Woodworking squares

[Jmac80]

Hi
Can anyone recommend a good quality square for setting up my mft/3 and other related tasks like kapex, bandsaw fence etc etc.
I see woodpeckers did a mft one time tool square but that thing was super pricey and i didn't like how it was adjustable, I would like just a solid one piece square.
What's the verdict on the cheaper woodpeckers squares like the "woodpeckers precision square 12"
Thanks

 

[Beau]

I would look for an engineers square as personal experience of squares for woodworkers is an angle close to 90 degrees. Moore and Wright squares used to be reliably accurate. Still using various ones which are now 20+ years old and still spot on.

 

[Billy Flitch]

Look up Joseph Marpels . The last of the Marples family still producing wood working tools in Sheffield.
Top class products.

 

[custard]

If you have some good quality dogs (Parf dogs, Kwas dogs etc) there's a lot you can do on the MFT/3 without a square. You may need an accurately parallel spacer bar to reach from the dog holes out to the fence but it's an alternative that's worth considering.

I often use a large draughtsman's square for machine setting by the way, you get better accuracy from the plastic versions than with anything other than a really expensive metal square, plus they lay flat on the table!

Good luck

 

[Mike.S]

I would look for an engineers square as personal experience of squares for woodworkers is an angle close to 90 degrees. Moore and Wright squares used to be reliably accurate. Still using various ones which are now 20+ years old and still spot on.

+1

I also use various old (but checked) M&W engineers squares.

 

[Eric The Viking]

3:4:5 & 5:12:13

Those are the proportions of the sets of sides of two different special right angled triangles. I was surprised that there are many more of them than I realised (see the link), but 3 : 4 : 5 is probably the most generally useful.

The point is that you can make your own very accurate square fairly easily, and the process means you satisfy yourself that it is square, too. There are lots of ways with geometry to draw two lines at exact right angles to each other, basically the bigger you make the triangle, the less significant the errors are.

Personally I'd make a 3 : 4 : 5 triangle out of good ply, with an adjustable edge (not the hypoteneuse!). If you draw out a large pair of intersecting lines at right angles on a board you can set it and check it easily with a straightedge.

You don't even need to be that complicated. Get a new piece of MDF with a clean straight edge, and mark a line "right angled" to the edge very lightly. Flip the square and mark another line right next to the first one (square). Check they're parallel. If not, adjust the square and try again until they are as parallel as you can get them.

There is a British Standard for squareness (BS 939, latest being 2007) - I have one engineer's square thus marked. I also have several (sadly) that claimed squareness but weren't (out of the box). The one-piece ones are a good idea, but beware - they can be fragile if they're made of aluminium extrusion, as a ding on a reference edge usually makes a tiny "crater rim" that lifts it off the thing you're setting very slightly. They are easily damaged in transit, too (if they're two piece), and you should expect to pay a lot for something big and accurate.

I don't yet own one*, but I am slightly puzzled why you need a square at all to set up an MFT: Simply having a good parallel piece of stock as a spacer lets you do the back rail, and then the cutting rail is easily set square to both that and the table dog holes. There are some really good videos on this, including some very quick setup procedures.

For Kapex, bandsaw etc, you probably need a range of different-sized small engineer's squares to suit - try Chronos. Personally I'd insist they are BS marked, as I said some cheap squares are quite off.

E.

*I intend to get one as soon as funds permit as it's a really good idea.

 

[Zeddedhed]

am slightly puzzled why you need a square at all to set up an MFT: Simply having a good parallel piece of stock as a spacer lets you do the back rail, and then the cutting rail is easily set square to both that and the table dog holes. There aare some really good videos on this, including some very quick setup procedures.

How else would you set up the table for cutting without a square? You can't be sure that the angle indicator is right and showing a true 90, so you have to use a square once everything is attached - unless there is some witchcraft that i'm not aware of (there usually is!!)

Could you give some pointers to the particular vids please

 

[Eric The Viking]

am slightly puzzled why you need a square at all to set up an MFT: Simply having a good parallel piece of stock as a spacer lets you do the back rail, and then the cutting rail is easily set square to both that and the table dog holes. There aare some really good videos on this, including some very quick setup procedures.

How else would you set up the table for cutting without a square? You can't be sure that the angle indicator is right and showing a true 90, so you have to use a square once everything is attached - unless there is some witchcraft that i'm not aware of (there usually is!!)

Could you give some pointers to the particular vids please

Sorry - was tidying my post above, when you did yours! Fingers fight brain at this time of day.

I thought 'truth' on the MFT was the dog holes. So you put a pair in the back row and set the fence to be parallel to them with a spacer. Then you set the protractor by aligning it against something running front-back against another pair of dog holes.

But the dog holes are always going to be much more accurate for simple angles than the protractor, as there's almost no error if they're not very worn. It's asking an awful lot of even something made by Festool to expect it to project accuracy, because of the way the protractor is designed. I have 'click stops' on my mitre saw, but always check them, as there's a tiny amount of slop. On the MFT protractor arrangement, it can be exaggerated, simply because the thing is so small.

On videos, I don't have them bookmarked, but I searched for "Festool MFT setup" and some good ones came up. Peter Parfitt comes to mind, but I watced a couple of good American ones too. A few secs in and it's obvious whether the presenter knows what they're talking about! One of the US ones described making setup blocks for the MFT, to calibrate the distance scale, too.

I think the only possibly tricky bit is the spacer block to get the back rail correct. The implication is that Festool don't supply anything with the kit.

E.