combination squares

[boris]

can anybody help me find a decent square the latest stanley 1912 model has a really poor rule ??????

 

[jasonB]

How deep is your pocket, have a look here and jump topage 691

Jason

 

[CNC Paul]

Hi Boris,

Have a look at the Starrett, the blades have very good markings.


Paul

 

[johnnyb]

there is a chap selling mitutoyo sets on ebay for £60 or so give him a look. ps these are the bees knees btw and and can measure squarer than my tools can cut. probably best as a reference though.

 

[ike]

I recommend this set. They are more than OK for woodwork. The quality of the engraving is as crisp as my Rabone engineers rule.

IMHO, VERY good value for money. The combo square is almost worth it alone.

cheers,

Ike

 

[DaveL]

I have one of the Axminster squares that Ike recommends, its very good value and very usable.

 

[Joe]

Axminster do a 150mm version too

 

[bugbear]

If you want accuracy, buy an engineers (fixed) square; combination squares are versatile and very useful, but it's very hard (i.e. expensive) to make an accurate combi square, and it won't stay accurate if used too much.

BugBear

 

[ike]

Don't know what make or quality of square you have in mind, but I've been using mine for a few years now and it's just as square as it was new. Let's keep it in perspective - for woodworking requirements there's nothing wrong at all with a decent quality combination square.

Ike

 

[bugbear]

Don't know what make or quality of square you have in mind, but I've been using mine for a few years now and it's just as square as it was new. Let's keep it in perspective - for woodworking requirements there's nothing wrong at all with a decent quality combination square.

Ike

Agreed; but woodworkers sometimes need "more" accurate squares for tool or machine setup.

For woodworking (per se), yes, combo square are easily accurate enough.

See previous threads on accuracy/tolerances.

BugBear

 

[woodbloke]

If you want accuracy, buy an engineers (fixed) square; combination squares are versatile and very useful, but it's very hard (i.e. expensive) to make an accurate combi square, and it won't stay accurate if used too much.

BugBear

I completely agree with BB here. I have a very good Rabone and Chesterman cast iron combo square...but it's not square. I only use it for rough marking out and wouldn't dream of using it for checking to see if a component is true. However I do have four engineers squares on the 'Tool Wall' of various sizes, 50, 100, 150 and 300mm and use all of them when needed but the one most used is the 150mm - Rob

 

[ike]

I have a very good Rabone and Chesterman cast iron combo square...but it's not square.

Huh? Can't be that good then :?

 

[woodbloke]

As the rule slides it will wear and the locking mechanism can't be guaranteed to lock it square. In addition, you only need to get a little bit of dirt, dried glue or a tiny piece of wood trapped in there and again...it won't lock down square. They are at best IMO tools for gauging approximate squareness and ought not to be relied on for accurate setting out and checking. Having said that, I wouldn't be without it and use it quite a lot when real accuracy isn't too critical - Rob

 

[bugbear]

I have a very good Rabone and Chesterman cast iron combo square...but it's not square.

Huh? Can't be that good then :?

See previous discussion on "tolerances"; no square is "square", but some squares are closer than others.

BugBear

 

[woodbloke]

...but I wonder how good this one's going to be...costs enough :shock: third down - Rob

 

[Paul Chapman]

I think that the main problem with combination squares concerns compound errors. Most of them inaccurate and by the time you add up all the small inaccuracies that there will be in completing a job, the final fit of the pieces is going to be hopelessly out. Far better, in my view, to start out with a square that is as accurate as possible and that way you will minimise the problem of compound errors.

I do have a couple of combination squares but I use them as depth stops and rulers with a fence - never as squares.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[bugbear]

...start out with a square that is as accurate as possible

No - squares that are "as accurate as possible" need to be used under extreme degrees of cleanliness and temparature control. No woodworker needs these squares (for woodwork!)

Squares should be "accurate enough" for the purpose at hand. Errors are unavoidable; it's the scale of the error that matters, and zero is NOT an option.

BugBear

 

[Paul Chapman]

it's the scale of the error that matters

That's the point I was making.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[ike]

I think that the main problem with combination squares concerns compound errors. Most of them inaccurate and by the time you add up all the small inaccuracies that there will be in completing a job, the final fit of the pieces is going to be hopelessly out.

Oh, that must be where I'm going wrong then (not).

Based on long-term experience and many different jobs all of which were executed without any problems relating to the use of a combination square, I recommend this set to my fellow woodworkers out there. They are more than OK for woodwork. :wink:

PS I grant, the cheapo ones (i.e. DIY shed std / PYO bargain bin) are complete cack.

VERY good value for money.

 

[wayne]

I'm partial to Starrett...especially the older items. I find the accuracy to be quite adequate for my needs, and the fit and finish is very good compared to the "bargain" tools found on the shelves today. Excellent examples of Starrett combination squares can be purchased through online auction venues and at tool sales, etc. for prices comparable to the "bargain" tools.

...and no, I do not store my tools this way. I was just taking partial inventory on Starrett squares I've "accumulated".
Wayne Anderson