What Mortise Gauge Do you Prefer

[JohnM Martin]

Wondering what everyone prefers for a mortise gauge. I find myself wanting another gauge so I can keep settings one one without having to reset it multiple times. I have the lee valley and also an older pin style I bought on the auction site. Out of the two, I find the lee valley is easier to use - doesn't want to wander off line. Maybe that is because it's much newer and sharp - not sure? Since I'm in the market for another, I thought I would see what others have had success with. What mortise gauge do you prefer?

[ken hatch]

john,

Marking gauges are personal and you may kiss a lot of frogs before you find one to your liking. I prefer pin type gauges for marking mortises because they work better with the grain and across end grain, others like cutting or wheel gauges. As far as a mortise 'style" gauge (twin pin) vs. single pin it makes little never mind if you are chopping the mortise to the width of the chisel. Wider than the width of your chisel the twin pin is good to have.

TFWW has a very good twin pin gauge made by Marples, it is not cheap at $50 USD, in justification of its price, the beam locks square and the gauge feels good in the hand. Philly Plane has a nice single pin gauge but it is also a little on the high end.

Good luck, it can be a slippery slope,

ken

[Mike Henderson]

Taylor tools (https://www.amazon.com/Woodworking-Precision-Marking-Cutting-MGB/dp/B017Z03G4Y/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1492463151&sr=8-1&keywords=taylor+tools+marking+gauge) has one that's very similar to the Tite-Mark - at a decent price.

[Malcolm Schweizer]

The Veritas one with the optional locking attachment. Love it, and I agree- get two so you can lock them to two settings during a project and keep them set.

[steven c newman]

Only have one marking gauge in the shop.....tend to lay out mortises using the chisel I will be using to chop them. Old marking gauge I have is just a single pin thing, nothing real fancy....

[lowell holmes]

I like the wheel gauges, but I do have a pin gauge I use on occasion.

I use it for marking a strip from a board. I find it easier to make a ripping mark with a pin rather than a wheel.

[Tony Zaffuto]

Titemark and a wooden one made by Jeff Hamilton (if I remember correctly). Several runners up: several small LV (brass 3 in 1 and two sided stainless) and vintage Stanley 18 ( triangular wooden head-have a number of them, bought whenever). I have more than a few others, but these are the ones set, left and used.

[David Eisenhauer]

While I definitely like the Titemark gauge for general marking, I do not find that using it for mortise marking always as effective as I would like it to be. I find that sometimes (hard hardwoods I believe) it does not mark the far side of the mortise as well as it should. I have an adjustable double pin marking gauge that I tend to use more for mortise marking and save the Titemark for single line marking duty. I use the Titemark, a single pin marking gauge, a single knife marking gauge and the double pin marking gauge all during many projects so as to avoid having to re adjust any particular gauge before I truly want to. I would like to try one of those Japanese mortise marking gauges with the double knife arrangement that Brian and Derek have shown us.

[Andy Nichols]

Flavored gauge for accross the grain is a Rob Cosman with the extra large wheel, even copied the flat spot that lets it sit on the table and not roll off. Put it on my Titemark and my Titemark clone. Also put one of Cosman's large wheels on each....

With the grain it's an old pin gauge, probably home made, slightly larger than most they make today.

Andy

[Ron Hock]

The one being sold by Taylor Tools is a cheap Chinese knock off of Glen-Drake's Tite-Mark. Please don't encourage such a blatant rip-off.

[Derek Cohen]

Ron, this was the topic of a thread a few months ago. The great majority of the forum were behind you.

Regrads from Perth

Derek

[ken hatch]

The one being sold by Taylor Tools is a cheap Chinese knock off of Glen-Drake's Tite-Mark. Please don't encourage such a blatant rip-off.

Yep couldn't agree more.

[Mike Henderson]

The one being sold by Taylor Tools is a cheap Chinese knock off of Glen-Drake's Tite-Mark. Please don't encourage such a blatant rip-off.

Well, the Taylor Tools marking gauge does not infringe any protected intellectual property. It works well and it's approximately one third the price of the Tite-Mark. It may not have the fit and finish of the Tite-Mark but it does the job.

If a manufacturer does not make any effort to protect their intellectual property, they lose the right to complain when someone else uses that (now) public domain intellectual property.

I know some people on the forum seem to feel that even if intellectual property is not protected no one else should use it but that's not the way the world works. A good example is the smartphone where Apple and Android (Google) copy each other's ideas immediately. We'd all be worse off if they didn't compete and copy each other.

Mike

[James Waldron]

I have a new favorite gauge: the "copy" of the Kinshiro from Tools from Japan discussed by Derek Cohen. http://inthewoodshop.com/ShopMadeTools/KinshiroOnTheCheap.html So far, I'm using it "as received" and thinking about making some changes along the lines discussed by Derek. I see his point about opportunities for improvements. Even without any changes, I've found the thing works very well for me, both as a mortise gauge and as a (single blade) marking gauge. Haven't had the chance yet, but can see the likelihood of good performance as a cutting gauge as well. I have some holly stringing to cut coming up in a bit and I plan to try it then.

Thanks for all the information, Derek! I really appreciate your blog.

[Brian Holcombe]

Talking about Matsui? That is a nice gauge, I have three (?) I think, and they're great.

It's viewed differently in this situation, IMO, since Kinshiro is retired and no longer makes the gauges. Also the matsui gauge has a magnet embedded in the dai to help with setting the gauge.

[Simon MacGowen]

I am not in the market for any gauges. I think we shouldn't shoot the messenger here as any inventors who don't have themselves covered are their fault, not the buyers of any copies of their products. Nor, those who choose to share the availability of the copies.

Granted, even if a product design is protected by a patent, it might be difficult to enforce the protection (case in point: SawStop vs Bosch), but that is a different situation in which the "right" vs "wrong" is clear.

Simon

[Kees Heiden]

358501

This is my favorite. Not only does it have the looks, it's even micro adjustable!

I did file the points though. From those thick pins towards more slender knife type ones. I now hope I didn't remove too much and they will last me a decent time.

358502

[lowell holmes]

I have a Stanley 77 gauge like yours. I also have a Marples that is similar.

[Kees Heiden]

Yes these things were made by everyone in England. I have no idea who made mine, it only has a users mark (Colens).

[ken hatch]

358501

This is my favorite. Not only does it have the looks, it's even micro adjustable!

I did file the points though. From those thick pins towards more slender knife type ones. I now hope I didn't remove too much and they will last me a decent time.

358502

Kees,

It is a beautiful gauge. I have no need for another gauge but if I found one like yours I would buy it in a heart beat.

ken

[Graham Haydon]

Ken & Kees' recommendation are very good. The Marples version mentioned is great, I own and use one. I have tried the wheel style that one of the guys has in our workshop and for me I found it inferior for marking mortises.

[ken hatch]

Ken & Kees' recommendation are very good. The Marples version mentioned is great, I own and use one. I have tried the wheel style that one of the guys has in our workshop and for me I found it inferior for marking mortises.

Thanks Graham,

Like you I find wheel and knife gauges are not optimum for end grain or with grain work. They will work but a pin gauge does it better, wish I could remember the song that came from :). That is one of the reasons I think there is no one perfect gauge and you need to fit the gauge to the job, not the other way around.

ken

[lowell holmes]

I'm guessing that anyone doing this for a while will have wheel, pin, and knife gauges. I do.:)

Some of them are home made.

[Derek Cohen]

I've recently restored an old pin mortice gauge - filed the pins as well, Kees :) It works well. I can see more time on this. No photo yet.

I do have three others, one I purchased (Veritas double beam), one I was given as a gift (Kinshiro), and one I built ...

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Marking%20and%20Measuring/Mortice-gauges1_zpsmo2nteg8.jpg

I am still coming to terms with the wheel gauge. I really like wheel gauges for cross-grain scoring, but they leave a very light mark on end grain. The Veritas is aided in one respect, and that is that the lines may be scored separately, which means more pressure may be exerted to each wheel. Trying to do two wheels together on a single beam is frustrating, especially with our local hardwoods.

The Kinshiro is my favourite gauge, and knives work exceeding well in all situations. The one downside to the Kinshiro is that the knives are very tricky to adjust for different depths, such as when moving from the tenon of a stretcher to a mortice of a leg. For this reason I designed and built a fixed double knife gauge (http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ShopMadeTools/Mortice-CuttingGauges.html) ...

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ShopMadeTools/Mortice-CuttingGauges_html_1ff5cd98.jpg

Regards from Perth

Derek

[michael langman]

I need to file the points on my pins to a knife edge too. I am concerned as what you said Ken. Ending up with too fine an edge to hold up. But I will give it a try anyways.
The pin diameters are .063 on my Marples economy gages. So they will be easy to replace with 1/16" drill shanks if necessary.
I want to make my own gages using HSS hack saw blades instead of the pins. Having a set for inside and outside edge marking, with one side of the blade perpendicular to the work, and the other side beveled to the waste side of the part being marked.
Pins filed on the sides and stoned to a nice edge will probably work ok though.

[Ron Hock]

All that may be true for Apple and Google. But I'm talking about a small tool-maker -- a full-time one-man shop that has introduced a wide variety of excellent tools, each one developed with a new look at how things can and should work. Do you think the company that ripped off Glen-Drake's gauge will be developing their own innovative, high-quality tools to help you do better work? Of course not. They're vultures seeking the quick buck by stealing designs, avoiding the expense and risk of R&D and marketing.

Protecting designs is impractical unless you're Google or Apple. I doubt the cost of defending the patent infringement would be covered by the profits on every Tite-Mark ever sold. It saddens me that we have to keep having this conversation.

Ethical consumerism, not just looking only for the lowest price, can encourage innovation and the development of new products. Why go to the expense of developing a new tool just to be ripped off? I know this has been discussed ad nauseam. But I know woodworkers who won't market their work for fear someone will go into production on the design they took months or years to perfect.

I read an inspiring signature line somewhere that I think applies here: "Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."

[Robert Engel]

Mostly use a wheel gauge, but I also like traditional marking gauges.

Sooner or later I'm going to get around to making up 3 or 4.

In some projects its very handy to have several and keep them set and ready.

[paul cottingham]

All that may be true for Apple and Google. But I'm talking about a small tool-maker -- a full-time one-man shop that has introduced a wide variety of excellent tools, each one developed with a new look at how things can and should work. Do you think the company that ripped off Glen-Drake's gauge will be developing their own innovative, high-quality tools to help you do better work? Of course not. They're vultures seeking the quick buck by stealing designs, avoiding the expense and risk of R&D and marketing.

Protecting designs is impractical unless you're Google or Apple. I doubt the cost of defending the patent infringement would be covered by the profits on every Tite-Mark ever sold. It saddens me that we have to keep having this conversation.

Ethical consumerism, not just looking only for the lowest price, can encourage innovation and the development of new products. Why go to the expense of developing a new tool just to be ripped off? I know this has been discussed ad nauseam. But I know woodworkers who won't market their work for fear someone will go into production on the design they took months or years to perfect.

I read an inspiring signature line somewhere that I think applies here: "Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."

Amen. Couldn't agree more.

[Mike Henderson]

All that may be true for Apple and Google. But I'm talking about a small tool-maker -- a full-time one-man shop that has introduced a wide variety of excellent tools, each one developed with a new look at how things can and should work. Do you think the company that ripped off Glen-Drake's gauge will be developing their own innovative, high-quality tools to help you do better work? Of course not. They're vultures seeking the quick buck by stealing designs, avoiding the expense and risk of R&D and marketing.

Protecting designs is impractical unless you're Google or Apple. I doubt the cost of defending the patent infringement would be covered by the profits on every Tite-Mark ever sold. It saddens me that we have to keep having this conversation.

Ethical consumerism, not just looking only for the lowest price, can encourage innovation and the development of new products. Why go to the expense of developing a new tool just to be ripped off? I know this has been discussed ad nauseam. But I know woodworkers who won't market their work for fear someone will go into production on the design they took months or years to perfect.

I read an inspiring signature line somewhere that I think applies here: "Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."

The points you make are valid. If someone just wants to support Kevin Drake and pay the extra money, I'm all for it. But the point I'm always trying to make is that people like Taylor Tools are not doing anything wrong. They are doing what our economic system encourages people to do. The advantage for the consumer is that s/he gets a tool for 1/3 the cost of the Tite-Mark (about $30 instead of $90).

Now, does this put pressure on Kevin Drake? Yes, absolutely! That's what our economic system encourages. Kevin Drake can respond by selling the tool for a lesser price, or making a version that does not have the fit and finish of the existing Tite-Mark and sells for less money, or contracting with a Chinese manufacturer to make a version that can compete with the Taylor tools in quality and price. There's probably other ways he could respond that I can't think of.

Kevin Drake can also come up with various innovative features for the product that justify the extra costs. You can't hold still and expect to rest on your laurels.

Kevin Drake had many years where he did not have any direct competition (meaning a marking gauge that could be operated one hand) so he's extracted value from his invention. But since he did nothing to protect his intellectual property, he had to know that one day someone would take that public domain intellectual property and compete against him.

It's the hard fact of competing in the marketplace.

So how should a rational buyer respond? If they feel that they will get more benefit in the long run by paying three times more for a marking gauge they should purchase the Tite-Mark. But most rational buyers have a more short term view. As John Maynard Keynes said, "In the long run, we are all dead." Offering such support in the hope of getting something back in the form of future innovative tools is probably going to be disappointing.

And people who won't market a product that they developed because "someone will steal the design" are illogical. No person is so smart that they can develop something that no one else can think of. They will likely see their innovative product in the market being sold by someone else. If their idea really is unique they have the tools to protect their idea and prevent others from copying (patents). There are patent companies who will purchase the patent and enforce it, and the inventor can get a portion of the awards. But more importantly it will keep others out of the market with an exact copy of their product.

Trying to appeal to consumers to pay three times the price for a fairly expensive product is not likely to succeed on a large scale. Most people need two marking gauges for dovetails so they'll be facing either a $60 purchase or a $180 purchase. Trying to get them to pay $120 extra for "ethical consumerism" is a tough sell. But if you can do it, go for it!

Mike

[The focus of our economic system is to provide value to the consumer, not to protect manufacturers.]

[ken hatch]

Bottom line, buying things on price alone is a losing strategy. It my be good for the individual at that moment but in the long run bad for the group. Walmart is a perfect example, individuals may save money buying inferior goods but in the long run Walmart ends up hollowing out their town and taking jobs away from the country. Its pretty much lose lose, you get shoddy goods and lose your job to save a nickel.

I guess for me the real question is: Can I look in the mirror each morning and like what I see.

ken

[Malcolm McLeod]

Bottom line, buying things on price alone is a losing strategy. It my be good for the individual at that moment but in the long run bad for the group. Walmart is a perfect example, individuals may save money buying inferior goods but in the long run Walmart ends up hollowing out their town and taking jobs away from the country. Its pretty much lose lose, you get shoddy goods and lose your job to save a nickel.

I guess for me the real question is: Can I look in the mirror each morning and like what I see.

ken

It seems very binary - I can hollow out my town, or hollow out my wallet. Tough choice.

Or perhaps there's another non-binary alternative? Maybe the town's Dollar 5 & Dime Store, or the nearby town's tailor, or the next-state-over tool builder will figure out how to compete in an ever changing marketplace..???

[Chris Parks]

All that may be true for Apple and Google. But I'm talking about a small tool-maker -- a full-time one-man shop that has introduced a wide variety of excellent tools, each one developed with a new look at how things can and should work. Do you think the company that ripped off Glen-Drake's gauge will be developing their own innovative, high-quality tools to help you do better work? Of course not. They're vultures seeking the quick buck by stealing designs, avoiding the expense and risk of R&D and marketing.

Protecting designs is impractical unless you're Google or Apple. I doubt the cost of defending the patent infringement would be covered by the profits on every Tite-Mark ever sold. It saddens me that we have to keep having this conversation.

Ethical consumerism, not just looking only for the lowest price, can encourage innovation and the development of new products. Why go to the expense of developing a new tool just to be ripped off? I know this has been discussed ad nauseam. But I know woodworkers who won't market their work for fear someone will go into production on the design they took months or years to perfect.

I read an inspiring signature line somewhere that I think applies here: "Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."

I have been ripped off despite patents in place and this is a fair summation of the situation. Patents in this world market place are for the big players who have the resources to defend them, beyond that they are a pointless exercise and only increase lawyers' retirement funds. In days past there was respect for someone's IP but not today.

[Chris Parks]

It seems very binary - I can hollow out my town, or hollow out my wallet. Tough choice.

Or perhaps there's another non-binary alternative? Maybe the town's Dollar 5 & Dime Store, or the nearby town's tailor, or the next-state-over tool builder will figure out how to compete in an ever changing marketplace..???

I used to sell Clearvue in Oz and I recall being asked when I was having a sale, I never had one, sold plenty at a fair price and regard sales as self defeating. Those who asked always bought one when this was explained to them.

[Mike Allen1010]

Bottom line, buying things on price alone is a losing strategy. It my be good for the individual at that moment but in the long run bad for the group.

I guess for me the real question is: Can I look in the mirror each morning and like what I see.

ken


+1

Ken Hatch - woodworker, philosopher and I suspect ...................... also man with an uncanny ability to find the best hole-in-the-all Mexican food establishment in any town, south of the Mason-Dixon, within 30" of entering city limits.

Now that I think about it, ....... where can I volunteer for the Ken Hatch "office of his choice" campaign?


Best, Mike

[Derek Cohen]

All that may be true for Apple and Google. But I'm talking about a small tool-maker -- a full-time one-man shop that has introduced a wide variety of excellent tools, each one developed with a new look at how things can and should work. Do you think the company that ripped off Glen-Drake's gauge will be developing their own innovative, high-quality tools to help you do better work? Of course not. They're vultures seeking the quick buck by stealing designs, avoiding the expense and risk of R&D and marketing.

Protecting designs is impractical unless you're Google or Apple. I doubt the cost of defending the patent infringement would be covered by the profits on every Tite-Mark ever sold. It saddens me that we have to keep having this conversation.

Ethical consumerism, not just looking only for the lowest price, can encourage innovation and the development of new products. Why go to the expense of developing a new tool just to be ripped off? I know this has been discussed ad nauseam. But I know woodworkers who won't market their work for fear someone will go into production on the design they took months or years to perfect.

I read an inspiring signature line somewhere that I think applies here: "Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."

Ron, as I mentioned in an earlier post, this very issue came up a few months ago over a Tite-Mark clone. There were those who argued from a legalistic-perspective, and those who supported a moral-ethic-perspective. It became clear that there was a strong separation of the groups, and neither gave way much. If there was a lesson to take away from this, it is that the forum likely is a representative sample of the larger world of tool buyers - those who believe in supporting original makers, and those who see the world as dog eat dog. Personally, I would not buy a clone, and I speak out in situations such as this. However, I recognise that there are counter arguments and that others have a right to their view, as much as I disagree with them.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Pat Barry]

Veritas makes a gage similar to the Tite-Mark and the Taylor tools. I'd probably buy the Veritas based on happiness with past purchases. Is this wrong?

[Derek Cohen]

Veritas makes a gage similar to the Tite-Mark and the Taylor tools. I'd probably buy the Veritas based on happiness with past purchases. Is this wrong?

Hi Pat

Lee Valley (Veritas) would never build a copy of the TM gauge (I know for a fact), out of respect for Kevin Drake. Their own wheel gauge is different in design. The wheel gauge concept, per se, has been around for a long time, but (as far as I am aware), but the adjustment mechanism of the TM is the design of Kevin Drake, and that LV would rather come up with their own version.

You have to decide for yourself what is right or wrong, as my grandmother used to say to me.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Simon MacGowen]

The points you make are valid. If someone just wants to support Kevin Drake and pay the extra money, I'm all for it. But the point I'm always trying to make is that people like Taylor Tools are not doing anything wrong. They are doing what our economic system encourages people to do. The advantage for the consumer is that s/he gets a tool for 1/3 the cost of the Tite-Mark (about $30 instead of $90).

Now, does this put pressure on Kevin Drake? Yes, absolutely! That's what our economic system encourages. Kevin Drake can respond by selling the tool for a lesser price, or making a version that does not have the fit and finish of the existing Tite-Mark and sells for less money, or contracting with a Chinese manufacturer to make a version that can compete with the Taylor tools in quality and price. There's probably other ways he could respond that I can't think of.

Kevin Drake can also come up with various innovative features for the product that justify the extra costs. You can't hold still and expect to rest on your laurels.

Kevin Drake had many years where he did not have any direct competition (meaning a marking gauge that could be operated one hand) so he's extracted value from his invention. But since he did nothing to protect his intellectual property, he had to know that one day someone would take that public domain intellectual property and compete against him.

It's the hard fact of competing in the marketplace.

So how should a rational buyer respond? If they feel that they will get more benefit in the long run by paying three times more for a marking gauge they should purchase the Tite-Mark. But most rational buyers have a more short term view. As John Maynard Keynes said, "In the long run, we are all dead." Offering such support in the hope of getting something back in the form of future innovative tools is probably going to be disappointing.

And people who won't market a product that they developed because "someone will steal the design" are illogical. No person is so smart that they can develop something that no one else can think of. They will likely see their innovative product in the market being sold by someone else. If their idea really is unique they have the tools to protect their idea and prevent others from copying (patents). There are patent companies who will purchase the patent and enforce it, and the inventor can get a portion of the awards. But more importantly it will keep others out of the market with an exact copy of their product.

Trying to appeal to consumers to pay three times the price for a fairly expensive product is not likely to succeed on a large scale. Most people need two marking gauges for dovetails so they'll be facing either a $60 purchase or a $180 purchase. Trying to get them to pay $120 extra for "ethical consumerism" is a tough sell. But if you can do it, go for it!

Mike

[The focus of our economic system is to provide value to the consumer, not to protect manufacturers.]

Bridge City understands the risk of rip-offs and hence has chosen to partner with a Chinese manufacturer to produce its tools for the non-US market. I would lose no sleep if I bought something that was a LEGAL copy of another product that was never protected by any patent or trademark. Why should I? To extend the argument of morality, should I buy American (British, Canadian, Chinese, etc.) only?

Simon

[Mike Henderson]

Ron, as I mentioned in an earlier post, this very issue came up a few months ago over a Tite-Mark clone. There were those who argued from a legalistic-perspective, and those who supported a moral-ethic-perspective. It became clear that there was a strong separation of the groups, and neither gave way much. If there was a lesson to take away from this, it is that the forum likely is a representative sample of the larger world of tool buyers - those who believe in supporting original makers, and those who see the world as dog eat dog. Personally, I would not buy a clone, and I speak out in situations such as this. However, I recognise that there are counter arguments and that others have a right to their view, as much as I disagree with them.

Regards from Perth

Derek
One problem with the "moral-ethic-perspective" on this forum is that people seem to only have that perspective for certain tool makers. If you really believe in that perspective you should have the same attitude towards all products that copy another manufacturer's product. But that would mean you would would have a very small set of products that you could purchase.

Essentially all products copy other products. It's the way our economic system works. What about a product that is patented and the patent runs out? Should another company be able to use that intellectual property at that time? Or does the "moral-ethical-perspective" require that another manufacturer not use that intellectual property because the first company developed it? If you agree that another company should be able to use it, you are agreeing that unprotected intellectual property is public domain - and that public domain intellectual property is available to all.

To live the "moral-ethical-perspective" you would have to research every product you were considering purchasing to discover whether the product copied any intellectual property that was developed by someone else, and whether that person consented to the use of that intellectual property.

Of course, that's what our legal system is for. If a company is infringing someone else's protected intellectual property, the owner of the intellectual property has the responsibility and legal ability to address that issue, not the consumer. The "responsibility" of the consumer is to choose the best product for his or her needs, and best includes price.

I am left to wonder if the people who advocate your "moral-ethical-perspective" are those who are manufacturers or who are closely associated with manufacturers.

The focus of our economic system is to provide value to the consumer, not to provide a monopoly to a manufacturer. And that, I submit, is the proper focus and the one that will provide the highest long term value to the nation.

Mike

[Monopolies are properly discouraged in our economic system because they do not have an incentive to provide the best value to the consumer. A patent is a legal monopoly and is granted for a specific reason and for only a limited time.]

[Regarding copying, I always think of Sir Isaac Newton's comment in 1676: "If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulder of giants." Building a product that uses the public domain intellectual property of a predecessor is essentially the same as Sir Newton development of the calculus. I submit that Taylor tools has enhanced the public domain intellectual property of the Tite-Mark by showing that it can be profitably sold for 1/3 the price of the Tite-Mark. This enhancement is valuable to the consumer, which is the focus of our economic system. What value is it to the consumer to pay significantly more for a generally equivalent product? It's only a value to the manufacturer.]

[Derek Cohen]

One problem with the "moral-ethic-perspective" on this forum is that people seem to only have that perspective for certain tool makers. If you really believe in that perspective you should have the same attitude towards all products that copy another manufacturer's product. But that would mean you would would have a very small set of products that you could purchase.

Essentially all products copy other products. It's the way our economic system works. What about a product that is patented and the patent runs out? Should another company be able to use that intellectual property at that time? Or does the "moral-ethical-perspective" require that another manufacturer not use that intellectual property because the first company developed it? If you agree that another company should be able to use it, you are agreeing that unprotected intellectual property is public domain - and that public domain intellectual property is available to all.

To live the "moral-ethical-perspective" you would have to research every product you were considering purchasing to discover whether the product copied any intellectual property that was developed by someone else, and whether that person consented to the use of that intellectual property.

Of course, that's what our legal system is for. If a company is infringing someone else's protected intellectual property, the owner of the intellectual property has the responsibility and legal ability to address that issue, not the consumer. The "responsibility" of the consumer is to choose the best product for his or her needs, and best includes price.

I am left to wonder if the people who advocate your "moral-ethical-perspective" are those who are manufacturers or who are closely associated with manufacturers.

The focus of our economic system is to provide value to the consumer, not to provide a monopoly to a manufacturer. And that, I submit, is the proper focus and the one that will provide the highest long term value to the nation.

Mike

[Monopolies are properly discouraged in our economic system because they do not have an incentive to provide the best value to the consumer. A patent is a legal monopoly and is granted for a specific reason and for only a limited time.]

[Regarding copying, I always think of Sir Isaac Newton's comment in 1676: "If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulder of giants." Building a product that uses the public domain intellectual property of a predecessor is essentially the same as Sir Newton development of the calculus. I submit that Taylor tools has enhanced the public domain intellectual property of the Tite-Mark by showing that it can be profitably sold for 1/3 the price of the Tite-Mark. This enhancement is valuable to the consumer, which is the focus of our economic system. What value is it to the consumer to pay significantly more for a generally equivalent product? It's only a value to the manufacturer.]

Mike, you and I are not going to agree on this one. And I am not about to try and convert you to my way of thinking.

I will comment about your statement, "If you really believe in that perspective you should have the same attitude towards all products that copy another manufacturer's product. But that would mean you would would have a very small set of products that you could purchase. "

There is nothing in what I have written about that should suggest that copying, per se, is verboten. Only copying without permission is verboten. There is also no argument against taking an idea of another and improving it. Many of the tools we use have the footprint of others. I'd say that the Taylor gauge is more than a footprint.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[John Schtrumpf]

I have no problem with the "moral-ethic-perspective" being presented. As long as those who make the immoral choice are not attacked.

For me, hand tool woodworking is a hobby, and my purchases are made with discretionary income. Along with the fact that many woodworking hand tools are either no longer mass produced or are barely fit for purpose if they are. I give thought to what manufacturers and retailers I buy from. Because I realize my purchase, in it's small way, may influence what is available. Adding a "moral-ethic-perspective" to that thought process, fits right in with other considerations.

[Andy Nichols]

I'm with John S. above, state your cerebral machinations without attacking....

Have problems with these tool buying ethics given no trademark or patents:

"if it' better it's ok"

"if it looks a little different it's ok"

What many inventors find when they apply for a patent is that during the search, it's been done before, and looking different or fantastic engineering does not count.

Also that these ethics only applies to certain items.

An IGaging copy of a Starrett is just one example...I'm not buying the much cheaper IGaging copy, will save my money for the real thing, and that decision has nothing to do with ethics..

The Starrett is worth that much more to me, that's all.


Andy

[Nicholas Lawrence]

Mike is not approaching this from an "immoral" perspective. Words like "moral" or "ethical" are out of place in this discussion. He is concerned about kids who can't afford to spend hundreds of dollars and need a marking gauge. There is nothing immoral about that, any more than there is something immoral about worrying that a $15 minimum wage might effectively prohibit some low skill workers from making a living, or people who worry that pharmaceutical patents might prevent people who need medicine from getting it. When I was growing up we saw the same debate over whether a Walmart would be allowed to build in town. You see a similar thing going on in discussions about global warming. Some people are more concerned about the bleaching coral. Some people are more concerned about the coal miners. Both sides of those debates are trying to approach it from a moral perspective, just as both sides of this debate are.

It makes no more sense to call Mike "immoral" than it would for me to call folks who oppose him "racists" or "imperialists" (after all, a superficial review of these threads would suggest folks only really get upset about copying when the Chinese are involved somehow; all American copying seems to be chalked up to good old Yankee ingenuity). In this context I think all of those words are just an easy way to avoid the substance of the other arguments.

I don't buy the distinction between the Lee Valley gauge and this one, any more than I buy the distinctions people have tried to make between the Lie Nielsen copies and the Woodriver copies. Interesting that the fellow who will straight up copy any Stanley part you send him never comes up in these discussions. From a certain point of view I would think an "ethical" argument could be made that he is taking food out of the mouths of our beloved tool dealers. Nobody seems to care. Would it be different if his address was Beijing instead of Arizona? Is it wrong to take your car to the local shade tree mechanic for a repair instead of taking it back to the dealer for repair by the people who "own" the design?

I suspect Derek's willingness to see differences in the design of the Lee Valley gauge he likes may subconciously have something to do with his friendship with Rob Lee (who has earned plenty of my tool dollars in recent years). Nothing wrong with that. Ron Hock a small tool maker, (who sold me two marking knives I like very much, thank you) has his own biases in an argument of this type, as does Chris Schwarz, who I think was linked in the last thread. Another member who was prominent in the last thread is a personal friend of one of the tool makers involved. Nothing wrong with any of their perspectives, and all are understandable, just as it is understandable for West Virginians to vote en masse against the democrats in the last couple of elections. But to smear people as immoral or unethical because they deal with "not my friends" is wrong. Nobody appointed anybody Pope of the hand tool world, and the preachiness of these threads is distasteful to me.

It is a big world, with lots of people, and if freedom means anything it means the right to be different, and think through things at your own pace, and come to your own conclusions in your own time. I think it is ridiculous that we have a member asking anxiously if it is "okay" for him to buy a gauge from a well established and respected tool dealer out of fear of what the mob might think of him. I don't agree with everything Mike says, and I don't agree with a lot of what the people who don't agree with him say. But I accept that both arguments are being made by good people in good faith, trying to deal with a difficult issue.

[Derek Cohen]

I suspect Derek's willingness to see differences in the design of the Lee Valley gauge he likes may subconciously have something to do with his friendship with Rob Lee

Mate, you are way off base here ..

Spot the differences ...

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Marking%20and%20Measuring/3.jpg

I don't have a micro adjust Veritas, so ..

http://www.leevalley.com/US/images/item/woodworking/markmeasure/05n3323s1.jpg

Do any of the Veritas examples appear to have the same adjustment as the TM?

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Derek Cohen]

I suspect Derek's willingness to see differences in the design of the Lee Valley gauge he likes may subconciously have something to do with his friendship with Rob Lee

Mate, you are way off base here ..

Spot the differences ...

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Marking%20and%20Measuring/3.jpg

I don't have a micro adjust Veritas, so ..

http://www.leevalley.com/US/images/item/woodworking/markmeasure/05n3323s1.jpg

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Malcolm McLeod]

Mike is not approaching this from an "immoral" perspective. Words like "moral" or "ethical" are out of place in this discussion. He is concerned about kids who can't afford to spend hundreds of dollars and need a marking gauge. There is nothing immoral about that, any more than there is something immoral about worrying that a $15 minimum wage might effectively prohibit some low skill workers from making a living, or people who worry that pharmaceutical patents might prevent people who need medicine from getting it. When I was growing up we saw the same debate over whether a Walmart would be allowed to build in town. You see a similar thing going on in discussions about global warming. Some people are more concerned about the bleaching coral. Some people are more concerned about the coal miners. Both sides of those debates are trying to approach it from a moral perspective, just as both sides of this debate are.

It makes no more sense to call Mike "immoral" than it would for me to call folks who oppose him "racists" or "imperialists" (after all, a superficial review of these threads would suggest folks only really get upset about copying when the Chinese are involved somehow; all American copying seems to be chalked up to good old Yankee ingenuity). In this context I think all of those words are just an easy way to avoid the substance of the other arguments.

I don't buy the distinction between the Lee Valley gauge and this one, any more than I buy the distinctions people have tried to make between the Lie Nielsen copies and the Woodriver copies. Interesting that the fellow who will straight up copy any Stanley part you send him never comes up in these discussions. From a certain point of view I would think an "ethical" argument could be made that he is taking food out of the mouths of our beloved tool dealers. Nobody seems to care. Would it be different if his address was Beijing instead of Arizona? Is it wrong to take your car to the local shade tree mechanic for a repair instead of taking it back to the dealer for repair by the people who "own" the design?

I suspect Derek's willingness to see differences in the design of the Lee Valley gauge he likes may subconciously have something to do with his friendship with Rob Lee (who has earned plenty of my tool dollars in recent years). Nothing wrong with that. Ron Hock a small tool maker, (who sold me two marking knives I like very much, thank you) has his own biases in an argument of this type, as does Chris Schwarz, who I think was linked in the last thread. Another member who was prominent in the last thread is a personal friend of one of the tool makers involved. Nothing wrong with any of their perspectives, and all are understandable, just as it is understandable for West Virginians to vote en masse against the democrats in the last couple of elections. But to smear people as immoral or unethical because they deal with "not my friends" is wrong. Nobody appointed anybody Pope of the hand tool world, and the preachiness of these threads is distasteful to me.

It is a big world, with lots of people, and if freedom means anything it means the right to be different, and think through things at your own pace, and come to your own conclusions in your own time. I think it is ridiculous that we have a member asking anxiously if it is "okay" for him to buy a gauge from a well established and respected tool dealer out of fear of what the mob might think of him. I don't agree with everything Mike says, and I don't agree with a lot of what the people who don't agree with him say. But I accept that both arguments are being made by good people in good faith, trying to deal with a difficult issue.

Well said. A VERY non-binary perspective.

How many people acquire ethical blind-spots (aka hypocrisy) about things that seem trivial, or dated, or just invisible to them? Do you support Mr. Drake for his inventiveness, but buy a Toyota? (By many of the arguments held dear herein, you really shouldn't buy a Toyota! They modeled their electronic ABS system from pioneering work marketed by Ford (or Chrysler/Bendix - - depending on who you believe).)

I am a firm believer in a capitalist reward system. If someone innovates, or provides exemplary sales assistance, or faster delivery, or better advice, or excellent after-sale tech support, then I will make every effort to reward them with my business. But I also look at when an item becomes a commodity. Who here will refuse to buy gasoline that's 3% cheaper at the station across the street from their 'favorite' station? Or fly United when they discount tickets this summer?

Is a marking gauge a commodity? Probably not, but the IP surrounding every model I've seen is really well known.

[James Pallas]

I'm sure that the Tite mark is a fine tool. It was praised by many Shwatz, Cosman, Neilsen when it first came out. This decision on Drakes part was a risk management decision. To apply for a patent or not. If the cost can be justified then a patent is a good decision. If you come out with a great product with no patent then you will be copied almost without doubt. You must just weigh the costs and make a business decision. Almost everyone would be happy if Saw Stop had not applied for a patent and their favorite saw maker had the same technology. Product production is a risky business governed by laws not ethics. Ethics only come in where you intend to do harm by copying a patented product or corporate espionage, then you are unethical. If it's out there in the public domain then it is fair game. I would still buy a Titemark because it is the best regardless of cost.
Jim

[Mike Henderson]

Mike, you and I are not going to agree on this one. And I am not about to try and convert you to my way of thinking.

I will comment about your statement, "If you really believe in that perspective you should have the same attitude towards all products that copy another manufacturer's product. But that would mean you would would have a very small set of products that you could purchase. "

There is nothing in what I have written about that should suggest that copying, per se, is verboten. Only copying without permission is verboten. There is also no argument against taking an idea of another and improving it. Many of the tools we use have the footprint of others. I'd say that the Taylor gauge is more than a footprint.

Regards from Perth

Derek
I can agree with you if the phrase is "Only copying protected intellectual property without permission is verboten."

Or put another way, "There's nothing wrong with using intellectual property which is in the public domain."

Mike

[The problem with your statement is that it's way too broad and doesn't give guidance to anyone who wished to implement it. If using ANY intellectual property required getting permission from the inventor it would be almost impossible to build anything new. One person, who just didn't want to give permission (even though the intellectual property was in the public domain) could prevent someone from building a product that included that intellectual property. That's very bad public policy and certainly does nothing good for the consumer.]

[Additionally, what is the definition of "improving" a product? LN certainly copied the Stanley planes and you may say that by making them to greater tolerances that LN improved the planes. How about if someone copied the LN planes and found a way to manufacture them for a lower price so that they could be sold at a lower price? Is that an improvement? I submit it is because the consumer benefits from that.
So who's to decide what an improvement is? If you ask the company making the product they will certainly say that they improved the product and will give you a list of improvements.
On the other hand, the term "protected intellectual property" has been well defined through many court cases.]

[Pat Barry]

I honestly did not know that the Tite-Mark was first to market with this type of tool, but knowing what I know now, I'd buy the Taylor tools version Mike provided a link to. For those that still want the Tit-Mark - do you buy from Glen Drake or Lie Nielsen. I hope you say Glen Drake because then he will make more $. :)

[steven c newman]

Marking for a mortise....I use the tenon that will be going there, I trace around the tenon. I might knife just inside the lines. Then I just chop away.
358561
All laid out..
358562
Chopped...
358563
Fitted. took about the same amount of time as I just took to type this out.
358564
Laid out..
358565
Chopped..
358566
Ready to fine tune the fit.

[Graham Haydon]

Love these threads :). I find it so very amusing when people imply the behaviour of others is not somehow "ethical". Mike has made an excellent point throughout this thread. Thanks to the system he outlines, we are free to choose who we support. The system has provided us with untold benefits in our everyday life, somehow it seems "gentleman's woodworking tools" are above that system. Thank heavens a cap iron, Stanley pattern frog or a Norris adjuster were seen as fair game otherwise we'd be beholden to monopolies. However, at least we'd be comforted by the ethical warmth of the infinite IP rights those companies would have.

It's interesting that Ron is posting here. I would assume none of his work is patented? When I think of his products, I think of fairly priced irons of a good quality. The reason he's a success is the quality of his irons, the service he provides, his knowledge and experience, the range and the price point. His offering was also well timed as the quality of the plane irons in the 90's was perhaps not so great for working very hard timbers. Shows how you can be a success without patents. If I've described the business wrongly, Ron, please do correct me. On a side note, the T10 water quenched plane irons (https://www.workshopheaven.com/hand-tools/hand-planes/plane-irons-and-accessories/quangsheng-plane-irons-accessories.html) supplied here are really very, very good. As I understand it water quench is very difficult (https://youtu.be/55yiNFYJGzM?t=1m3s), but the Quangsheng team really did get something right and different to others too.

I fully understand why both sides of this argument choose their path, further I think it's brilliant that people choose to support certain makers of certain tools. I would do the same if I thought an independent maker had discovered a fresh and effective way of producing a tool that made my life easier. Perhaps someone could tell me the innovation in a tite mark? All the gauges pictured, to me look like engineer made gauges that pretty much do the same thing.

[Mike Henderson]

Perhaps someone could tell me the innovation in a tite mark? All the gauges pictured, to me look like engineer made gauges that pretty much do the same thing.
I think the innovative part of the Tite-Mark is that it uses an adjustment mechanism that is similar to a turnbuckle (with right hand threads on one end and left hand threads on the other). It allows the gauge to be adjusted with one hand.

The Taylor Tools gauge uses the same mechanism but the rest of the tool looks quite different from the Tite-Mark.

I agree that Ron Bontz will never have to worry about someone using his intellectual property. His tools are made completely from his talent and skill, not from any mass production. If anyone would like to copy Ron's work they have a significant learning curve and they better have a lot of talent.

Mike

[Oops, you meant Ron Hock. Sorry for the misunderstanding - I just had Ron Bontz's name in my head. But I'll leave my kudos for Ron Bontz.]

[Graham Haydon]

And that's what all the interest is for? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZ1-pQw2l3U I do similar with my wooden gauges which have a screw fasten. Nice thing is you can hit top or bottom of the stem with the basic screw style. http://www.uktoolbox.com/products/rst-beech-marking-gauge-rc038.html?F1=0&ID=462355&utm_source=GoogleBase&utm_media=Product+Search&gclid=Cj0KEQjwuOHHBRDmvsHs8PukyIQBEiQAlEMW0KaenkB2 q1t-F1KAQUaENSk965sM06NyzX36cy2kXtMaAhOF8P8HAQ The gauge looks crap and it's easy to mock it but it adjusts with one hand and works. That link should not be an affront to those who find favour with different solutions, just an option.

[Chris Parks]

Those that say IP is fair game have not experienced what it is like to have it done to them. I designed a world first product, it had never been done before. One of the people involved in evaluating and placing that product on the market decided he could do it in a way that overcame the patents in place and I got the boot from the project. That product is now sold world wide and I have never received a cent from it. To be honest I see both sides of the coin so to speak but it still annoys me that it happened and I never received any IP acknowledgement. The points made about copies being copied are good example of where the IP is public domain and has been for decades no one has the monopoly on it. My experience on reflection was brought about because I trusted people to do the right thing by my standards and I was plainly naive about business practises so in the end it was my own undoing so I have put it behind me and moved on.

[ken hatch]

+1

Ken Hatch - woodworker, philosopher and I suspect ...................... also man with an uncanny ability to find the best hole-in-the-all Mexican food establishment in any town, south of the Mason-Dixon, within 30" of entering city limits.

Now that I think about it, ....... where can I volunteer for the Ken Hatch "office of his choice" campaign?


Best, Mike

Mike ROTFLMAO:o.

One thing about threads like this one you can quickly figure out who you would like as a friend.

ken