Bridge City Toolworks

[David Ragan]

Am reading FWW 1995, a guy says that Bridge City is really good marking, measuring tools.

I have never really looked into it.

Anybody have experience with them?

[Mel Fulks]

In that same issue there is (probably) an ad for BC , check it for info on how great they really are! There stuff is good. Seem to have a lot of speciality limited edition things that are fancy and often collected more than put to use.

[Bruce Page]

IMO, they only make high quality products and price them accordingly.

[Art Mann]

I went to their website. Their machining is excellent and their tools (instruments?) are beautiful. Their products are not for me though. I can't imagine buying a shoulder plane that is more expensive than a new cabinet saw.

[Frederick Skelly]

I went to their website. Their machining is excellent and their tools (instruments?) are beautiful. Their products are not for me though. I can't imagine buying a shoulder plane that is more expensive than a new cabinet saw.

+1. Wish I was a Doctor. (sigh)

Edit: David Ragan - I apologize for any offence I caused you here. Please see my reply to your post in the Lumberyard. I never read your bio until 5 minutes ago. I did not know you are a Physician and did not intend this as a shot at you Sir. I apologize.

[Jim Matthews]

If your Doctor has a shoulder plane as an office implement,
get another Doctor.

[Derek Cohen]

Handplanes, among other tools, are essential as paperweights and art. The workbench makes a fine desk. Sometimes one has to acquire tools to do essential office repairs!

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Kent A Bathurst]

If your Doctor has a shoulder plane as an office implement,
get another Doctor.


i wish you had told me 10 days ago...............:(

[Kent A Bathurst]

IMO, they only make high quality products and price them accordingly.

functional works of art, at elite prices

[Bruce Mack]

Check John's Blog at Bridge City for the pending block plane at an intended $300. Not knowing how he can do this, I expect the usual quality. As I now use mostly block planes for box making, this is a must have.

[Chuck Nickerson]

BCTW makes (or made) magnificent rulers: 6", 12", 24". They put a lot of thought into the length, thickness, and coloring of the tick marks.
In my shop they put Starrett and B&S to shame.

On the block plane front, if the new one is anything like the recent special edition block plane with the side fences for depth control, it will be great as well.

Standard disclosure: I have lots of their layout and measuring tools but none of their higher-priced planes.

[Jim Koepke]

Check John's Blog at Bridge City for the pending block plane at an intended $300. Not knowing how he can do this, I expect the usual quality. As I now use mostly block planes for box making, this is a must have.

Is that the one that comes with legs so pieces can be planed to a set width?

jtk

[Bruce Mack]

Yes. The blog shows the legs were an afterthought. I'm interested in it as a small free-hand tool that may be less hefty than the LN adjustable mouth block plane

[Frank Drew]

Back when I bought from them (mid and late Nineties?), their rules and straight edges were excellent quality and weren't particularly expensive; I don't remember them making hand tools such as planes at that time.

I highly recommend their small booklet Woodworker's Guide to Compound Miters. From their catalog: "This dandy reference contains all of the miter gage settings and saw blade tilt angles for table and radial arm saws. It is amazingly thorough and allows you to make compound angled projects with three to thirty–six sides."

For eight bucks it's a total bargain, and unless I'm mistaken the price hasn't budged a penny in twenty years!

[Frederick Skelly]

Check John's Blog at Bridge City for the pending block plane at an intended $300. Not knowing how he can do this, I expect the usual quality. As I now use mostly block planes for box making, this is a must have.

OP, please forgive a question that diverges from your post for a moment?

Hi Bruce & Chuck,
I can tell that their rules are really nice. Their price seems commensurate with their performance - accurate, easy to read, etc.

But I have an LN block plane - paid about $120 for it. It's a really great tool. In your experience, can an average user (me, not a virtuoso like George W) honestly tell the difference between the LN block plane and a $300 one from BCTW. I get that their planes are works of art. But is there a noticable performance difference? (Things like depth control, "legs", etc don't really factor-in for me personally because I've learned how to manage that without attachments, etc. Nothing wrong with them - I just don't need them.)

What's you folks' experience tell you?

Thanks,
Fred

[Jim Matthews]

Let me guess, you can salute at perfect right angles now?

[Jim Matthews]

What's you folks' experience tell you?

Lots of second hand BC tools are available (at at a premium over their sale price)
in the original, shrink wrapped box. Most Lie Nielsen and Veritas tools have at least
some evidence of handling if they're up for resale.

The kind of tools I actively use are dinged up, crusty and heavily worn from active use in a shop
that made furniture, rather than one that collected tools.

Anybody that numbers their 'tools' in a limited edition is proving H.L. Menken right.

[Bruce Mack]

Frederick - I find my LN adjustable mouth block plane to be as good as I can imagine. For some reason I can't understand, its equivalent from Veritas has not planed as well, even with a PM-VII replacement blade. There are differences beyond appearance and feel in the hand. I will buy the Bridge City just to own it now that it is affordable. I drive a 2003 Accord and hope to have it when I die. Block planes however.... :)

[Frederick Skelly]

Frederick - I find my LN adjustable mouth block plane to be as good as I can imagine. For some reason I can't understand, its equivalent from Veritas has not planed as well, even with a PM-VII replacement blade. There are differences beyond appearance and feel in the hand. I will buy the Bridge City just to own it now that it is affordable. I drive a 2003 Accord and hope to have it when I die. Block planes however.... :)

Well then, that special plane is the equivalent of 1 car payment. Momma can't rightly grumble about that! :) And your Honda might just last that long. They've got a great rep for durability. Good luck!
Fred

[David Ragan]

+1. Wish I was a Doctor. (sigh)

I'm not sure how to respond to that, except-as the say in Law & Order "you opened the door".....

Next time, I'm going to get a CPA, a JD, then Mechanical or Chemical Engineering.

.....or........

If I ever did Medicine again, there are four rules I need:
1) Hypomanic state
2) Ivy League education
3) Neurosurgery
4) Peace of Mind (the most important thing)

Still, my guess is, Life being what it always is, there will be problems, unmet wants/needs, issues, etc, etc.

But-hey, what we're talking about right here and now, is 'filling the hole' with something material, right?;)

That sounds like great thread for Lumberyard.....see you there, I hope:D


Lots of second hand BC tools are available (at at a premium over their sale price)
in the original, shrink wrapped box. Most Lie Nielsen and Veritas tools have at least
some evidence of handling if they're up for resale.

The kind of tools I actively use are dinged up, crusty and heavily worn from active use in a shop
that made furniture, rather than one that collected tools.

Anybody that numbers their 'tools' in a limited edition is proving H.L. Menken right.

My question here is...I'm thinking about selling some of my LN stuff I have never used.....how would having Tom LN signature on the items effect the value?


BCTW makes (or made) magnificent rulers: 6", 12", 24". They put a lot of thought into the length, thickness, and coloring of the tick marks.
In my shop they put Starrett and B&S to shame.

On the block plane front, if the new one is anything like the recent special edition block plane with the side fences for depth control, it will be great as well.

Standard disclosure: I have lots of their layout and measuring tools but none of their higher-priced planes.

I have read that machinist's rules from McMaster Carr, etc are better suited to us. Is this true, with all the wood movement, etc?

[Moses Yoder]

You really don't need to work with wood, therefore all woodworking tools are extrinsic. You can make just about any tool perform the task it was designed for. I just buy the tools I like and try to spend a little bit more than I can afford. Just the fact that you spent a lot of your money on something that you enjoy using adds to the enjoyment of the task; the actual performance of a $5 garage sale find with a Hock iron replacement might not be noticeably different from a $300 plane but you know the difference; do what you like.

[William Adams]

For me, while I find all of their stuff to be well-designed and beautifully machined, only a few of their pieces are actually appealing to me, and a number of their more recent designs are just too far out there to appeal to my sense of aesthetics for workshop tools, no matter how brilliant the engineering or performance.

That’s fine of course, in matters of taste there can be no argument, only differences of opinion and taste.

That said, there are a lot of days when I really wish that instead of getting a CNC machine, I had gotten a Jointmaker Pro — I’d probably spend more time doing woodworking than posting about CNC machine setup, usage and trying to document everything about CNC so as to be able to understand it — some days I’m tempted to just give up on that too and haul out a credit card and buy Cubify Invent, CamBam or MeshCAM and G-Wizard and a copy of the CNC Cookbook and be done w/ it.

[David Ragan]

For me, while I find all of their stuff to be well-designed and beautifully machined, only a few of their pieces are actually appealing to me, and a number of their more recent designs are just too far out there to appeal to my sense of aesthetics for workshop tools, no matter how brilliant the engineering or performance.

That’s fine of course, in matters of taste there can be no argument, only differences of opinion and taste.

That said, there are a lot of days when I really wish that instead of getting a CNC machine, I had gotten a Jointmaker Pro — I’d probably spend more time doing woodworking than posting about CNC machine setup, usage and trying to document everything about CNC so as to be able to understand it — some days I’m tempted to just give up on that too and haul out a credit card and buy Cubify Invent, CamBam or MeshCAM and G-Wizard and a copy of the CNC Cookbook and be done w/ it.

Thanks for putting into words what I sensed when I went to the BC website. They have really beautiful flowing designs, art-like. But looking at the tool, I wondered-how does all that curving flowing lines going everywhere contribute to function, and how much am I paying for it?

Your point about the CNC is analogous to Sketchup for me right now. Dave Richards has been a superb teacher, and gentleman, but I still wonder with the very slow rate at which I build stuff, if it is really worth the time invested. I get the feeling I might forget what I learned by the time I use the program again 6-12 months later. Guess we'll find out at some point. Haven't started anything complicated since Dave tutored me.

Again, anyone wanting to learn it, Dave is your guy, if he still has the time and inclination.

[James Baker SD]

I have a few BC tools, mostly bought on the auction site, a couple bought new, but all of them from their early days when they made traditional designs in very high quality. None of my BCs are display items, all are getting scratches and nicks as I use them. Their newer stuff seems a bit too aimed at the collector market rather than at the woodworker market. Still, beautiful pieces of machining.

[george wilson]

I find some of the BC designs too extreme. Like that overly stretched out block plane they made a while back. And,the little hand brace is pretty bizarre.

The workmanship is great,but design is a different matter. That is where so many craftsmen fall short,because it cannot really be taught. I do like some of their designs.

[Tony Zaffuto]

I've never handled one and am curious about the comfort in the hand of some of their designs.

[Mel Fulks]

Friend of mine bought a BC combination square, I think that's what is was. Used to ask him if it was an old Star Trek prop,strange looking thing that he dropped often.

[David Ragan]

Last night I read that BC will repair any tool, regardless of how it was damaged for $5.

[ian maybury]

'The workmanship is great, but design is a different matter.'

I guess the best design does more with less (is a more or less optimised matching of form to function) - and ends up looking beautiful at the same time. Words like integrity, rightness and fit come to mind.

No offence to anybody (least of all BCT who do some lovely stuff), but the product R&D experience suggests that it's in the general sense ultimately a tall order/an unrealistic proposition to think that it's possible to crank out optimised designs one after another. As in the case of unique 'one time only' tools offered by more than one maker these days. By definition some will hit the mark, while others won't. It's very easy to get into gee whiz gizmo territory.

Seen through an R&D management lens product innovation is much like betting on the horses. You bet finite time, money and other resources against commercial and technical risks in the hope of winning big in the market. Effective development processes seek to early on get the investigation required to reduce that risk done - and to weed out projects/products that are unlikely to succeed commercially early on in the game long before they make it to market. Normally before heavy investment has been committed. Human factors however frequently mess that one up.

It can get a little dangerous when there's what seems like a good idea about looking to bend user reality to fit it. It may represent a new and greatly improved paradigm, but it's on balance more likely a pipe dream. Business realities/the need to make a buck can drive pseudo innovation and even the invention of pseuco science to justify it too - we see it all the time in consumer products.

The reality tends to be that very occasionally the designer gets lucky and hits the nail on the head first time, but it's very often the case that it takes years of use and evolution to truly optimise stuff. At which point the design should stabilise as there's not a lot of room for improvement barring new technologies or different price point requirements.

The other side of that coin is that as buyers we equally may end up following a similar learning path - we don't necessarily recognise what's good and what isn't in advance. Bragging rights, personal attitudes (early vs perceived risk/change averse late adopters) clever marketing, must have thatedness and the like can distort the scenario too….

[george wilson]

Personally,I really think that Stanley,Starrett,Disston,Lufkin and some of the other great old tool makers did a better job of designing their tools back in the day. Their designs were and are beautiful,though today we often see them in rusty,paint spattered,or less than bright condition.

They aren't extreme,but are very functional. We have seen them around today so often that we take them for granted. But,look at them with new eyes and see how well they are designed.

At least BC is not just copying old tools. But,I do find that some of their things are a bit extreme. Or at times bizarre,like the small hand brace. Some are quite beautiful. Their awl comes to mind.

It is funny that you seldom,IF EVER see second hand BC tools on Ebay that have actually been used. Are their owners buying them as an investment,keeping them for some years,and trying to sell them at a profit? I don't know,since I never check the prices of BC tools to begin with. It does seem like they are shelf queens.

[ian maybury]

I think George a lot of the old tool designs were classic examples of products that survived over an extended period by virtue of being a very good fit to all the requirements (not just technical, but also price and other 'soft' ones) of users over an extended period of time. Not only that, these were very demanding users operating in an environment where there was very little room to accommodate anything that didn't do the business.

What does happen is that with time requirements can change - for example most professionals use power tools these days.

The fact is though that the proven designs of old planes for example still stand up as very effective solutions for those wanting to hand work wood. Just about all that can (perhaps) be said is that there's scope for somewhat higher quality finishing and materials given the ability of today's gentleman punter to tolerate a higher price. Modern manufacturing and technical advances have to some extent made developments feasible too - but the fact is that the designs are still very closely based on the originals.

That it's often possible to realistically argue that a well set up oldie is still a very realistic alternative is a testament to the rightness of the original designs...

[george wilson]

Warren Mickey beat everyone else using an old Stanley.

[Mel Fulks]

I know one guy who owns a large thriving architectural shop who collects the BC stuff but doesn't use any of it. Most of his
users are Starrette ,Lufkin.

[george wilson]

People with money collect all kinds of things. I bought a Gibson Custom Shop 1954 Les Paul black solid body guitar in new condition. It didn't even have the paper peeled off the pick guard. A dentist had kept it in his office for decoration. I got it for considerably less than what they sell for new ($4,000.00?)

Probably the prettiest solid body guitar ever made,with the rectangular pole piece alnico 5 pickups. Everything gold plated.

[David Ragan]

'The workmanship is great, but design is a different matter.'

I guess the best design does more with less (is a more or less optimised matching of form to function) - and ends up looking beautiful at the same time. Words like integrity, rightness and fit come to mind.

No offence to anybody (least of all BCT who do some lovely stuff), but the product R&D experience suggests that it's in the general sense ultimately a tall order/an unrealistic proposition to think that it's possible to crank out optimised designs one after another. As in the case of unique 'one time only' tools offered by more than one maker these days. By definition some will hit the mark, while others won't. It's very easy to get into gee whiz gizmo territory.

Seen through an R&D management lens product innovation is much like betting on the horses. You bet finite time, money and other resources against commercial and technical risks in the hope of winning big in the market. Effective development processes seek to early on get the investigation required to reduce that risk done - and to weed out projects/products that are unlikely to succeed commercially early on in the game long before they make it to market. Normally before heavy investment has been committed. Human factors however frequently mess that one up.

It can get a little dangerous when there's what seems like a good idea about looking to bend user reality to fit it. It may represent a new and greatly improved paradigm, but it's on balance more likely a pipe dream. Business realities/the need to make a buck can drive pseudo innovation and even the invention of pseuco science to justify it too - we see it all the time in consumer products.

The reality tends to be that very occasionally the designer gets lucky and hits the nail on the head first time, but it's very often the case that it takes years of use and evolution to truly optimise stuff. At which point the design should stabilise as there's not a lot of room for improvement barring new technologies or different price point requirements.

The other side of that coin is that as buyers we equally may end up following a similar learning path - we don't necessarily recognise what's good and what isn't in advance. Bragging rights, personal attitudes (early vs perceived risk/change averse late adopters) clever marketing, must have thatedness and the like can distort the scenario too….


Man, what a synopsis of marketing, product design, and advertising psychology. A humbling experience for me to read all that.......that experience happens all the time to me reading on this forum. It is a good thing for my massive ego.;)


People with money collect all kinds of things. I bought a Gibson Custom Shop 1954 Les Paul black solid body guitar in new condition. It didn't even have the paper peeled off the pick guard. A dentist had kept it in his office for decoration. I got it for considerably less than what they sell for new ($4,000.00?)

Probably the prettiest solid body guitar ever made,with the rectangular pole piece alnico 5 pickups. Everything gold plated.

Yeah, I am considering selling some of my LN planes, and Pfeil chisels. Have too many, and never use what I have. Would like to have a nice spray set up. But, thats another thread.

[ian maybury]

Hi David. Guess spending more than a few years in the field clarifies the thought process.

Knowing the variables we deal with in developing and commercialising new products - and having a structured process by which to handle them is to a very significant degree helpful. It has the potential to at least help point to potential blind spots/tunnel vision issues in projects where those doing the work get sucked into focusing on their favourite areas/comfort zones, and ignoring others equally important. It basically improves the odds of success/ups the hit rate.

The unfortunate fact however is that even knowing the stuff it's hard to consistently get R&D right. Even the best organisations have scarily high rates of failure. It's really only when they run well put together projects in large enough numbers that the outcomes may start to track the statistical odds. (one off projects can fail for trivial reasons that bear no relationship to the big issues) Some individuals seem to have a definite knack in the area, but most businesses based on successful product developments got lucky - the stars lined up. (what they did of course makes perfect sense in retrospect)

As ususal (as in most things in life) it tends to be a case of getting on with it. Lots of thought/consideration of the issues helps, but there's equally always room for heart/creativity/enthusiasm to make the vital difference. It's possible to get bogged down in procedure and intellectualisation, but it's also possible for blind emotion to drive people into making huge mistakes. The big issue is that most of us literally are unable to look at situations in an impartial way - never mind hear what our heart is telling us. We out of fear and the resulting prejudice typically tend to block/refuse to engage in/selectively perceive/ignore large areas that actually are very important.

There's never any guarantees - in either direction….

[Kent A Bathurst]

Yeah, I am considering selling some of my LN planes... Have too many, and never use what I have...

David - not to throw around sharp elbows or anything, but - who loves ya? :D First peek heads up via PM/email maybe?




PS - the rest of youse guys - don't come whining to me if I get dibs..........I don't wanna hear it.:p

[David Ragan]

Hi David. Guess spending more than a few years in the field clarifies the thought process.

There's never any guarantees - in either direction….

Yes, it is fascinating how the toy makers have to gear up for the upcoming Christmas season-by June, all the production lines are rolling, and prob by August, the trucks will be rolling out to distribute toys for kids who don't even realize they want these particular toys yet.

A particularly interesting area, is when I'm in meetings (not often, fortunately) and the process of 'groupthink' occurs---irrational processes that gain momentum, just because everyone wants to agree, or something like that(?).


David - not to throw around sharp elbows or anything, but - who loves ya? :D First peek heads up via PM/email maybe?


PS - the rest of youse guys - don't come whining to me if I get dibs..........I don't wanna hear it.:p

Yesterday, I went to classifieds and see that the LN in good condition is about 80% of retail-

Plus, as I have alluded to earlier, all these items are signed by the man himself. The provenance includes a picture with yours truly and Tom LN signing all these things-up @ Peachstate Lumber several years ago.

Probably on the block will the the 7 1/2, the no 9 miter, the tongue/groove plane, and maybe a low angle one. Depends.

Promise to never ask me exactly why I have both a 7 1/2 and 8 jointer:D

[Mike Brady]

Occasionally I will see Bridge City tools at estate sales; all boxed with their serially numbered certificates, and nary a one ever used for anything constructive......So much potential, relegated to the role of men's jewelry.

[Bill McDermott]

I have the CT-15 Multi-Square. It is a fantastic tool. Small, but packs a punch. Really, it does many things and does them all very well. It was a gift from my Mom and Dad. I think high end, well designed tools like this are great for special gifts. In any case, I use that square all the time. It includes: a bevel gauge, two different pitch dovetail markers - with wrap around square (super handy) and a straight wrap around. The cam lever lock works well. I put John's tool designs in the place where art and function intersect.
http://www.bridgecitytools.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/c/t/ct15_1.jpg

[Jim Matthews]

My question here is...I'm thinking about selling some of my LN stuff I have never used.....how would having Tom LN signature on the items effect the value?

It can't hurt. Tom's also really gracious about it.
Having the original box seems to matter.

What few LN tools I still own are pretty ugly by collector's standards.
(Fingerprints, sharpened blades that no longer have milling marks, evidence that someone has looked at them, etc.)



I have read that machinist's rules from McMaster Carr, etc are better suited to us. Is this true, with all the wood movement, etc?

Just make sure you use the same rule when fitting things together, throughout the project.
I like a dressmaker's rule, myself - they're clearly marked, flexible and inexpensive.

I also like large wooden yardsticks, the kind that were given as advertising promos.
They make transferring marks easy, can be clamped together to use as 'pinch sticks' to measure large openings and are difficult to lose.

My shop is a wreck - losing things under shavings is a common problem.

Hard to use a yardstick, and I've tried.

[Jim Matthews]

For me, while I find all of their stuff to be well-designed and beautifully machined, only a few of their pieces are actually appealing to me, and a number of their more recent designs are just too far out there to appeal to my sense of aesthetics for workshop tools, no matter how brilliant the engineering or performance.

That’s fine of course, in matters of taste there can be no argument, only differences of opinion and taste.

That said, there are a lot of days when I really wish that instead of getting a CNC machine, I had gotten a Jointmaker Pro — I’d probably spend more time doing woodworking than posting about CNC machine setup, usage and trying to document everything about CNC so as to be able to understand it — some days I’m tempted to just give up on that too and haul out a credit card and buy Cubify Invent, CamBam or MeshCAM and G-Wizard and a copy of the CNC Cookbook and be done w/ it.

The Jointmaker pro is a nifty piece of kit.

If you're making small boxes, there's nothing like it.
Balancing larger boards on top of the sliding trunions
is another matter entirely.

[Jim Matthews]

It is funny that you seldom,IF EVER see second hand BC tools on Ebay that have actually been used. Are their owners buying them as an investment,keeping them for some years,and trying to sell them at a profit? I don't know,since I never check the prices of BC tools to begin with. It does seem like they are shelf queens.

Yup. Nobody remembers the Beanie Baby craze, the crash in value of Hummels figurines,
or the fleecing of all Thomas Kincaid's credulous rubes either.

I find the product line to be an exercise in conspicuous cynicism.

Contrast that to the young companies actively making tools that
are intended for work.

[Rob Luter]

People with money collect all kinds of things. I bought a Gibson Custom Shop 1954 Les Paul black solid body guitar in new condition. It didn't even have the paper peeled off the pick guard. A dentist had kept it in his office for decoration. I got it for considerably less than what they sell for new ($4,000.00?)

Probably the prettiest solid body guitar ever made,with the rectangular pole piece alnico 5 pickups. Everything gold plated.

OK, I'm jealous. I've been looking for a '54 Custom reissue with the staple neck pickup. If you ever grow tired of it keep me in mind.

[george wilson]

Sent you a PM,Rob.

[William Adams]

Thanks. Yeah, the Jointmaker would support my mania of making small boxes and models &c.

FWIW, I absolutely agree that there's a real honesty and integrity to the Bridge City Tool line in terms of material selection (bounded by John Economaki developing an allergy to the exotic woods which he had previously used) and their design. I absolutely love some of their designs and look forward to being able to buy (and use!) them after I'm doing putting the kids through college. Some of them go a bit too far for me, but that's fine, they're still neat to look at, and I always enjoy looking through their site and seeing the pretty things.

Very sad that people buy / receive them and they don't get used.

William

[george wilson]

Jim,my friend Jon and I have a joke where we ask each other "Got your Kincaid yet?"

[Brian Holcombe]

It can't hurt. Tom's also really gracious about it.
Having the original box seems to matter.

What few LN tools I still own are pretty ugly by collector's standards.
(Fingerprints, sharpened blades that no longer have milling marks, evidence that someone has looked at them, etc.)




Just make sure you use the same rule when fitting things together, throughout the project.
I like a dressmaker's rule, myself - they're clearly marked, flexible and inexpensive.

I also like large wooden yardsticks, the kind that were given as advertising promos.
They make transferring marks easy, can be clamped together to use as 'pinch sticks' to measure large openings and are difficult to lose.

My shop is a wreck - losing things under shavings is a common problem.

Hard to use a yardstick, and I've tried.

Patina!

I have some Kikohiromaru's that I'm putting into action, late 80's stock, rosewood handles. Some collector is wincing as I put the initial grind on, remove the stickers from the handles, fit the hoops and peen the wood.

[Jim Koepke]

(edited for brevity)

I also like large wooden yardsticks, the kind that were given as advertising promos.
They make transferring marks easy, can be clamped together to use as 'pinch sticks' to measure large openings and are difficult to lose.


My most used ruler is an old Stanley four fold yardstick. A story stick is used often for repeat measurements.

For inside measurements on a project two yardsticks were made into a tool for measuring:

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?151635-Inside-Measuring-Yard-Sticks

Now they are used for measuring between corners to check for square when gluing up large frames.

jtk

[Rick Whitehead]

My wife and I have a running joke about Bridge City tools. Back in the late 80's I asked for their dovetail square for Christmas, among other things. She ordered one, telling Bridge City that it was a gift, and to send it to another address. They complied with her request, but then they sent a copy of their catalog to our home address, in her name! That was a dead giveaway, even to me, and she was very unhappy about it! So from then on, I would occasionally ask her if she needed any thing from Bridge City!
They sent us catalogs frequently for several years, and sold our name to several other woodworking catalog companies. I haven't done business with them for years.
The square is very well made and well-designed. It was expensive at the time she got it, but I think it was worth it.
I can't say the same thing for all their tools.Most of their recent offerings seem to have been designed for collecting, not for use. There's nothing wrong with that, since the tools are actually made so that they can be used, but their expense keeps me from buying any more.
Someone asked if Bridge City tools worked any better that other high-end tools. My answer to that is "No". To illustrate, I'll relate a story about how I almost bought a Lie-Nielsen plane.
I had some birthday money, and I was considering buying one of Lie-Nielsen's number 103 small block planes. This was back when Woodcraft still sold them, so I went there to see one in person.After handling it, I thought to myself "What will this plane do that my beat-up Stanley 103, which I paid $5.00 for, won't do"? The Lie-Nielsen was of course MUCH better made, and more easily adjusted, but my Stanley 103 would make a cut that was indistinguishable from it. So, I put it back, and spent the money on something else.
I admire the craftsmanship, and some of the designs, of Bridge City tools, but they are simply too expensive for me.
Rick