Stanley 98 marking gauge

[Bill Houghton]

In a recent thread, someone (Jim Koepke?) referred to the Stanley 98 marking gauge as his "go to" gauge. I'm wondering what, in particular, makes it such an effective gauge in comparison to, say, a Stanley 65.

[Jim Koepke]

In a recent thread, someone (Jim Koepke?) referred to the Stanley 98 marking gauge as his "go to" gauge. I'm wondering what, in particular, makes it such an effective gauge in comparison to, say, a Stanley 65.

Hopefully, others will also add their thoughts on this, as my opinion is limited to my experience.

For me, the wheel type scriber used on the 98 does a better job than the pin on the 65. The pin seems more likely to follow the grain and is a bit more finicky about being held at an "ideal" scribing angle. The 98's wheel tends to leave a better line. If it does snag, the body of the gauge is more likely to turn on its axis than the 65 type which tends to stop the pin and not the gauge, causing the line to not be clean and straight.

Marking on end grain is especially easier with a roller type marker. It is less likely to tear out at the edge.

jim

[Bill Houghton]

Have you compared it to modern wheel gauges, like the Lee Valley gauge?

[Jim Koepke]

Have you compared it to modern wheel gauges, like the Lee Valley gauge?

No I have not. That is why I was hoping someone else would chime in. My hope would be the Lee Valley or the TiteMark would be at least as good if not better.

The Stanley 98 has two markers which to me is not a big advantage. The Stanley 97 has a single marker but is not as common.

Looking at the Lee Valley markers, the one with the micro adjust feature looks nice. It is not that much more than a used Stanley.

Wonder if I can convince SWMBO that I need one. Not likely, I have quite a few different marking gauges around the shop. Maybe If I sold three or four of them I could get a new one.

jim