Double & Sliding Square

Re: Double & Sliding Square

MikeW

>Hi Roberto,

I can only offer my thoughts here.

As for the sliding square, while I would think the etching would be nice in either mm or imperial, imperial was possibly chosen due to at least intial market considerations.

I use metric measurements a lot. But the way I would probably use the sliding square (pretty nifty looking btw) would be to mark off via steel rule and set the diamond point on the mark, tighten and run the line. Reason? I try to use as few different measuring dvices on a given project.

As for the double square... It looks an awful lot like the Brown and Sharpe I have, which has both measurements. If you need mm markings and the LV version doesn't have them, The Best Things has the B&S for a decent price (though it's nearly double).

I keep measuring devices to a minimum for accuracy. And, when I do purchase a new mesuring device I take along my 6" Starrett rule that has both imp. and mm and check them against it.

LV review

bill tindall

>I bought one and it was not machined right. Promptly replaced as expected by the fine LV Company. The 4" version stays on the bench. I use it more than any tool I own, for measuring more than squaring. It is just astonishing how often I find uses for it. Starret makes one and it is on sale from one of the tool places, maybe Travers, about $34.

Ruling- I do wish it was NOT ruled so finely on one side (1/32 and 1/64). I find this ruling difficult to read and uselessly precise for woodworking. My preference would be 1/16 or mm ruling. I will bet that Starret has the mm ruling.

Re: Double & Sliding Square

William Duffield, on the Cohansey

>Well, I guess I've been spoiled by the Starrett combination squares I've gotten used to. This year, I decided I needed a 4" double square, and since the Lee Valley was about half the price of an equivalent Starrett, I ordered one. I sent it right back, and ordered a Starrett from Tools For Working Wood instead. I find this form factor to be very useful for lots of things around the shop, including measuring wood and setting up tools and jigs. There were two reasons I didn't like the Lee Valley offering. The rule was about a hundredth short of 4" long, and all four sets of graduations did not start from the same zero point. I figure this could have been a sample defect and another one might have been fine, but it had another minor, annoying problem that I found I could not live with. I am often turning the ruler over and turning it around in the head, depending on what I am measuring. This square was very finicky to get the rule remounted in the head, taking a lot more time than is typical of a Starrett. Again, this may have been a sample defect. I cannot be sure, since I only saw one square.

Tools for Working Wood will be able to supply you with a Starrett double square with the same size head, but with with a 100 mm. metric rule, which is approximately 4" long. Also, Starrett makes a center finding head that fits the rules in this size range. This head is very useful if you are turning spindles. Starrett also makes a larger double square head, with a level, that holds either 6" or 150 mm. rules. Note also that Starrett does not offer the option of the hardened head in the 4" size double square, that they do offer in larger size double and combination squares.

I will say that I got great service from Lee Valley. They accepted the square I returned without question, and even paid return postage. That's more than one would expect, since I didn't ask for a replacement that worked better. OTOH, I got the Starrett overnight, or at worst next business day.

Re: Double & Sliding Square

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>I can't respond on the LV squares, but I will say that I own a little diemaker's square (like the Starrett 453), 2-1/2" rule that has been way more useful than I realized it would be when I paid $15 for it at an estate sale.

Re: LV review

William Duffield, on the Cohansey

>With reference to my review, below, of this tool: I agree that for most woodworking purposes, the /32 and /64 scales are not useful, and in fact confusing, because they are so difficult for my eyes to read. That's why I find it important to be able to quickly change the orientation of the ruler in the head, so I can get rid of the extra confusing marks. However, there are times, usually when working with power tools like table saw fences and blade exposures, finger joint jigs, etc., where I find the precision of the /64 scale quite useful.

Mine (Starrett) is either on my bench or in my shirt pocket. The 6" Starrrett combination square, which I found difficult to put into or take out of a pocket already filled with pens, pencils, 3x5 cards (spare brain), a dog biscuit and a card scraper, without throwing everything onto the floor, now stays one step removed, in the tool rack on top of the bench, or on the wall directly behind me.

Starrett Series 13M in 100 and 150 mm

Todd Stock

>Starrett has metric double squares - try Series 13M in the 100mm (4") or 150mm (6"). The 100mm is far more useful as an apron square than the 150mm. If you want a 6" square, go with the 150mm combo square, which does not have that honking big stock. I don't own a 12" combo square, after having figured out that it's pretty much a bench tool (18" blade is far more useful at the bench).

I've tried the lower priced Woodcraft (Woodhaven?) double squares, which are similar to the LV and the Garrett Wade stuff. I found that even if the rule is accurate, the stock is too thick, poorly machined, or the retaining screw and spring make for poor setting. Traded up for the Starrett.

The Starretts have a spring mechanism to maintain tension, and that alone makes them worth the extra buckage.

Re: Starrett Series 13M in 100 and 150 mm

William Duffield, on the Cohansey

>I agree, an 18" rule is very useful. I have had a carpenter grade combo square in that length for many years. I recently bought an old 12" Starrett with three hardened heads. Of course, Starrett makes an 18" rule that fits the 12" heads, so one of these days, I'll pick one up at some old tool sale, to complement the 12" rule, so I can put the cheap square out to pasture in LOML's toolbox.

I will point out that while the 12", 18" and 24" rules are interchangable, they will not fit the heads for the 6" (33 series) rules, which I believe is the type of the Starrett 6" combo square carried by Woodcraft. Also, those 6" rules and heads are not interchangable with the 13 series 4" and 6" sizes. If all this is getting too complicated for someone just getting into a purchase of one of these squares, just call Joel, and he will clarify everything for you.

Re: Double & Sliding Square

paul womack

>I own one of these (Starret #14, from a yard sale) and a craftsman made model, slighly larger, with an ungraduated blade.

I do not recall ever using the graduations. I do find small sliding squares very helpful - particularly for David Charlesworth's excellent "double the error when edge planing" trick.

I will admit to owing and using a dedicated depth gauge if I want to check a mortise.

For purely financial reasons therefore, I'd go with the Veritas - if you can't find a good yard sale :-)

BugBear