Need Help Choosing Squares

[Patrick Cox]

Hello,
I need to order a couple of squares. (Was thinking a small square and a medium square. Like 3" or 4" and then maybe a 6" or 12" but not sure about that large.) I will mainly be working on smaller projects to start that will allow me to practice small mortise and tenon joints and dovetail joints. And most likely working with 3/4" stock. So I will need a square for marking knife lines...etc as well as checking squareness of joints. Should I start with a couple of engineer's squares or maybe add a combination square? Lee Valley has some reasonably priced engineer's squares and then for combination square I would go with a Starrett. Probably either 4" or 6". I guess a Starrett double square would also be an option.

Thanks for your suggestions.

Pat

[Pat Barry]

I recommend a decent combination square. A Starrett would be great although I really don't think you need to pay for that brand right now. I have two, ets call them Starrett knockoffs, that only cost a oouple of bucks each at garage sales. You could follow steven newmans exploits for a great example of finding decent tools at low prices, just a time investment to seek and find. If you don't have the time then I'd suggest going to your local BORG and sort though the stock on hand to find a decent low priced combination square. If on the other hand you have the $$ to spend, your plan is fine. I would want a 12 inch combo square though

[Tim Cooper Louisiana]

It's out of stock everywhere I think, but The Vesper 3" dovetail square kit is ah-mazing. I just ordered the 6" rule to go with it as well. The different rules really pay off with checking dovetails and mortises. The mechanism for changing the rules is so much better than any others. This is an opinion of course.

Starrett is very good, and I've never dropped my 12" combination square.

For value, a lot of people highly advocate PEC seconds. I think there is a site called Harry Epsteins that sells them.

[Stew Hagerty]

I have two Starrett's. I have a 6" Combination Square and a 4" Double Square. For me these are perfect. I have often thought about getting a 12" Combination Square, but I have several other tools which more than make up for not having one. I have quite a few Woodpeckers squares and other layout tools. Their tools ate fantastic. All made in the USA (Ohio) with great quality and accuracy. http://www.woodpeck.com/measuringhome.html

[Phil Mueller]

I made the investment in a 4" Starrett square, and used/use that to sort through and select big box and garage sale combination squares. I also use a very small sliding t-bevel from Woodcraft that I square up against the Starrett for dovetails.

[Nicholas Lawrence]

I have no idea what your budget is or what you want to build, but if I were starting over again on a limited budget, I think I would buy a Swanson speed square. They are cheap, you can do angles easily, and they are pretty difficult to get out of square. If I had more money, I would get a Starrett combination. They are expensive, but in my opinion worth the money compared to the less expensive combination squares you can find.

[Paul Sidener]

I got a vintage 6" Starrett combination square off of fleabay a couple months ago for $25. It is perfectly square and works great. Not as shinny as new, but worth every penny. Just something to consider.

For a double square, I bought a 4" one from Sterling Tool Works, while I was at Handworks this spring. I got it with the dovetail blade. The square has really helped me make dovetails better. If you get one from somewhere else, I would recommend getting the dovetail blade for it. The tiny blade can get in small places.

[Jim Koepke]

As with so many things this is one of those choices a person must make for themselves.

My preference is for the standard try-square available used from so many makers. There are only one or two sizes needed for me to have a full set to meet all my needs for the different sizes of stock I use.

A combination square is a good choice, to me they feel awkward.

jtk

[Patrick Chase]

I recommend a decent combination square. A Starrett would be great although I really don't think you need to pay for that brand right now. I have two, ets call them Starrett knockoffs, that only cost a oouple of bucks each at garage sales. You could follow steven newmans exploits for a great example of finding decent tools at low prices, just a time investment to seek and find. If you don't have the time then I'd suggest going to your local BORG and sort though the stock on hand to find a decent low priced combination square. If on the other hand you have the $$ to spend, your plan is fine. I would want a 12 inch combo square though

I basically agree with Pat : Empire (what the BORG carry) is plenty good for woodworking.

With that said, you're not just paying for the brand with Starrett. I have Empire, Pinnacle, and Starrett combination squares, and the Starrett's are a lot more accurate. The Empires and Pinnacles invariably have some combination (and usually both) of significantly non-straight rule and poor machining of the head. Every Empire I own has a curved "straight" face on the head and inaccurate machining of the head/blade mating surfaces, and taken together those are enough to throw perpendicularity by a mil/inch or more. You can fix a curved head by lapping and the mating surfaces by filing (must be done in that order), but at some point it's worthwhile to pay for quality.

Or, you can recognize that all of these errors are insignificant relative to wood motion and not worry about it.

EDIT: My Pinnacle square was probably the most frustrating of all. The head was impeccable, but the rule was out-of-flat by several mils. I ended up buying a Starrett 4R rule to "redeem" it, though at that point it wasn't such a bargain any more.

[Trevor Goodwin]

Whatever you do, don't buy a bloody Bahco. Thought I was getting a nice Portuguese quality square, ended up with a poorly made Chinese thing. Blade is bowed, out of flat, and the head isn't even close to square.

Can recommend Toledo, Moore & Wright. ECE make some nice wood and brass non-adjustable squares if you're interested in that

[Rich Riddle]

I have Starrett and PEC. Here is what Fine Woodworking said a couple of years ago, "When testing squares for this review, we found many to be nearly identical, though prices varied. For instance, double square models sold under the brand names PEC, Lee Valley, Brown & Sharpe, Pinnacle, and Mitutoyo all appear to have been made by PEC. Four of them even came in the same blue-and-white box. Aside from a few cosmetic differences, they performed identically, but the prices ranged widely, from $23 for the PEC to about $55 for the Brown & Sharpe."

They gave the PEC the best value and Starrett the best overall category. The differences weren't worth the extra cost in my opinion. PEC gets my money for new.

[Ray Selinger]

Rather than waste money at a BORG on those aluminium and plastic things,I won't even call them squares, for the same money a Chinese machinist combination square like iGaging. I'll duck now. I much prefer Mitutoyo over Starrett. I have a little 4" Lee Valley double and it's sweet, but I use a iGaging 6" in my apron.

[Reinis Kanders]

PEC seconds can be found for about half price. Otherwise full price PEC is also cheaper than Starrett and good enough, not like Starrett will be all that perfect.
One could buy cheap 1-2-3 machinists setup block and take that to home depot and check Empire squares.

[Patrick Chase]

Rather than waste money at a BORG on those aluminium and plastic things,I won't even call them squares, for the same money a Chinese machinist combination square like iGaging. I'll duck now. I much prefer Mitutoyo over Starrett. I have a little 4" Lee Valley double and it's sweet, but I use a iGaging 6" in my apron.

The BORG combo squares are Empire, which have iron heads and steel rules just like everybody else (except for the really high end Starrett stuff with forged steel heads).

The differences between brands are more a matter of execution than design. I think that the cheaper manufacturers are less careful about things like thermals, i.e. they let the combo square heads get hot during machining and then thermal contraction causes deformation. The Empire ones in particular are deformed in ways that are very consistent with that.

EDIT: Mitutoyo is really, really good. I have their calipers and micrometer and couldn't be happier. I also have an 18" 4R combo square rule, and while it's thinner and a hair less flat than my 24" Starrett it's plenty good for any real-world use.

[Robert Engel]

I've had several combo squares purchased from the hardware store and some have been quite terribly out of square, no where good enough "even for ww'ing" whatever that means to you.

1/2 way through a project its quite frustrating to discover the square isn't square.

My suggestion: get one good one and be done with it: Starrett.

I also have picked up a couple machinists squares over the years which are very accurate.

And BTW you have to check them all. I picked up an 8" Starrett square that was off almost 1/32 in 8".

[Brent Cutshall]

A try-squares and combination squares are the most useful squares I have. I bought my first combination square from Lowes and I'll tell you what, I never thought it would be that much more useful than my try-square. It came with an awl and a level built in.

[Rob Luter]

I picked up a 12" Starrett with all three heads (combo, centering, protractor) at a local tool auction for cheap. It's many years old but clean as a whistle.




https://d2pbmlo3fglvvr.cloudfront.net/product/full/Z-LJDwfo5oy.JPG






I got a 6" combination square at the home center. I'm pretty sure it's an "Empire" brand. It was under 10 bucks and is very accurate.
https://i5.walmartimages.com/asr/b7941d2e-aaeb-402f-bf8d-47cec32aa64d_1.a31f51b5187f7cb0a98708798a966a42.jp eg?odnHeight=450&odnWidth=450&odnBg=FFFFFF

I also grabbed a small machinists square somewhere. I can't remember where, but it wasn't that expensive.

http://cdn3.volusion.com/agzpl.rugpe/v/vspfiles/photos/UTMS6-2.jpg?1394713617


Last but not least is a Veritas Saddle Square. It's a handy little bugger.

http://www.leevalley.com/us/images/item/woodworking/markmeasure/05n5601s4.jpg

[glenn bradley]

I find I use double squares more often than the combo square although I keep both handy.

[John K Jordan]

I keep several combination squares and other squares. I've had a very cheap square for decades that is just as accurate as my Starretts.

What I like about the Starrett besides the accuracy is the workmanship. They simply feels better, slide and lock smoother, and the numbers are easier and more pleasant to read. That may be poor justification to some but on the other hand many of us simply enjoy excellence, one reason we spend ime in our shops instead of in front of the TV.

I use a Starrett double square and some 4" and 6" squares of other brands. One thing about accuraccy: while I do want my squares to be perfect, for small squares keep in mind that for a short 1/2" line in wood a square that's off by a hair over 12" won't matter much.

I bought a set of good machinist squares to use with the milling machine and end up using them often on the wood side. The smaller size makes them fit better whem making jigs and aligning some tools.

JKJ

[Prashun Patel]

I've gotten by for 10 years on Groz engineering squares. There's a 3-pack which has a 2", 4", and 6" (or is it 8"?) set. I have 2 sets and they are both reasonably accurate.

I will say, I do think there's value in owning at least ONE high quality double or try square. For as often as I reach for it, I think the extra $25-$80 is miniscule for the utility and reliability. I think you can get lucky with cheap squares in terms of being SQUARE. Where the premium squares excel is in the smoothness of operation, and accuracy of the markings.

[Patrick Chase]

I've had several combo squares purchased from the hardware store and some have been quite terribly out of square, no where good enough "even for ww'ing" whatever that means to you.

For me it means that for any realistic piece design, any measurement error will be swamped by the inherent instabiity of the medium. A square that's out of perpendicular by, say, 1 mil/inch fits this description IMO.

You can tolerate bigger errors than that if you know how to sequence your measurements so that errors are mostly self-cancelling, which is something you should probably be doing anyway.

[Ray Selinger]

Those yellow Stanley "contractor grade" squares are what they sold as Handyman years ago. Then they were painted medium blue, but were numbered with the H. Earlier same numbered Handyman squares had cast iron heads but only one bubble instead of their deluxe ones having two. My Empire square has aluminium head with an infill of plastic. The lightweight blade rides on the plastic. Boy did I waste my money on that. Even using it for steel fabrication embarrassed me.

When had to buy my own combination set,I chose Mituyoyo over Starrett. The previous job supplied Starretts .

In woodworking there is something to be said for the much lighter wood and blued steel.

[Daniel Rode]

I have a Starrett 12" combo square. It may be the most used tool I own. I also have a 4" Double square that gets lots of use and a set of Groz machinists squares. I've had a couple of inexpensive 6" and 12" combo squares. While there were perfectly accurate, they were not well made and they were awful to work with compared to the Starretts. Most are buried in a drawer somewhere. Eventually, I'll get a nice 6" combo. It's a useful size. Some inexpensive tools work just fine. Cheap square are miserable even when accurate.

You can do most layout tasks with a single 12" combo square. Layout is the most important task in hand tool work, so get one quality square. It will last a lifetime and be a pleasure to use. Over time, get a couple more.

IMO machinists squares are nice to have around. My set was not expensive and after 15 years, they are still more accurate than I need for woodworking.

[Patrick Chase]

My Empire square has aluminium head with an infill of plastic. The lightweight blade rides on the plastic. Boy did I waste my money on that. Even using it for steel fabrication embarrassed me.

It appears they make two lines: "Heavy Duty Professional" (part number starts with "E") and other. I only have the former, and they have iron heads just like everybody else. They cost about $15 on Amazon or at BORG.

I'd never looked the non-professional ones before, but you're right: They have "polysteel" heads, which appears to mean "plastic". At $10 you're not saving much money with those - I wonder if they're targeted to people who don't want to worry about rust?

[Luke Dupont]

Don't overthink this. A square is not something you should spend a lot of money on up-front; just get something that is square, and has a straight edge. Though, stay away from speed squares.

Empire and Stanley combination squares are plenty accurate and very flexible. I use the 6" and a larger 16" one, and I have a hand made wooden try-square about 11". The try square is quicker and more convenient as you don't have to adjust it to switch between measuring inside and outside references, but the combination squares are very flexible in that you can use them to mark a depth, width, or 45 degree angle. I probably use the small 6" one the most, along with my wooden try square.

[Luke Dupont]

You can tolerate bigger errors than that if you know how to sequence your measurements so that errors are mostly self-cancelling, which is something you should probably be doing anyway.

I'm curious if you could give some examples of this. I often work with somewhat loose tolerances (ie, my boards are dimensioned pretty well, but not dead on, leaving some minor variance over the length or width of the piece by a mm or even two with large pieces), so I usually just pick one face/edge to "take as gospel" and just kind of flex and wiggle things a bit if I have to. Most of the time any variance does not translate into any difference in angles measured from either edge or face, but occasionally with large and very wide pieces it will.

I actually have a jointer now, so I guess precision on larger pieces will be easier in the future, but meh. Even a smoother with a light cut can take things out a little bit, and edges are almost never dead square, plus, wood warps on you. So learning to fudge things accurately and working with fudginess in general seems like an important woodworking skill ;)

[Daniel Rode]

I don't own and PEC squares yet but I did get a couple of their steel rules. Based on that, I want to pick up one of the PEC 6" combos. I suspect I'll like it as much as my Starretts. They are not cheap but they are less expensive than Starrett and the second tier brands.


I have Starrett and PEC. Here is what Fine Woodworking said a couple of years ago, "When testing squares for this review, we found many to be nearly identical, though prices varied. For instance, double square models sold under the brand names PEC, Lee Valley, Brown & Sharpe, Pinnacle, and Mitutoyo all appear to have been made by PEC. Four of them even came in the same blue-and-white box. Aside from a few cosmetic differences, they performed identically, but the prices ranged widely, from $23 for the PEC to about $55 for the Brown & Sharpe."

They gave the PEC the best value and Starrett the best overall category. The differences weren't worth the extra cost in my opinion. PEC gets my money for new.

[Prashun Patel]

I'm curious if you could give some examples of this. I often work with somewhat loose tolerances (ie, my boards are dimensioned pretty well, but not dead on, leaving some minor variance over the length or width of the piece by a mm or even two with large pieces), so I usually just pick one face/edge to "take as gospel" and just kind of flex and wiggle things a bit if I have to. Most of the time any variance does not translate into any difference in angles measured from either edge or face, but occasionally with large and very wide pieces it will.

I actually have a jointer now, so I guess precision on larger pieces will be easier in the future, but meh. Even a smoother with a light cut can take things out a little bit, and edges are almost never dead square, plus, wood warps on you. So learning to fudge things accurately and working with fudginess in general seems like an important woodworking skill ;)

Due respect to Luke and Patrick, don't UNDERthink square. While not every piece has to be s4s, most joinery starts with and requires 2 square faces. You can get lucky with cheap squares, but you should test them against references that have produced solid results for you. Although I am a long time user of cheap squares, I can tell you that a reliable one is worth its weight in gold. Buying a good quality one now will allow you to reap more years of benefit from this highly important tool. I do believe that woodworking tolerances may be less than machinist/metalworking tolerances. But if you're not using a reliable reference for checking square, you'll make more challenges than are necessary when cutting joinery and jointing edges for glue ups.

[Tyler A Anderson]

I have some PEC, Mitutoyo and Starrett squares, along with the BORG ones as well. The Starrett are clearly the best, and when I use the others I wish they were as nice as the Starrett. No more cheapies for me. The PEC I purchased as seconds, and they are good, especially for what I paid. But once you taste quality, its hard to use lesser tools. I will likely eventually replace all of them with Starrett as I really like them and the company.

[Robert Hazelwood]

Just start with a good 12" combo square. You'll wind up getting other types, I'm sure, but the 12" combo is the most versatile and will remain in use even if you acquire dozens of other squares. It can mark 90 degrees and 45 degrees, in addition to being a depth gauge (very useful- and in conjunction with a marking knife this can do the job of a marking gauge) and a finely graduated and accurate ruler.

A second choice would be a double square, which has the same features as the combo square minus the ability to mark 45 degrees, but is a bit more nimble.

A fixed square is often too small or too large for what you need to do. They're handy, especially for checking inside corners, but not as essential.

I can recommend Starrett or PEC, and can also say that I've never liked any hardware store squares I've seen- they are either out of square, have warped blades, or have difficult-to-read graduations, and there's typically a gritty, imprecise action to the adjustment. Sometimes they don't lock the blade well, either. They feel like a toy compared to the Starrett.

[Curt Putnam]

Someone mentioned saddle squares. I find them to be indispensable. I've got pretty much the LV assortment. The 45° and dovetail squares have been particularly useful. For general use, I find that a 4" double square and a 4" try square pretty much handle it all. When I do need larger, I walk over to the tool chest. For larger, I have a 6" Woodpecker's and a 12" Starrett.

[Luke Dupont]

Due respect to Luke and Patrick, don't UNDERthink square. While not every piece has to be s4s, most joinery starts with and requires 2 square faces. You can get lucky with cheap squares, but you should test them against references that have produced solid results for you. Although I am a long time user of cheap squares, I can tell you that a reliable one is worth its weight in gold. Buying a good quality one now will allow you to reap more years of benefit from this highly important tool. I do believe that woodworking tolerances may be less than machinist/metalworking tolerances. But if you're not using a reliable reference for checking square, you'll make more challenges than are necessary when cutting joinery and jointing edges for glue ups.

Actually, I will agree there: you should definitely check your squares, and continue to do so from time to time.
A suggestion based on my novice experience, though: make absolutely sure that your square is registered against a perfectly straight edge. I wonder if some people don't think that their square is off because the edge they're referencing against is actually off. Use at least two known straight edges if you can, as, it's probably more likely that the edge is off rather than the square - you want to make sure you've got the correct culprit.

On at least a few occasions, I've checked a square against something I thought to be straight and detected a slight difference in angle which lead me to think that my square was off, but registering against another piece confirmed that the square was dead on, and it's the edge that was off.

[Chuck Hart]

I own a Starrett 6 inch combo and a 12 inch PEC. After using both I bought a 4 inch double square from PEC. My Starrett is nearly 35 years old and perfectly square. My PEC's are newer but square also. When I bought the 12 inch PEC they were much cheaper than they are now. If you want one buy them direct. http://www.productsengineering.com/squares/

[lowell holmes]

Really,

I think we need one of each!