and "figgerin" to get the riser heights to code, whether or not you are legally obligated to do so.

For the record, I'm not a big fan of how extensive and restrictive the building codes have become. There are definitely some good things in there, but the code writers (independent organizations write the code, localities subsequently adopt it in years that follow, some quickly, some slowly) are always chasing the "next most unsafe building practice". The wiring practices that caused fires in 10% of the homes in which they were used are long gone from code. Then the 1% stuff went years ago. Then the 0.1% fire dangers were written out of the code, then the 0.01%...you get the idea. At some point, I have to be willing to take responsibility for what I build on my property, even if it's stupid. I don't consider stair riser heights stupid.

[Art Mann]

Ty just recently bought the house. Presumably, the stair geometry met requirements when he bought it or someone else would have had to do the modifying. He is replacing a 2 X 10 with carpet on it with slightly thicker solid maple without carpet on it. The change in tread thickness might be anywhere from zero to maybe 3/8". Except for the bottom step, the height change for subsequent steps will be exactly the same as before. I just don't see how that would be a problem.

Gluing up narrower 8/4 to make sufficient width sounds like a very good alternative if he has the equipment to joint the edges and plane the assemblies to the desired thickness. Of course, that is the way commercial stair treads are made. The cost savings would have to be enough to justify all the work involved versus buying pre-made treads.

[Todd Burch]

Interesting thread. And tread.

I would pick option #1 too. To qualm your concern over the glue failing in, oh, say 40 years or so... you could tongue and groove them. More gluing surface, better alignment during the glue up, and a mechanical "safety net" if the glue did fail.

To Art and Jason - I've never built stairs, but I'm familiar with the concepts of the code. When I built my last house, the builder wanted to know what finish we wanted on the stair treads: carpet or wood. I presume this was due to the fact that the first tread cut for the stringer made a difference. As Art states, after the first tread, it's easy to keep the rise consistent. Perhaps, in Ty's case, for his "case", , he might could adjust the thickness of the first tread (+ or - as needed) to compensate and keep the rise consistent.

Ty, have you measured the rise from the finished floor to the what will be the top of the first tread, and also the top of the top tread to the higher floor's landing, and compared that with the mid-stair rise? If it were me, I'd be checking the rise for each tread on the whole case.

Todd