>I'm tired of buying squares that aren't or don't stay that way. Got stung at the orange borg again. My tool budget has alway kept me at the low end so it's my fault.
Guess I'm going to have to step up and bite the bullet. Other than Starrets is there any other quality brands I should be looking at? In particular, I'm looking for a good one 8" to 12" long
For my framing square I may use a ball pean hammer to adjust it into square. I just don't like looking at the dents after the fact. It makes me mad that I have to do it at all. I feel that I should be able to expect a square to be so, new from the store.
>How do you check your squares for square? One thing to be very careful of is that if you use a straight edge and flip the square, the straight edge has to be absolutely straight. If you actually are on a low budget, and are not just pretending, you could make a really nice square with a bit of maple.
>It'd be hard to imagine any other square for the same money that'd be any better, and even harder to imagine one for less money that'd be anywhere as good.
I know dollars can be scarce, but a Starrett square is just about the first thing I'd buy (and was, as I recall). We're talking 50 to 60 dollars here. You could waste that much wood in erroneous cuts and refittings, not to mention the stress, using a square that's significantly off. I'm not saying you need a square as accurate as a Starrett for everything, but when you do need it, it'll be there. And that satin rule sure is easy on the eyes. Should last you a long long time, too.
>Manney's in Lexington KY was selling some very nice looking squares at an attractive price. I bought the set and I am pleased. They are well made and easy to read black on brushed stainless steel ruleing. Brass and some kind of wood handles. One could be fooled into thinking they were made by Bridge City.
>If you buy a new Starrett be certain it is made square and all correct. I mail ordered for a 4" adjustable and it was out about 0.008" in one inch, that is about 0.032" in the 4 inch blade.
I called Starrett and they said I could return it and THEY would decide if it was defective or not, did not take my word? How long? = about 6 weeks backlog.
My dealer accepted the Starrett in return for credit,,,,,no I did not replace it with another Starrett product.
>I bought one of these squares from LV it is right on the money and cheap not pretty IMO. They also sell a very good framing square. I do the same thing check it out when it comes home one square that's no good can ruin alot of wood in a hurry. As with all LV stuff any problems they take care to fix it Very Fast.
>I have a Starett combination square and a Starett 4" double square, both of which are accurate and useful. However, unless I actually need a combination square, I reach for one of my enginee's squares. I bought a set of these at a reasonable price (2", 6", "12). They are accurate and not as prone to go out if dropped, and substantally less expensive.
I don't remember where I bought mine, but Woodcraft offers the 2", 4", and 6" as a set for around $35, but I think you can buy them separately. I may have gotten the 12" from Hartville Tool. Unless you actually need a combination square, I would recommend considering a engineer's square because of the lower price. There may be a variety of these out there but look for ones whose accurancy meets Britsh Standards. My were made in India, but meet those standards.
I share your rant. I ask one thing of a square: that it be square to a relatively high degree of tolerance. I find it unbelievable that most squares aren't square. A square that isn't, doesn't meet the defintion of even being a product. Unsquare squares should go by the name, "near-square" of something like that.
>I agree engineer's squares are the handiest for most work, and tend to be highly accurate, stable, and sturdy.
MSC's usual price on the set of three from Mitutoyo (3 1/2", 5", and 7", hardened blade with wide unhardened beam and .00063" squareness) is usually $79.39, which saves $16.31 if you bought them separately. Right now, though, you can get the set for $39.99, which is not bad at all. I bought a set for that price a couple years ago and they're superb compared to the cheap imports that all indicated differently.
>A Stanley 46-123 12" combo square is about $16 at Lowe's or some of the other big boxes, and is pretty accurate, as well as easy to adjust to square if out (no measurable difference between my 12" Starrett and the Stanley). The Stanley comes with a satin chrome blade, which I find preferable to a cheap stamped out job.
I keep the Stanley in my bags for trim/joint layout work, 6" and 12" Starrett combos on the bench, and a 4" Starrett double square in the apron.
The Stanley will give you good service at the bench for a long time, then gracefully retire to the traveling kit when you're flush and eyeing the high end stuff.
We've had this discussion before so I won't bore you with my lengthy counter rant. The Readers Digest version is you should be able to get by fine without a super accurate square. If you are setting up machines that's one thing, but for what we do, you shouldn't need a perfect square. Mine are wooden, and my joints look fine. There are techniques and joinery that allow for the inaccuracy.
Like you, I went in search of perfect squares, and then learned to true squares. I once thought what I'm talking about was baloney. The only answer that made sense was to own perfect squares.
But the lesson is a valuable one, and you never really need to learn it when your tools are perfect. They become a sort of crutch or worse, an obstacle between you and learning and the important principles about eliminating error, eliminating stack-up, etc.
If you go back into our archives, you might find that discussion. It may include how to fix a rosewood stocked square and techniques for using unsquare squares.
Just thinking of the cost of starret squares, I think the time spent would be worth your time.
>"But the lesson is a valuable one, and you never really need to learn it when your tools are perfect. They become a sort of crutch or worse, an obstacle between you and learning and the important principles about eliminating error, eliminating stack-up, etc."
I certainly don't think one needs machinist grade instruments to make a Windsor chair, stick a moulding, or do just about any other thing with wood, but then I don't see any real advantage in not using them, either, especially when they are relatively cheap. Totally useful dial calipers are fourteen dollars, these days, a top-grade engineer's square can be had for under twenty dollars, and the Starrett combination square with 12" ruler is around sixty. One of each will add up to a hundred, which is still a lot cheaper than many handtools most of us own.
While I agree there are many ways to compensate for not having these tools, straightforward and otherwise, I don't see that owning and using them really hobbles anyone. Sure, I made a couple favorite squares when I was a bookbinder, nice bone micarta with easy to read scrim'ed scales. But I can't think owning dependable (and repeatable) measuring instruments is any more a crutch than owning a good quality musical instrument would be, especially when learning, which has caused so many people to throw in the towel.
>I hate fighting my equipment. Sometimes it's my own ignorance and sometimes it's the tool. You also outgrow stuff. some tools that I thought perfectly fine turned out to have limits as my work got better and I was expecting more from them.
But I also find I use far fewer tools then I used to as I understand how the tools I use are supposed to be used.
>... then you must look at the squares made by Colen Clenton. These are too pricey for me, I'm afraid, but they are The Best.
Not only are they works of art, featuring wonderful Aussie timbers, but they are adjustable (or should that read "correctable") if the setting ever moves.
I have a relatively cheap 4" brass and rosewood Colen Clenton copy made by Crown which is great. Unfortunately they do not make a larger size than this. For 12" I have a Starrett combination. I have used several brands and this is by far the best of the lot. It adjusts very smoothly and is always spot-on accurate.
>A quick way to tell if the square you are holding at the store is square is to set it on the floor and check against the floor tiles. The tiles have to be very square to lay tight.
I guess this won't work if the store has concrete floors though....
>I want to thank everyone who took the time to reply to my message above. I truly appreciate all of the advice given.
I guess my problem is that I don't accept an error tolerance of 0.030" @ 12" as being square.
The concept of building furniture in an out of square condition is very interesting. I think I've been doing that all my life. The reality is I know how to compensate for errors but want the set up as close to right as I can get it.
>Bought a batch of "Prehistoric tools" or that was the eBay descriptor, certainly looked like a Starrett 12" and the 6" too...
It was, $9 inc shipping for a 12" and a 6" Starrett square, several "craftsman made" mortise chisels and some other bits and pieces of dirt rust and debris most of which I haven't worked out a use for.
Perhaps I ought to post them to see if anyone else knows...
>Hard to go wrong at that price. Although they get more use on machine setup than at the joiner's bench, I do keep the small one there most of the time. Very handy size for small work; frames or carcase.
