Recently, I've been following a growing update at the site of Michael Taylor, at landmarktrees.net, about what was at least the second largest tree ever recorded in the last few centuries, if not the second largest. Crannell Creek Giant coast redwood He's been assembling reference sources much more complete than some vague mentions that I have read elsewhere. Total wood volume would have been over 60,000 cubic feet, quite a bit bigger than General Sherman giant sequoia (52,000 cubic feet). A log by log acount published early in the century, showed over 20' diameter at dbh, and a remarkable 15' diameter at 200' high. Total height 308' tall. Although a larger coast redwood was never photographed, I think Taylor suspects the Lindsey Creek coast redwood existed. It would have been 19' diameter at 130' high, whereas Crannell Creek Giant was 17' diameter at 130' high. Taylor wrote that Lindsey Creek tree was covered in an article, as having "535,000 board feet of merchantable timber", which he said indicates a 90,000 cubic foot coast redwood. That would make the Lindsey Creek redwood virtually twice the size of General Sherman. I had wondered if an image even existed for these. Apparently at least one large image exists in a museum. "merchantable timber" is only part of a tree's wood volume. A 90,000 cubic foot coast redwood would have volume of 1,080,000 board feet if wood and bark were dice-up. Either coast redwood sounds realistic, because presently, only 7 giant sequoia known to exist, are bigger than the largest coast redwood. So giant sequoia are not the largest trees in the world: but only 7 of them, at present. Recently, Taylor visited a "Fieldbrook Stump" about 1000 feet from where the Lindsey Creek Giant grew. Some comments on the internet suggested that maybe the Fieldbrook stump was a double tree. Taylor confirmed that the stump was a single trunk, and that this one also would have been larger than any standing coast redwood known today.