Needs Pictures: 0
Picture(s) thanks: 0
Results 1 to 15 of 15
-
31st March 2020, 01:41 PM #1
Musings on combination squares and quality
I thought I'd put down some thoughts that have been rattling around in my head about my experience with combination squares.
I had never seen a combination square before we built our house. One of the tradesmen who was helping us had one and I was smitten by it. Not long after in 2009 I popped down to our local hardware shop and bought an Empire 400 mm combination square for about $40, and I felt like a king (partly because it felt like a king’s ransom at the time, being a skint owner builder).
20200331_090149-1024x768.jpg
This square has left its marks on a house, shed, office, fence and a myriad of bits and bobs around our property. It has even lent it’s hand to some finer woodworking.
20190508_194149-e1557354314797.jpg IMG_20190720_234151_133.jpg
When I was a Cub Scout and we were learning orienteering at a jamboree I still remember the day our leader pointed to the other end of a field and explained that a bearing error of only a couple of degrees at the start would put us way off the mark at the far tree line where a trail head could be found concealed behind some bushes.
It was this principle that first caused me to realise that there was something amiss with my cherished square when working on my Plain Plane box. In contrast to my other pieces, at 190 mm tall the side panels were far wider than anything else I’d done, plus employing dovetails meant layout errors were very apparent.
20190913_194751.jpg
Now I know my square was square when I bought it, as I was advised to, and did test with the score-flip-score method. A subsequent thorough examination of the square identified a couple of issues.
Firstly the head material is soft. As in look-at-it-with-piercing-eyes-and-it-will-deform soft. Seriously though, moderate pressure with the awl will leave a deep scratch. I suspect it is cast aluminium (it’s not magnetic either which lends weight to this suspicion). I’m not too concerned with scratch burs and dent crater walls developing with use as these may be removed with a file to restore flatness to the faces. Where the real problem lies in my view is with the raised sliders that are the reference face for the ruler. To show that I’m talking about, they’re really obvious on my 100 mm iGaging double square.
20200331_095505-1024x768.jpg 20200331_095505-Copy-300x247.jpg
The problem with the Empire square as I see it is that over time the the steel ruler simply wears the sliders down. Here is the Empire’s head, with almost no reference face left. Any wear of those faces will affect accuracy. This is compounded by the fact that the ruler isn’t hardened, so the edges don’t stay smooth for long, which accelerates the wear.
20200331_085754-1024x768.jpg
The second issue is that the two edges of the ruler are not parallel. You may recall that the photo at the top of this post has the ruler upside-down (based on the name print). That’s simply because in this orientation it is less out of square than in the other orientation. Inspecting it up against a known straight edge is enlightening!
20200331_102640-1024x768.jpg 20200331_102737-1024x768.jpg
What you can’t see in the image is that not only is the ruler bowed, but the edge isn’t uniform. There are numerous dips and hollows that have developed over the years.
A new square
With the realisation that my square wasn’t square, and the frustration that comes from not being able to trust your layout, I thought the time had come to buy a higher quality combination square. The price of a Starrett horrified me, at nearly seven times the price of the Empire. Popular opinion by those who use and rely on their squares for their day jobs year after year however is near unanimous; Starrett is accurate and should remain so for your working life. Despite scouring the second hand market for a couple of months, nothing showed up, so finally swallowed the lump in my throat, bit the bullet and bought a new one.
It has now been five or so months and numerous projects later and I am smitten and in hindsight have no regrets spending the money. Why? Because I have a square that I trust both now, and by reputation, into the future. And I guess in the end that’s what it comes down to with measurement tools.
20200331_103948-1024x768.jpg
Pondering
I frequently see online comments where someone bought a cheep square and declared that spending any more would be a waste because the score-flip-score showed the square to be square. I think this misses the point though. I wonder if accuracy of a tool is less about its performance out of the box, and more about its ability to remain so. I learned this the hard way. Not financially, but in wasted time and frequent frustration through layouts that simply wouldn’t line up.
Having said all of that, I still use the Empire when doing carpentry type work where it is accurate enough for the task at hand, or I don’t want to risk damaging my Starrett. If it broke or got lost, I would buy another one for just these tasks. But when working on fine joinery, the Empire is left to hang on a hook next to my claw hammer, and my Starrett is gently removed from its place in my measuring and marking drawer and put to the task.
20191222_185523-scaled.jpg
-
31st March 2020 01:41 PM # ADSGoogle Adsense Advertisement
- Join Date
- Always
- Location
- Advertising world
- Posts
- Many
-
31st March 2020, 03:07 PM #2
When I started my apprenticeship (shortly after the discovery of fire and the wheel) I set out starry eyed to buy teh very best tools. I've still got most of my stahwille spanners. As the years rolled on I cottoned on that some tools needed to be top quality but some others can just be ok and will do fine. I bought 3/8 drive no name sockets, but made sure they were chrome vanadium not drop forged steel. I was working on F series ambulances then, but had my motorcycles at home (priorities). Some of my co workers literally laughed especially when they saw my 3/8 universal joint. I never broke a single socket and am still using that uni today. Its even still tight. I did invest in good quality ratchets though.
My CS isn't even pot metal, it's a plastic head and mild steel ruler. I understand it's limitations and it does me fine. I continue to be amazed at the money people throw at fancy gadgets to set router bit and saw blade heights when a combination square, and optionally a vernier caliper, will set them to perfection.I'm just a startled bunny in the headlights of life. L.J. Young.
We live in a free country. We have freedom of choice. You can choose to agree with me, or you can choose to be wrong.
Wait! No one told you your government was a sitcom?
-
31st March 2020, 03:17 PM #3
Great story Lance, thanks for taking the time.
I have had my 6” Starret Combination Square fo about 20 years now, and I suspect its at least as old as me.
I bought them from a Widow that was selling off her late husbands tools, he was an engineer in one of the Sugar Mills up this way. She was advised by one of his colleagues what to charge for them. I remember I thought at the time that I paid too much for the set, but I was not about to try and bargain for a lower price. I told her what I did for a living, and that my hobby was woodworking which was what I wanted the square for, she was happy that her husbands tools would be continued to be used. As I was about to leave , she picked up some inside and outside callipers, and a set of dividers, and gave them to me.
It was a touching moment, I think of her every I use those tools.
My Dad got his Starret combo square at a garage sale for $5.Brad.
-
31st March 2020, 03:27 PM #4
-
31st March 2020, 07:47 PM #5GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Oct 2018
- Location
- Dandenong Ranges
- Posts
- 1,892
As a carpenter, I gave up on combination squares years ago. The little pins that align the blade to the head would often snap and I was forever getting stabbed by it from its spot in my nail bag. I now use a small roofing square, triangular in shape and am confident it will remain square even after being dropped. I must confess to lusting after the original Rabone CS with the cast iron head. An old boss from many years ago had one
-
31st March 2020, 08:35 PM #6SENIOR MEMBER
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Location
- South Africa
- Posts
- 950
-
31st March 2020, 09:51 PM #7
Lance,
Empire squares cost even less than you paid all those years ago. I got one about a year ago when my last one broke the hook thingie that holds the ruler. I think the empire is pretty good value and also think everyone needs a combination square as it is so versatile. They do get out of square after a while but simple to fix with a small file. I have a few other squares but a combination would be the pick if I could only have one.
Regards
John
-
1st April 2020, 09:41 AM #8
Yes. I think the Empire is great value. But like everything else, it has its limitations. Had I not started doing more hand tool work where layout became so critical, perhaps it would have been good enough for a lot longer, if not forever. The other point though, it that of being able to trust your measurement tools. Yes they can be adjusted with a file, but in all seriousness, does anyone actually do it?
A couple of anecdotes:
1. My Dad has a bunch of really cheep and nasty tools, but also had a little drawer unit with his special tools. As a retired toolmaker he is incredibly picky about tools that need to be accurate, but there are plenty of tools that don't need to be, of which he just buys what will get the job done. Horses for courses.
2. As an very occasional fisherman, I had a nice set of pliers that lived in my tackle box which always used to corrode shut despite my best efforts of keeping them clean. When fishing with a local expert he advised me to go and get a set from the two dollar shop instead. His reasoning was that the tolerances in the joint were so bad that it was hard for them to rust shut. Again, horses for courses.
-
1st April 2020, 09:46 AM #9Senior Member
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Posts
- 383
Yes, bought a cheap 150mm CS and regretted it, threw it out and replaced it with two combination squares:
a Stanley professional CS (the one Paul Sellers recommends) bought secondhand in good condition for $10, and
a Starrett 100mm CS bought new ($$$ - ouch!)
Knowing I can trust these makes for a better woodworking experienceNew Zealand
-
1st April 2020, 04:19 PM #10GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Jul 2011
- Location
- In between houses
- Posts
- 1,784
Roofus
I have one of these, it’s so far ahead of the rest it’s not even funny. Looks weird but works brilliantly. Roofus Tools - The Tool of the future for Carpentry
-
1st April 2020, 06:41 PM #11
Many years ago, when I was still a fresh-faced punk, I was given a Stanley CS.
I quickly worked out that as far as squares go, it wasn't... but as a cheap adjustable rule/depth marker it was a wonderful device.
I don't think I've ever used mine as a square, but it's still a regular user. Along with a couple of other immigrants that crept into my tool-box somehow.
As an aside, I used to carry an even cheaper adjustable wooden scribe in my tool-box to mark out joints etc. Lost many, many of them on-site but no-one ever nicked the CS's. Huh!
- Andy Mc
-
1st April 2020, 07:49 PM #12
Yep.
Mine's a Rabone, considered a moderately good brand, though not in the Starett league. I bought it sometime in the early 70s, iirc. After about 25 years of regular use it got a bit out of whack, so I decided to have a go at re-calibrating it. The way the slot for the blade is cut leaves a raised section on the bottom of the slot, which makes things a lot easier. I used an auger file (the end which has safe faces & cuts on the sides only) to shave a teeny bit off the high side. It was a fiddly job and I was afraid of over-doing it, so I kept assembling & testing it after just a couple of light passes with the file. Eventually, I had it spot-on again. That was quite a while ago now, and about the time I fixed it I acquired my first Clenton square, which I find far nicer to use for woodworking, so the Rabone only gets used as a depth-gauge or where I need a very stubby square on some job. So I would not expect to need to fix it again in my lifetime...
CheersIW
-
1st April 2020, 11:19 PM #13
I have also had a go at this and found it like Ian describes a bit of a fiddle but got things back on line. I was thinking that should be good for another 20 years or so but not long after that the brass adjusting screw/hook thing broke so that was the end of that one. At the time I thought a square thats not square is useless so what is there to loose.
Regards
John
-
5th April 2020, 10:11 AM #14SENIOR MEMBER
- Join Date
- Sep 2009
- Location
- victor harbor sa
- Posts
- 316
Hi Lance,
thanks for your post with photos.
there is an old saying about the quality in manufacturing..
' built up to a standard, not down to a price '
which goes along with.....
' you get what you pay for '
having said that, my Stanley combination square with aluminium stock and a steel rule
that I bought back in 1977 is still showing to be accurate.
Graham.
-
12th April 2020, 06:29 PM #15Senior Member
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
- Location
- geelong
- Posts
- 359
One of the most bolatent BAD tools that I have come across was an adjustable square - PLASTIC chrome plated adjusting screw -REALLY an absolute con -best thrown in the bin as soon as you realise - made to be sold - not used.
Glorious peoples republic of course.
Similar Threads
-
Combination squares
By Ivor in forum HAND TOOLS - UNPOWEREDReplies: 25Last Post: 28th July 2020, 03:04 PM -
Where to get quality squares.
By Mychael in forum WOODWORK - GENERALReplies: 15Last Post: 16th July 2011, 08:43 AM -
Combination squares fitted with 600mm blades?
By johncee1945 in forum HAND TOOLS - UNPOWEREDReplies: 11Last Post: 13th December 2010, 11:37 AM -
Some musings on the GFC
By Big Shed in forum NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH WOODWORKReplies: 0Last Post: 21st April 2009, 10:36 AM