Top quality Engineer's Square

[whiteant]

Hi, Looking for a good quality Engineer's Square.
Can anyone recommend a maker and an online shop to purchase one?

TIA

 

[Mike.C]

I have this Incra and it is spot on.

http://www.rutlands.co.uk/cgi-bin/psProdDet.cgi/GSQR7

Cheers

Mike

 

[woodbloke]

I use the engineers squares from Axminster, made from steel. I always worry a bit that when I use an aluminium square with a very sharp knife I'm going to shave a little bit of the side of it, probably never happen. The Axminster squares are quite good, I use a 150mm one for general use but have smaller 100 and 50mm M&W squares as well - Rob

 

[Mike.C]

I also use a very sharp marking knife and I have never had any problems.

Cheers

Mike

 

[Dan Clark]

I have the same Incra square and like it a bunch. Actually, I bought the large and small one, which was a probably a mistake. The small one just sits in the box.

Althought they are very accurate, the biggest advantage (IMO) is the thickness of the metal. It makes them easy to hold and easy to get lined up. I have some steel engineer squares that are the traditional thin ones. Now they just sit in their nice pretty wood box.

Dan.

 

[DomValente]

Mitutoyo make very good engineers squares.

Dom

 

[jasonB]

Moore & Wright also make decent squares, an grade B (workshop) one should be fine for woodworking purposes. Just hope you don't want a big one as they go upto £650 :!: for a 24".

You can buy them here, jump to page 584

Jason

PS I still use the one I made at school.

 

[engineer one]

the obvious question that has not been asked is what do you want to do with it???

unless you intend to use it as a reference item, then it is often better to use a combination square, which gives you the chance to draw 45degree lines too.

axminster do a decent one, but if you can find an engineers square, then look for m&w or starrett, or as dom says mitotoyu

paul :wink:

 

[Paul Chapman]

then it is often better to use a combination square, which gives you the chance to draw 45degree lines too.

In my experience, these are probably the most inaccurate "squares" of all. I have a couple which I use for a lot of things, but never as squares, because they are simply not square.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[engineer one]

interesting paul, i never have any trouble with their being square :roll:

a lot depends upon the quality and the tightening mechanism i guess.

also depends upon the maker too i would think.

actually for woodworking, i use the winged square that trend now sell,
i think it is 3m's is very accurate, and adjustable, plus the wings mean you can go round 3 corners which is pretty useful.

another way to go is one of the veritas saddle squares, the go round two corners, which minimises errors.

will go and check my combination square again, but am pretty happy. :lol:

paul :wink:

 

[Woody Alan]

Paul I have had the same and opposite experience. My Starret combo is as accurate as could be wanted certainly as accurate as the axminster engineers square but more importantly it's easier to use being a bit lighter. I have a rabone combo which was slightly out but like anything else it was fettled to be good enough to use, a bit of draw filing on the blade and polish on a stone. I agree Paul (eng 1) combo for the woodshop with engineers square for ref if needed. I bought a japanese small square form CHT wasn't impressed out of the box, It's square now,I think you get what you pay for.

cheers Alan

 

[engineer one]

being a pessimist, and typical of anyone using their tools, i think the other problem with an engineers square, is what happens when you drop them

somehow the over long thin arm can be dinged out of accuracy quite easily if you manage to drop it. in my experience, the combination square is more able to handle the day to day abuse.

when bought, or even in the store, check that it is square, it ain't difficult.

get your favourite cut edge, mdf works well enough and draw a line along the long arm. then reverse the square and draw another line, if in the same place, it is square, if not well now you know. :roll:

paul :wink:

 

[Paul Chapman]

I always worry a bit that when I use an aluminium square with a very sharp knife I'm going to shave a little bit of the side of it, probably never happen.

I've found that, if you are not careful, you can sometimes shave a thin sliver off a steel square or straight edge if the knife is very sharp :shock:

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[engineer one]

ok, just checked a couple of things.

i actually have 3 combination squares too. a short one taiwanese/general make, which i use for checking on my tormek in sharpening. only 3inches long,it has very small error possibilities.

i also have two longer 12inch ones(boasting i know )
one is a cheap and cheerful ally one. checking that i have found it is about 0.5mm out over 10 inches, which is not too bad.

i have also checked the axminster one i had bought some time ago.
that is i would say pretty spot on. interestingly of course, if you try to get the whole length of the ruler in use, you build up the inaccuracy since it has to be lined up with the ruler along the whole of the slot. so in fact you only get about 10 inches of useable ruler.

actually, i rarely use my combination for checking square, but i do use it as a marking gauge, much more accurate than a tape. and unless you make your own "proper gauge" rarely do they come in sizes of more than about 6 inches. so the combination square is a quick and dirty way of marking out, and with the square part, you can run along a board and get a pretty accurate line.

another useful tool is also a veritas one, which is an attachment that screws on to a steel ruler of standard 25mm width, so far i have found it too to be pretty accurate and square. the also do an adaptor which screws on to a rafter square which allows you to rest the edge of the square against a board edge.

you could also buy one of the plaster board 1200 squares, i am amazed how accurate they are and stay. 8)

finally you need both a 3,4,5 square and a set of pinch rods to ensure that things are square. and you can make the 3,4,5 out of a piece of mdf or ply, whilst the pinch rods are also easily made at home from strips of 3/4 wide by 1/2inch thick hard wood clamped in the middle, and extendible.

paul :wink:

 

[Paul Chapman]

which is not too bad.

Well it is, actually - it's either accurate or it's not :wink: It's all about compound errors. A little bit out might seem OK but those little bits add up. When you come to put several pieces together, and they are all a little bit out, you find that the whole job is p****d. And with combination squares, if you want to use the outside edges, you have to have the blade fully extended, which is when its accuracy is at its worst.

If you are happy with the accuracy of yours, Paul, that's fine but I certainly no longer use mine to check squareness - but they are very handy for depth measurements; checking distances, say, from the router base plate to the edge of the cutter; making parallel pencil lines along boards, etc.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[engineer one]

i do agree paul, and i think the really important thing is to be happy with whatever tool you use.

when i trained all those years ago, we used two squares one for laying out, and the other to check. i do however think that we have a little more flexibility in wood than we used to have with metal.

the most important thing is to minimise the compounding of errors.

by that i mean make for instance one "h" frame, and ensure that is square
then make the other etc.

i think that when one starts one is so determined to finish that one does not dry assemble prior to final assembly, ( i know that is a no no with
dovetails :roll: ), and then you can i think reduce the accumulated errors to some extent.

of course the really strange thing is how accurate your eye is once you get it back into practice, so often, the square is only a guide anyway.

if you are not using man made boards, then wood movement will impact on your squareness, and your ideas thereof too i think.
anyway that's another can of worms. :lol:

if you look at how devon woody builds his boxes, he seems to use a lot of jigs to ensure flatness and square. i think many of us tend not to use jigs for "normal" work which may also exacerbate the angularity.

thank good for bessey clamps i say :lol: :twisted:

paul :wink:

 

[woodbloke]

which is not too bad.

Well it is, actually - it's either accurate or it's not :wink: It's all about compound errors. A little bit out might seem OK but those little bits add up. When you come to put several pieces together, and they are all a little bit out, you find that the whole job is p****d. And with combination squares, if you want to use the outside edges, you have to have the blade fully extended, which is when its accuracy is at its worst.

If you are happy with the accuracy of yours, Paul, that's fine but I certainly no longer use mine to check squareness - but they are very handy for depth measurements; checking distances, say, from the router base plate to the edge of the cutter; making parallel pencil lines along boards, etc.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

I also have a decent enough R&C combo square but I only use it for a bit of 'rough' work, eg if I want to put a pencil line across a board for cross cutting to size then this sort of square is very handy. For accurate work tho' it stays on the 'Tool Wall' and something else is used instead :wink: - Rob

 

[Mike.C]

The thing I like about the Incra is they guarantee that it is square when you receive it, and it will stay that way even if you drop it.

Cheers

Mike

 

[DomValente]

The thing I like about the Incra is they guarantee that it is square when you receive it, and it will stay that way even if you drop it.

Cheers

Mike

Uhuh I'm not a cynic, honest.

Paul I agree with Paul, anything that is inaccurate gets chucked out, as he says, those little bits add up.

Dom

 

[engineer one]

interesting i have been following this thread today whilst doing some cad work for a book i am involved in.

i am re-drawing gear for working a water scoop on an old 19th century locomotive tender. so accuracy has been high in my mind.

however i keep getting told that woodwork can never be as accurate as metal work, so the dichotomy is interesting :lol:

i agree that your tools that are intended to be square should be square, but i wonder how many of us actually re check the scms, table saw, band saw EVERY time we make an adjustment :?

truly errors accumulate, but that is why you use only one measuring tool on any one job, and only one square or type of square.

the question that was asked, was without a reason, since we do not know what he intends to do with the tool. so whilst it is good to aim for complete accuracy, it may not actually be what is required. :roll:

as i have said, you can obviously make some adjustments in assembly, and if you make sub assemblies, and each is square and the correct length, the whole will also be square.

now back to turning 2d engineering drawings into what i want in 3d

paul :wink: