Why Do You Own A Try Square?

[Kees Heiden]

At least overhere in Holland the combination square is not very common. I think it only came on the market relatively late, under influence of English/American habbits or brands entering our market.

I have one, it was as cheapy (of course, I always seem to end up in the cheap corner) probably made in the far east. It wasn't very square when I got it and needed readjusting. But I use a try square all the time at the bench and the combination square leads a sheltered life in a cupboard. A trysquare is just simpler and quicker to use for most jobs.

I quit buying second hand try squares. The edges are usually worn out, not straight anymore, not very square either. So it is a good idea to check your own square from time to time. I use the method Jim posted about, usually with a piece of plywood. An undisturbed factory edge is way straight enough for me to do this test.

And yes I did the test of rotating the square around a bit of squared timber and seeing if the ends meet. But it doesn't tell if the timber was really square or if the square itself isn't square anymore.

[Stanley Covington]

And yes I did the test of rotating the square around a bit of squared timber and seeing if the ends meet. But it doesn't tell if the timber was really square or if the square itself isn't square anymore.

Kees

That is exactly my point.

Stan

[Vlad Evdokimov]

Hello guys. What do you think about such square?

MSMW1.jpg

[Megan Fitzpatrick]

I like my large wooden square for framing work – it's a lot lighter to use when I'm atop a ladder – plus if I drop it, it's not the end of the world. (I have an 18" Lufkin combo square, too, that I could use for house work, but I'd be awfully sad if I dropped it!) So the wood one goes in the air (and in my car for marking up stock to break down in a parking lot). Plus, the wooden ones are just fun to build!

[lowell holmes]

I made the Pop Wood square. It hangs from the ceiling in my shop so I can get to it.

I also have two framing squares.

[Rick Malakoff]

These 2 followed me home, IMG_2636[1].jpg
the Johnson with the missing rivet which I think I'll fill with a mother of pearl button or just some epoxy. The 9" was made by the
L S S co. Athol Mass. had no idea who that was and wondering if the 5$ I paid was too much.

[Jim Koepke]

[edited]

The 9" was made by the
L S S co. Athol Mass. had no idea who that was and wondering if the 5$ I paid was too much.

LOL!

L S S stands for Laroy Sunderland Starrett. If you are worried that you paid too much there are likely many people like me who would be willing to pay you $5 and shipping if it would make you feel better.

jtk

[mark kosse]

It depends on what tri square it is. I've never looked at a combo square and thought man that's a good looking tool. I like my tri square.

[george wilson]

1/3 or 1/4 HP is about right for washing machines!! They can be very dangerous, too. When I was just out of college, and still had no money. I had bought an old, old tilting TABLE walker Turner table saw from a fellow class mate. My only available motors were a few of those old appliance motors that we never threw away when we discarded the rest of the washing machine. I was cutting some long, thin strips for guitar binding when the motor bogged down. Somehow my fingers got in the wrong place when the capacitor kicked in, sending the strip of wood backwards, with my fingers atop it. I got the first two fingers slit about 1/4" deep right through the finger nails. Took me two years to be able to comfortably dial a telephone again! Luckily, my nails grew back un distorted. It was some few years before I could play the guitar again, unless I used a pick! And,I was a finger style player, and still am.

That was the only time I ever got a significant cut from a table saw. That first year of teaching(or was it the 2nd.?) I bought a REAL saw, the Clausing I still have today. It is a very smooth running saw compared to a Unisaw, and weighs twice as much.

The lesson was: NEVER try putting an under powered motor on a table saw!

[Patrick Chase]

For any question like that, there are a vast range of justifications but often just one true answer: "Because I have a Tool Acquisition problem".

Seriously, I have quality combo squares, double squares, and try and machinist squares. The combo squares can do basically anything the others can, but the ergonomics aren't as good. There's something to be said for having a tool that's just the right size for what you're measuring and no bigger. That's why people splash out big money for tools that are both slim/compact and accurate like the Vesper double square (I use mine all the time).

Avoid the Groz machinist "squares" though. The problem is that they aren't very square.

[lowell holmes]

I do try to have one of each.

[Michael J Evans]

I own 3 aluminum try squares. They came in a pack that my mom bought me one Christmas. I really thought they were great at first (all I had was a couple smaller steel squares ) but the rules are beveled for some reason, meaning my knife or pencil can mark under the rule blade, which is super irritating. On the two larger sizes I used the pins that hold the rule and body together came loose and the rules can literally be wobbled up and down. I haven't tried any nice try squares but those have definitely left a bad taste in my mouth. Would like to get a nicer one someday for the reason Steven states.

[Derek Cohen]

Michael, I suspect that they are the same design as the one that Stanley and I posted early on in this thread. If so, they are for examining whether something is square, and not for marking. The thin bevelled edge is for that reason.

Regards fro Perth

Derek

[Patrick Chase]

I own 3 aluminum try squares. They came in a pack that my mom bought me one Christmas. I really thought they were great at first (all I had was a couple smaller steel squares ) but the rules are beveled for some reason, meaning my knife or pencil can mark under the rule blade, which is super irritating. On the two larger sizes I used the pins that hold the rule and body together came loose and the rules can literally be wobbled up and down. I haven't tried any nice try squares but those have definitely left a bad taste in my mouth. Would like to get a nicer one someday for the reason Steven states.

Michael, I suspect that they are the same design as the one that Stanley and I posted early on in this thread. If so, they are for examining whether something is square, and not for marking. The thin bevelled edge is for that reason.

Indeed. What Michael describes sounds like a pale imitation of a bevelled-edge master square: The good ones are extremely precise (the Starrett I linked is spec'd square to within 0.0001" per 6"), extremely expensive, and worth every penny if you do any sort of precision work. The bevelled edge allows you to detect very small deviations in squareness. It's possible to visually detect 0.0001" gaps under a beveled-edge square with a strong backlight. With all of that said, a master square is ridiculous overkill for woodworking.

What you want for marking is something like a machinist's square or try square. Note that they can be almost as precise as master squares (the set I linked is spec'd square to 0.0002" per 6", which is still overkill for woodworking), but they're designed for marking.

[Patrick Chase]

On a related note to this thread, I strongly recommend the Vesper double square. TFWW and Highland sell it in the US.

It's basically as compact and handy as a similarly-sized try square, with the advantages of being useful for measurements and accepting small blades to measure things like mortise and dovetail squareness. My sample has better squareness and blade flatness than my Starrett double square despite having a much shorter baseline (the width of the head where it meets the blade). It's easily square to within 0.0005" over 6" when compared to my master square.

IMO it's also a functional and aesthetic winner, with very simple, minimalistic, and usable adjustment and markings. I particularly like the rotationally retained "hook" in the head, which makes blade-swapping very quick.

The only downside is cost.