Why Starret?

[Luke Maddux]

Starret seems to be one of those companies that is just kind of widely accepted as "the best" in their realm. I know that some others are on the same tier, but I'm generalizing.

So why? Why should I pay 4-5x the money for a Starret combination square or a combination square of a similar ilk?

To clarify, I am not comparing these kinds of squares to infill squares which are adjustable and have considerable aesthetic and collectible value. Specifically talking about engineering tools which also apply to WW like combination squares and slide rules.

Thanks a lot in advance,
Luke

[FenceFurniture]

Near as I can tell Starret is aimed at Metalworkers where the tolerances are much much lower, and irrelevant to woodwork

[elanjacobs]

+1 for that
I buy Starrett for machine setup and because I'm a bit of a brand snob I also just like knowing that my tools are hyper-accurate, even if I don't really need it
Whether you're really getting 4 times the quality/precision is up for debate, but I doubt it.

[Ratbag]

Starrett, Mitotoyo (unsure of spelling) & Moore & Wright were collectively THE standard in engineering measurement & marking. I don't think any is noticeably better than the others.

Some of Starrett's other product lines, e.g their hacksaw blades & holesaws are not at all special. The home grown product; Atkins & Sutton respectively, are as good or even better in my experience.

[hiroller]

If you want an accurate, made in USA alternative to Starret.
You could try PEC. Jim Davey sells them and gives them a big tick:
http://www.jimdavey-planes-sharpenin...1-1a66b924fbe4

[marphlix]

Not really answering the question, but for combo squares that are accurate - i bought 2 cheap (really cheap) steel ones from masters. The first was dead accurate when i test by scribing a line and flipping it and scribing again.

The second was a tiny bit off, but i just removed the rule and ran some fine wet and dry through the slot once (check google for tutorials for truing combo square) and it is dead on now.

They lock in place well and i have even dropped one and its still dead on. I think the brand is Swansen (not 100% though). I recon as long as they don't feel flimsy, they are easy to test for true and not very hard to fix up.

Just my thoughts,

Cheers, Dave

[behai]

I bought a Starret 30cm square because it has an ISO certificate

[derekcohen]

Starret seems to be one of those companies that is just kind of widely accepted as "the best" in their realm. I know that some others are on the same tier, but I'm generalizing.

So why? Why should I pay 4-5x the money for a Starret combination square or a combination square of a similar ilk?

To clarify, I am not comparing these kinds of squares to infill squares which are adjustable and have considerable aesthetic and collectible value. Specifically talking about engineering tools which also apply to WW like combination squares and slide rules.

Thanks a lot in advance,
Luke

Hi Luke

I'm only going to repeat what I have heard on forums for a good many years. There is simply no way that I could go about testing all the various combination square, although I did own - and discard - a few of the cheapies 20+ years ago.

The ones I own are Starrett. They were not expensive, actually quite cheap, since I found them on eBay (USA) - which is a testament to how durable they are. Replacement parts are also available. What I can emphasise is that they are quality, made to last, hold a setting, do not wear quickly and adjust easily and precisely. I am never in doubt whether the setting is accurate or not. Reports I have from other of cheap models include cheap cast pot metal or iron parts that break, thin and flexible steel blades that are also poorly etched, and that loose settings as parts wear. Like everything in the tool world, you generally get what you pay for.

Having said all this, Starrett are machinist tools and much of the time we do not need that level of accuracy for woodworking. But that does not mean that I do not appreciate it, nor that I do not want it. I just want something reliable and easy to use.

I actually have far more accurate squares from Chris Vesper, and these are as much over-kill as Starrett. They are not necessary either, but - dammit - they are so nice to use.

If I did not have any of these I would just get on with whatever I did have, cheap and cheerful. Really I do not care that much. there is enough accuracy in the cheapies. I even have made large ones out of wood.

All these came from eBay ...



Large layout square ...



Regards from Perth

Derek

[IanW]

I guess it's the old story, Luke - do you want a tool that is reliable right out of the box? Starret and some others come with a promise that they will meet stated tolerances. There is also an implied promise that they will maintain this accuracy for a longer time in normal use than cheaper alternatives. So if you've got the readies and the inclination to have "the best", they are pretty safe buying.

When I had need of a combination square a long time ago, I was on a very tight budget, so Like Marphlix, I bought one that cost way less than a Starret. It was, however, solid, and appeared to be well-machined & finished. All the bits slid together & locked in place firmly, but I found it was a bit off-square when I got it into serious use. This was fairly easily rectified by a bit of attention to the ridge in the stock that the rule bears against. I used an auger file, which was almost the same thickness as the blade. Auger files have 'safe' edges at one end, and 'safe' flats at the other, so they are quite good for this purpose. It was a tedious matter of a light stroke or two on the 'high' spot, then assemble & test. I can't remember exactly how long it took me, not much more than 1/2 hour if I recall correctly, but I eventually got it so that the total deviation when flipped was less than the the thickness of a fine scribe-line. The human eye doesn't allow you to do better than that (well, mine don't, anyway ). Thirty something years later, said square has maintained its accuracy, though I admit I don't use it a lot any more. Nowadays, I only bring it out when I need a very short-bladed square or the 45 degree function. I used to use the protractor function more, but these days I find my Veritas protractor scale more convenient.

There is a fair amount of guff put about to induce you to think you can't make a square cabinet unless you have super-accurate, deviation-of-less-than-a-trillionth-of-a-thou layout tools. "Sufficient unto the purpose" is my motto. The virtually invisible, glue-less joinery of traditional Chinese furniture was set out with the simplest of home-made tools (some of the more intricate by eye alone!). In woodwork, we are dealing with an elastic, and hygroscopic material that isn't going to remain at a precise dimension for more than a minute or two anyway. Squares needn't be absurdly accurate, just sufficiently accurate to allow you to work within the tolerances you desire. If I can consistently build cabinets so that door & drawer openings have a 0.5mm or less difference across the diagonals, for e.g., I think I'm doing ok. A square that has a deviation of less than the width of a fine scribe line will lay out joints that should allow you to assemble a carcase that meets those requirements. You can add far more error during cutting & fitting the joints than by using a square that may be out by a couple of thou over 6 inches...

My 2c.
Cheers,

[IanW]

Strewth, Derek, how do you use six combination squares at any one time?

I was nearly going to suggest that the only tool I might own more of is marking gauges, but thinking back over the number I've seen that you've acquired & made, I think you'd trump me several times over there, too.

Backsaws, maybe.

I wouldn't like to be faced with the decisions you'll have to make when you pack for that desert island.....

[Ratbag]

All my squares must be spot on... it's just my eyes that are wonky these days.

Just a few years ago it was exactly the opposite!

[routermaniac]

It comes down to how obsessive you are. I find it irritating to have a saw blade set at 90 degrees and to find its not. I spent good money on squares from the large hardware shops only to find they are NOT SQUARE.

The Starrett ones are. Like Derek I got mine from US EBAY and they werent that expensive... But guess what, theyre still spot on 10 years later. One of them was at least 10 years old before i bought it!

I agree with the notion that its not necessary to have the square spot on for woodwork, but its nice if it is. Like its nice for your tablesaw to crosscut a perfect 90 degrees and your mitresaw to cut a perfect 45... The other problem is the inaccuracy is often amplified if one tool is set properly, another using the dodgy square and so on...




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[derekcohen]

Strewth, Derek, how do you use six combination squares at any one time?

I was nearly going to suggest that the only tool I might own more of is marking gauges, but thinking back over the number I've seen that you've acquired & made, I think you'd trump me several times over there, too.

Backsaws, maybe.

I wouldn't like to be faced with the decisions you'll have to make when you pack for that desert island.....

Hi Ian

I work equally in metric and imperial. Often mix the two at the same time - whatever is the best fit at the time. Actually, to more accurate, I rarely work with measurements, other than setting out the initial couple, preferring to use a story stick and/or marking gauges to transfer measurements.

One of the large combo squares is metric (300mm) and the other is imperial (12"). These are more useful for setting up machinery. That 6" double square get most of the use. It I could only take one to the desert island, that would be it. Fantastic for tenons and marking along an edge. The 4" does not get a lot of use these days, but made a useful square for joints such as mortices and dovetails.

My most-used squares are 4" and 7" Vespers. These are essentially machinist squares that are infilled. No if someone was looking for the absolute best squares at the cheapest cost, I would seek out cheap machinist squares (the all-metal variety). Check them for square (flip left and right), and you would be good to go for life.

A large wooden panel set up square, like the one I made above, is a very valuable addition. My design is a little different: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ShopMad...OutSquare.html

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Luke Maddux]

I'm glad you mentioned Vesper, Derek.

I plan to get some of his squares and bevels and the reason I had Starret on the brain in the first place was because I was considering getting a hyper accurate combo square to have as my baseline for those when they ultimately need micro adjusting. Something I can KNOW is square.

Really appreciate the feedback, fellas. For now I'll stick with my cheapo from carbatec but I may upgrade later.

[FenceFurniture]

Colen Clenton has CNC cut phenolic 45° triangles for resetting his squares after dropping or whatever. They aren't shown on HNT Gordon's site, but I'm sure Terry could get one in. From memory they are about $20-30.