Thread: Colen Clenton square - which wood?

I don't think Colen would use it if it wasn't stable. It's hard and very pretty.

i've had my clenton rose sheoak 10 inch square and marking gauge for 1 year now.

the timber is still very beautiful and has no damage to it at all. no cracks or splits due to unstable timber.

i would be very surprised if colen would put that much effort into making these highly precise instruments with unstable timber.

justin.

Bring it home:

Lost Art Press Blog - For Sale: Colen Clenton 8" Adjustable Try Square

My 8" is the blackwood

I am very very happy with it.

Colen is (justifiably) very proud of his tools and workmanship. If you were to have any problem with the tool whatsoever I am very confident that he would correct or replace it.

I see it as a low risk purchase, he looks after his customers, tools and his reputation with equal care.

Thanks for all your responses, and for reaffirming my belief that these are world class tools.

Justin, I wasn't worried about cracks or splits, just minor wood movement, figuring even very small changes would not be good news for a square. Out of interest, how often do people actually use the calibration screws?

Originally Posted by Saw Crack

Bring it home:
Lost Art Press Blog - For Sale: Colen Clenton 8" Adjustable Try Square

Mmm, the Blackwood also looks good. Chris Schwarz is only willing to post his current swag of excess tools within the US, so I'll let that one continue racking up international fame and glory for its maker. The local new price is not very different from that anyway.

Still deciding... I'll put an order in tomorrow and post a pic when it arrives.

Haven't read any other posts but I don't think Colen would use a timber that wasn't suitable...

The Sheoak is very nice (I swapped this one with Colen for a marking knife set - I think I got the better deal) ..



I think that the Ebony is nicer (top left) ..



I like Tassie Blackwood (probably my favourite wood) but the Rose Sheoak cutting gauge is very striking (These were prizes last year in the Aust Wood Review Toolmaking comp) ...



Sorry the pics are not clearer.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Now your just showing off Derek

A very nice collection you have there indeed.


Just a question (not trying to hijack this thread) but I am in the market for a quality square and I am looking at a starrett combination Starrett® Combination Squares - Lee Valley Tools

How does a combo square compare to a dedicated square, such as Colin's for accuracy?

Cheers, Andy

Now your just showing off Derek

Absolutely Andy!

I really do not need all these squares. I do use the mitres and the 8" square frequently. The 8" has a really nice balance. I considered selling off a couple, but they have sentimental value, and so I decided to keep them.

I probably use a 6" Starrett double-square the most. This is a great square for joinery. For wide boards I have a 12" Starrett combo. In fact I have one in metric and one in imperial. All purchased on Fleabay (US) for cents in the Dollar. Look there before going retail.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Originally Posted by Simms

Somehow I've persuaded myself to buy a Colen Clenton 8" try square. I like the look of the Rose Sheoak version, but was a little concerned after asking my old mate Wikipedia for details about this timber. Wikipedia claims (without reference) that "Rose Sheoak has the largest contraction along the grain (12%) of any Australian wood and needs to be dried carefully to get full value as a useful timber."

This sounds like Wiki has got it wrong (again!). Radial and tangential shrinkage is typically 20 and 40s times more than longitudinal shrinkage. Base on a longitudinal shrinkage of 12% this would make the Radial Shrinkage 240% and the Tangential Shrinkage 480% which would make all Rose Sheoak pieces into pretzels, Actual R and T shrinkages for sheoaks are 3 - 6.5% and 6 - 9% making the longitudinal shrinkage around 0.08 to 0.3% ie not much. Quoting another Wiki page
"Shrinkage from the pith outwards, or radially, is usually considerably less than tangential shrinkage, while longitudinal (along the grain) shrinkage is so slight as to be usually neglected."

In most cases longitudinal shrinkage of softwoods is considered so small as to be ignored.

Here is a table listing species followed by two numbers which are the % T & R shrinkage. I cannot find any data for Rose Sheoak, but Karri oak is supposed to be a close relative and you can see it's nothing special.


Karri oak 8 6.5
Jarrah 7 5
Karri 10 4.5
River Redgum 8 4
Spotty 6 4
Tassie blue 14 7
Rock Oak 6.5 3.5
WA Sheoak 4.5 1.2
Swamp Sheoak 9.2 3.2

Sometimes T & R values are added together as a measure of shrinkage Which might be what was done for the Rose Sheoak.

Thanks for the other pics Derek, very nice. Think I've seen a couple of them before, actually - your tools seem to have a habit of becoming internet celebrities. As for my decision, maybe the solution is to buy one tool in each wood. I won't be able to get that idea out of my head now.

I gather the ebony we're looking at here is an African or Indian timber, not an Australian "ebony"? I like the idea of Australian tools made from Australian wood.

Andy:
Until now I've just had a Stanley combination square. Because of the sliding mechanism I've never trusted the thing - always get the impression it's sneaking out of square on the sly. Of course whenever I look it squarely in the eye and test it by the scribe and flip method, it's dead on again, much to my annoyance. The Starretts would be better, and for woodworking I doubt you'd notice any difference between a Starrett combination and a good fixed square when new.

I'm going for the CC square because I rarely use any of the combinationy bits, but will also grab a 3" Starrett engineers square for the purpose of being handy and ridiculously accurate.

A similar question was asked here in a very old thread.

Ah, thanks BobL, that's the disconfirmation of Wikipedia's blatant lies I was after. Yes, 480% tangential shrinkage seems quite a bit. Perhaps they were thinking of old chip packets in the oven? Some of the technical gibberish in the other article was a bit beyond me, but I like to think you've made me a skerrick wiser.

There doesn't seem to be any such thing as an unhappy CC tool owner, which suggests none of his squares have ever been spontaneously pretzelled.

I had a look at the Colen Clenton squares today at the Melbourne show (happened to be in luck that i'm in Melbourne) and they just look amazing, along with the Chris Vespers squares. I think you'll be very happy with your purchase.

If I do go the Starrett, i'll be getting it from LV, along with my BU LA Jack. I just sent them an email to see if they have any metric in stock.

From reading that old thread it seems that it's an individual choice. I think i'm leaning towards the Starrett due to it's versatility.