Squares are ....square

[William Chain]

So, after getting rather disgusted by and tired of the volume of sellouts on social media that have gone from informative content and furniture, and you know, woodwork, to mindless photos of sponsor's red measuring tools ranging from squares to absurd compasses (see thread in off topic forum if you like), I decided to run an experiment. I borrowed (I refuse to buy) one of the red company's 8 inch squares from a friend. I then purchased a square from each borg store (~$8 each, one is empire, one is husky), one from a super cheap import company (~$6, pittsburgh, but with coupon it was free!), a Starrett, and some speed squares from all of the above. Speed squares ranged from free to $6.

I then aligned these tools with the super expensive guaranteed to 0.001" square and used a flashlight to detect any gaps as a measure of squareness. Quick, dirty experiment, but hey if there's light, there's a measurable gap. With the exception of one speed square which was a rather rough surface (casting? cheapo sand blasting?) guess what? All of the above are square.

I upped the ante a bit. I slapped down a 4x8 sheet of plywood (3/4in BB), verified that the sheet was square (measuring tape), verified that the 4' length was straight, applied all the squares to one corner and concluded the edges were perpendicular, and applied the squares to strike a line. I carefully extended these lines to the opposite side using a drywall square, and then collected some measurements, both with a Starrett ruler and tape measure by eye, and by throwing down my aluminum tracksaw track and measuring again by the same method. All lines (save one, the rough finish speed square) struck in this fashion deviated from one another by less than 1/16" over the full 8' length of the sheet.

So... I think we can conclude that the $8 measuring and squaring tools will provide dutiful service, and that the hype is just hype. Discuss.

[Tom M King]

I've somehow managed to make a good living, for 45 years now, without ever investing in what is considered an expensive square. I do have a number of Starrett squares, left to me by a dear friend, but the one I carry in my tool belt is a stainless steel bladed Craftsman combination square. I do check squares in the store before I walk out with any that I buy. If I'm remembering correctly, after 15 years or so, that Craftsman was the only one hanging on the peg that worked smoothly enough to suit me, even though they all checked out to be square.

I might be a fool, but am not easily parted from my money.

[Simon MacGowen]

I know what you re saying. I was less lucky than your experience.

I have precision squares (USA), empire aluminum square, Starrett combo square, unnamed combo square, engineer's squares, etc. I used a kinex machinist square (0.00055" tolerance) to check them. Heck none of them seemed to be square!

What should I do? Go out and get a made in USA red square? Of course, not. I continue to woodwork the same way as I have.

Those fancy tools ($150 a piece; $250 a piece,...) are as good as how their owners feel about them. If they love them after paying top dollars, good for them.

I drive a nice car; a lot of car owners would say I am a sucker who is willing to spend that kind of money on a box with four wheels, and theirs take them to where they want just like my car. May be I am, but I just feel good when I drive my car.

Simon

[Matthew Hills]

Main issue I’ve seen is irregularity in aluminum speed squares taking them out of square. That was annoying. (Got some cheap plastic speedsquares from Lowe’s for cub scouts, and those have worked well)

Some of the starretts are super nice for legibility.

Matt

[Steve Jenkins]

If your aluminum or plastic speed square is out of square just put it on your table saw making sure the miter gauge is accurately set to 90 and trim a tad off the edge. You can do the same at 45.

[Tom M King]

I've built stuff for a living for 45 years now, and never used a speed square for anything. I always carry a combination square though, if I have a tool belt on.

[Andrew Hughes]

I have several very accurate squares that I use to set up my machines.
I don’t use them to measure wood so they don’t live out on my bench where things get knocked around.
It’s good to have at least one good square to use as a reference.
Unless your work doesn’t require it.

[Cary Falk]

Why doesn't measuring equipment from Starrett, Mitutoyo, Bridge City Tool works, Brown and Sharpe, Pec, incra, etc draw the same hate? Is it the red cape causing the bull to charge sort of thing? I have things from several names on the list I mentioned. I also have a Borg supplied square I build fences and decks with.

[glenn bradley]

So... I think we can conclude that the $8 measuring and squaring tools will provide dutiful service, and that the hype is just hype. Discuss.

I question the definition of "hype". A Toyota Carolla and a BMW M5 both use gas, move under their own power and will get you from point A to point B. Does this make the M5 "hype" because it does the same thing the Carolla does? I have a $30 plane that works every bit as well as a Lie Nielsen. Is the LN more elegant and more refined? Certainly. Does my $30 Millers Falls work fine? Certainly. If I were a machinist, would I notice the difference between a Starrett and an Empire measuring tool . .. oh yes.:D

[johnny means]

Why doesn't measuring equipment from Starrett, Mitutoyo, Bridge City Tool works, Brown and Sharpe, Pec, incra, etc draw the same hate? Is it the red cape causing the bull to charge sort of thing? I have things from several names on the list I mentioned. I also have a Borg supplied square I build fences and decks with.
I think using the machinist brands onin a woodshop or install site is also pretty unnecessary. I see a lot of talk about feel, fit, and finish, but never any measurable improvement in results. I think of these things as the chrome tipped exhaust of woodworking, no real need, but who doesn't like a little bling.

[William Chain]

I've built stuff for a living for 45 years now, and never used a speed square for anything. I always carry a combination square though, if I have a tool belt on.

I hope I was clear enough, if not I apologize. I tested combinations squares and speed squares. Good results with both, with the exception of one pretty crunchy tool.


I've somehow managed to make a good living, for 45 years now, without ever investing in what is considered an expensive square.

And that's my main point. It's patently absurd to convey to people that one needs to blow $140 on those tools to do this work (particularly when they *cough cough* didn't either). It's a chair or a table or a nightstand, whatever. Made of wood that moves with every 1% change in humidity. It isn't the space shuttle. The inexpensive tool does the job. My data is proof positive of that.

The way I see it is that $140 fancy pants square....that $140 is my QSWO for my next Stickley replica.

[Van Huskey]

Why doesn't measuring equipment from Starrett, Mitutoyo, Bridge City Tool works, Brown and Sharpe, Pec, incra, etc draw the same hate? Is it the red cape causing the bull to charge sort of thing? I have things from several names on the list I mentioned. I also have a Borg supplied square I build fences and decks with.

In very general terms "the red bird" starting getting hate when they started the one time tool deal. I have a few Woodpeckers measuring devices and absolutely love my Delve square.

It is unlikely many or any of us have seen a measuring device truly square over its length, if we have it was a one in a million luck thing. It all comes down to "square enough" and that depends on your medium, your designs/type of work and your expectations of the finished product and so everyone is different. I tend to buy moderately expensive measuring tools because when I use my cheap ones I find myself double and triple checking because I just dont' trust them, even if they were square/accurate yesterday. Not all the time but often 16 3/64" needs to be 16 3/64" and 90* needs to be darn near perfectly 90*.

[David Kumm]

I have a lamb Tool Works square for setting up my slider and the crosscut fence. It is higher precision than a normal square and worth the price to me. A crosscut fence that produces a 1/16" error over 8' seems to always compound and never offset. Either boxes fit together or you fiddle with them and there are a few tools I'll pay for to reduce the hobby stress. An accurate 24" square and a flat straightedge of at least 7' are two that are worth it. Dave

PS To be fair, I also think a Range Rover is worth the price so I may not be normal.

[johnny means]

I don't think square is the right tool for setting up a slider, unless one owns a 6' square. You'd get better results with three sticks and a pencil.

[Cary Falk]

In very general terms "the red bird" starting getting hate when they started the one time tool deal. I have a few Woodpeckers measuring devices and absolutely love my Delve square.

It is unlikely many or any of us have seen a measuring device truly square over its length, if we have it was a one in a million luck thing. It all comes down to "square enough" and that depends on your medium, your designs/type of work and your expectations of the finished product and so everyone is different. I tend to buy moderately expensive measuring tools because when I use my cheap ones I find myself double and triple checking because I just dont' trust them, even if they were square/accurate yesterday. Not all the time but often 16 3/64" needs to be 16 3/64" and 90* needs to be darn near perfectly 90*.

I agree that some of the one time tools are out there and I don't buy them if they are of no use to me. I don't see the same hate for large expensive sliders that hobbyist buy for example. I have gone through a rash of bad squares. I was always fighting square until I stepped up to better measurement equipment(several names on my previous lists.)

[Van Huskey]

One thing that is often missed is this comes down to value and value is a VERY personal thing. I see it most starkly on the watch forums I frequent. The largest one has sub-forums for Chinese (not knockoff) watches all the way up to high-end where the buy in is 10k+. The "problem" comes in when the $10 Parnis watch does basically the same thing as a $100k Patek and why you see people with collections of $10 watches just as proud and happy with them as the guys with 7 figure collections. Each feels they are getting value for their money and hard to argue even the person with a million dollars tied up in wrist jewelry is dumb, since unless he/she is a trust fund baby he/she almost certainly did something intelligent over and over to be able to afford them.

It is probably safe to say if we all had Bill Gates money you wouldn't see much discussion of rehabbing an old Craftsman 6" table top jointers found on CL but lots more about how long the lead time is on a new Martin. Will the Maloof Rocker or Boston Highboy they each make look different based on whether they were milled on a $100 or $40k jointer, no but they probably feel they both got value. There are a wide variety of people here, some will have to save for a while to buy a PEC blem and for some the price of a Starrett 12" combo is a literal rounding error on their lunch tab from earlier today, most of us live somewhere in the middle but we all see value different.

I get your issue with advertising and content creators but Woodpeckers makes a quality tool in the US and while they make some expensive niche tools that it is often hard to see where the value lies they apparently it has merit for some people.

[Cary Falk]

PS To be fair, I also think a Range Rover is worth the price so I may not be normal.

My wife had a 2006 Range Rover Sport HSE. I don't claim it. I was so happy the day we sold that pig. We must have got a bad one. :D

[David Kumm]

My wife had a 2006 Range Rover Sport HSE. I don't claim it. I was so happy the day we sold that pig. We must have got a bad one. :D

Tata beats Ford. Dave

[Nick Decker]

I don't know of anybody who claims you NEED the red stuff to do good work, but it "feels" well made. I don't claim to be a master at woodworking, but I do take pride in my work. I get the feeling that WP takes that same kind of pride in making their tools. I usually don't get that feeling from stuff from the big box stores.

[Van Huskey]

I agree that some of the one time tools are out there and I don't buy them if they are of no use to me. I don't see the same hate for large expensive sliders that hobbyist buy for example. I have gone through a rash of bad squares. I was always fighting square until I stepped up to better measurement equipment(several names on my previous lists.)

I think it may be due to the fact not a lot of people can drop 10-20 grand on a new mid-level slider so they simply don't read nor comment on it. They are also not going to comment on a 2K Aigner shaper fence, even if they think it is silly for a hobbyist. A $100 square is more in their wheelhouse so they are more likely to call it out. Again Woodpeckers has turned some people against them with the One Time Tools, I am sure you remember the "uproar" when the released the first OTT for the second time... We could all build stuff with a worn out $8 Lufkin tape and a beat up $4 plastic speed square but sometimes the journey is the most fun and sometimes using (really) nice tools makes the journey a little more satisfying.

I also respect and believe the OP's data points but at the same time like you my experience has not been as stellar with cheap squares.

[Mike Cutler]

Companies have a product to sell people, that's just the way of it. The "Red Company" selling squares is no different. If their products were not as they advertised, that would be one thing, but apparently they are as advertised, and as such they're allowed to ask what they believe it is worth and what the market will bear. It is the same with most anything.
In Williams post I would argue a few points.
Firstly, without a NIST Certification you have no accuracy. I don't care what color the square is, or who's name is on it. If the "red company has NIST traceable certs in their manufacturing process than that is what you are paying for. You're buying a "standard".
I have a 6' long Starrett machine rule. Prior to losing it's NIST cert it was worth $700.00 in 1996. Once it lost it's NIST cert it was about as valuable as any piece of metal in the bin. That Cert is expensive. It would have had to go back to Starrett to regain the NIST CERT.
Second. All of the squares were referenced and adjusted to the "red square" and not a standard. This is a reverse iterative calibration method.
Third. A "standard" tape measure was used to establish a sheet of plywood as at the reference for a parallel, reverse "calibration" checks. That the sheet of plywood was square, all four sides, is amazing to me. Same with the drywall tee's.
I understand the argument that William is presenting, and actually agree with it. The methodology of the testing has to many variables and flaws for me. As someone that early in their career worked in a mechanical standards lab, and actually calibrated rulers, squares, gauging blocks, dial indicators, micrometers, etc. Willam's testing is to unorthodox for me. Given that, I would also say that, were I to go back into the lab and repeat the same tests William did, the result would be very similar.
Products today are not being made by hand any longer to a large degree. They're being made on machines that are fully automated that have tolerances and accuracies expressed as percentages of the digital word equivalent of LSD, and the baud rate the machine is running at. as long as the machine is setup accurately, everything coming off that machine will be within those accuracy specification.
I have one "quality" square, and it's primary purpose is machine setup, and layout. I primarily see the use of a square as a tool to setup a machine, not so much to simply draw a line. The machine setup needs to be as good as you can make it. You want any given part coming out of a machine to be statistically the same as every other part made with that existing machine setup. That's not accuracy, that's repeatability.

I have a number of L&N planes and chisels. They're beautiful and very gratifying to work with. I also have a number of flea market specials, and a box of assorted plane parts collected over the years. I can mix and match the parts in that box, and make a plane that will function, exactly as one of the L&N planes. It won't be as nice, and the handle may be held together with electrical tape, but that blade and sole will work. Was I a fool to have bought L&N products for their "hype"? I hope not.

[Greg R Bradley]

Actually, you need to change your title because a square is NEVER square. It is always a question of the tool being good enough for the task. In a precision machine shop we bought new Starrett Master Squares like a 20-12 for $700 and then marked the accuracy and problem areas.

I went through all of the Empire squares at a borq to find maybe one or two out of 8-10 that were good enough for carpentry. Had to wonder about people buying the ones that i left behind. Probably would have to work with it to make it good enough for any precision woodworking.

Go to Harry Epstein and buy PEC seconds of a 4" or 6" Double Square for $12-15. Buy a 12" Combination Square for $45. Later, if you have the desire, spend $100 for a Woodpecker 1281 from Carbide Processors. At that point you will stop using the Combination Square for all uses except where you need the "Combination" part. The three make a great combination.

The value in the Woodpecker square is the design and function. It won't be any more accurate than a $17.50 solid machinist square from HJE here: https://www.harryepstein.com/index.php/12-machinist-s-solid-square.html

[Brian Holcombe]

I worked in a machine shop for a few years so I’d rather have the ‘machinist’ brands, but I use a PEC tools for everyday stuff.

As Dave mentions, error compounds and it’s expensive to spend time on something that should be accurate but is not.

Wood movement is a moot point that is constantly brought up to suggest that doing accurate work is folly. If you are building parts in batches then they will move similarly. Also my project time lines are typically narrow enough that I’m not experiencing significant wood movement until after they’re finished. At which point I like to see that my joints are still tight and attend to anything that has caused an issue.

I notice far fewer issues the more accurately I work, just does well for me and the type of work I do.

[Van Huskey]

Tata beats Ford. Dave

Can't argue with that point.

I don't disagree with you often but Land Rovers are low on my value chart. While not with the same cache the Toyota/Lexus Land Cruiser and LX are much better made and just as capable. This comes from someone for whom his LR Defender was one of his all time favorite vehicles. While you could see the panel gaps from space it was one of the most capable from the dealer passenger vehicles ever made, along with the diesel H1 and the old G-wagons (pre- Brad and Angelina matching pairs, when they were grey market only like the Defender).

Before some wise butt chimes in I don't consider the Unimog a passenger vehicle but possibly the coolest vehicle on the planet, and that planet includes the 911 GT2 RS...

[Brett Luna]

I think of these things as the chrome tipped exhaust of woodworking, no real need, but who doesn't like a little bling.

My eyes are every bit as old as I am and are prebyopic, astigmatic, and have the beginnings of cataracts. A little satin chrome bling goes a long way to making a blade more readable.

[Steve Demuth]

So... I think we can conclude that the $8 measuring and squaring tools will provide dutiful service, and that the hype is just hype. Discuss.

I've got one pretty spendy (Starrett) square that I use as a reference for machine setup and checking / squaring other tools, as well as machining tasks. I have used it to align the squareness of a miter gauge on my table saw, and having done so, could cut an 18 segment circle (36 total cuts) 12" in diameter with no more than .005" total gap in the segments.

My other woodworking squares are "off the shelf" tools. But essentially 100% of them required fettling into true square using the reference tool. Some weren't initially square. Some blades weren't really straight. Some had both problems. Were they good enough before fettling? Depends on what you wanted to do with them. The cheap Stanley rafter square was good enough to build steps for my deck. I wouldn't have wanted to use it to for aligning cabinet doors that had to meet with a visually uniform reveal between them. Its long edge wouldn't do to verify co-planarity on a jointer either. I still wouldn't use it for that, but after some work, it's close enough that I probably could.

[Jacob Mac]

I get where you are coming from for sure. With that said, I have one Woodpecker tool, and I really like it. I got some clamping squares for a gift and I use them on almost every project.

I also am saving for a LN 4 1/2. So I'm probably too caught up in nice tools.

[William Chain]

All of the squares were referenced and adjusted to the "red square" and not a standard. This is a reverse iterative calibration method.

I’ll clarify - I did not adjust anything. I compared the cheap ones with the “square” one just to see. Everybody seemed to be consistent. By no means were my analyses super rigorous, I tried them under conditions typical of my work and I’d venture to guess most other work here. Bottom line is these cheap ones will produce fine work. And yes, I’d feel differently if the prices were not ridiculous for what you get. The OTT things I find mostly hysterical. For example, the $140 stick. It’s a stick... Their marketing is (necessarily) boastful and I guess it’s proving effective.

And to clarify further, I have little disdain for some of the other brands cause they aren’t busy saturating social media with their wares. Just honest and most of the time affordable. With WP, I’m reminded of a Family Guy bit about children’s photos... So I felt the need to experiment to prove (granted without a NIST certificate) a point.

[Chris Fournier]

If you needed a sheet of plywood you used a sheet of plywood to verify your red square hypothesis you are already out of the running in my books. Not sure why you tested a square like you did.

Machine a straight edge and us a knife to score a line with your square. Flip the square 180 degrees and score a line again? Where are you at? Two times the error of the square.

I have cheap carpentry squares and expensive machining and woodworking squares. They all represent good value to me although they cost magnitudes of $$$ difference. I have never begrudged the cost of a precision measuring instrument. Not once. They inspire me to do the best work. They will last more than my lifetime. Can't say that for the cheap stuff which is not to say that the cheap stuff wasn't worth the money.

[johnny means]

Their is no doubt that their is a difference in quality between the different price tiers of measuring tools. I think the OP is pointing out the folly of "you should by the Starrett..." Imagine if every, "Which saw should I buy?", was answered with either Martin or Altendorf. We would all see that as pretty unproductive.

[Cary Falk]

…….social media...…...

I see the problem. I can't remember the last time I have seen any adds for Woodpeckers. They don't even send me any e-mails for OTTs anymore. I just went to their website just now to see the latest OTTs I have missed this year. Pocket Compass, how ridiculous. :D Where did I put my wallet?:rolleyes:

[Edwin Santos]

In very general terms "the red bird" starting getting hate when they started the one time tool deal. I have a few Woodpeckers measuring devices and absolutely love my Delve square.



I'm right there with you brother. I wanted to hate "the red bird" and ordered the Delve square in a weak moment. But I've really come to love that thing, as much for layout and marking as for tool setup. Handy little sucker and to my knowledge, there's nothing else quite like it.
I have a really nice coffee maker. I don't really "need" it, but boy that thing brightens up every morning. Tools can be like that.
Edwin,

[Mike Walsh]

I have 3 Starrett squares that belonged to my Dad, all are the steel rule versions and at least 50 yrs old. They're all "dead square" no matter which way I check them - only issue is the rulers are hard to read. About 3 years ago I got a satin finish rule which is much easier to read - I can swap it into any of the 3 heads and no difference from the original rules. I don't own any WP measuring tools, but I'd highly recommend investing in the quality of the Starrett product

[Brian Holcombe]

Checking precision tools for accuracy can be done in various ways, I saw Chris Vesper has a pretty cool rig setup
for checking his squares with an indicator.

If I were serious about squareness I would use a granite master square.

[Edwin Santos]

Checking precision tools for accuracy can be done in various ways, I saw Chris Vesper has a pretty cool rig setup
for checking his squares with an indicator.

If I were serious about squareness I would use a granite master square.

Adjusting a combo square is surprisingly simple. All it takes is a small thin file. I've seen a video somewhere online by Robert Lang where he demonstrates how to do it. You can sneak up on the adjustment using your checking method of choice until you get it dialed in.

[Matt Day]

Harbor freight sells jointers and planers too. Maybe we all should trade in our Powermatic, Festool, Felder, etc since the harbor freight models work.

[Mike Cutler]

I’ll clarify - I did not adjust anything. I compared the cheap ones with the “square” one just to see. Everybody seemed to be consistent. By no means were my analyses super rigorous, I tried them under conditions typical of my work and I’d venture to guess most other work here. Bottom line is these cheap ones will produce fine work. And yes, I’d feel differently if the prices were not ridiculous for what you get. The OTT things I find mostly hysterical. For example, the $140 stick. It’s a stick... Their marketing is (necessarily) boastful and I guess it’s proving effective.

And to clarify further, I have little disdain for some of the other brands cause they aren’t busy saturating social media with their wares. Just honest and most of the time affordable. With WP, I’m reminded of a Family Guy bit about children’s photos... So I felt the need to experiment to prove (granted without a NIST certificate) a point.

William

I understand where you're coming from. I truly do. You solicited discussion, so I commented.
For the record. I do not own any of the "Red Company's" products, and suspect that the OTT concept was taken from John Economaki, of Bridge City Tool's, marketing model. People are drawn to exclusive, and I suspect that is what The OTT is all about.
The "best" squares I have seen readily available are the plastic Staedler triangle squares available in Art stores and drafting supply catalogs, and they're generally less than $5.00. Same with their drafting Tee's, but they run about $40.00. They're more than adequate for the majority of wood working applications.

[Rich Engelhardt]

So... I think we can conclude that the $8 measuring and squaring tools will provide dutiful service, and that the hype is just hype. Discuss.I won a Red Company pocket rule. It's a joy to use. Accurate in the extreme. I use it mostly for router setup where tiny, tiny, tiny differences matter a lot. The type that the eye can't detect, but, the finger can.

[William Hodge]

It's hard for me to not buy Starrett tools. My neighbors and relatives work there. This ad was in the local newspaper today. I t means a lot. Go look around Athol on Google Street, and you can see how important this is to the local economy. The are also great to use.


https://greenfieldrecorder-ma.newsmemory.com/newsmemvol2/massachusetts/greenfieldrecorder/20180825/gr-grr_20180825_c8.pdf.0/page/pag_7_0.gif?mtime=075442

[Nick Decker]

I'm curious as to how much more than "reasonable profit" WP makes on their products. Given the environmental/safety/etc. regulations and the cost of skilled American labor, how much of that $100 square is profit?

[ray grundhoefer]

I have their precision framing square. Is it overpriced at what I paid for it? I don't think so,.. I had 3 cheap stamped framing squares from the borg . everyone of them was off to varying degrees. some of their onetime tools are rather expensive compared to what you get however people still buy them. there are a few other things they have that appeal to me also, It goes back to the same old question" how much are you willing to pay for quality"

[Brian Holcombe]

I have one checking tool from the BORG, I had to straighten it abd later discovered it also had a slight twist to it. Check out Chris Vesper’s Instagram and you start to get a feel for the difference in quality and conscientiousness of someone really interested in producing fine tools. That sort of thing is important to me, and I think it’s great to see that level of professionalism consumed by the industry.

[Brian W Evans]

I like the analogy with "car people" vs "non-car people." I don't need my slider or my WP T-Square or my Starret combo square (or, or, or...), but they make me happy. Nobody else needs to understand why since it's my money. I'm not even sure I understand why.

I've driven my father's Porsche and BMW, and they're nice. I genuinely prefer my 10 year old Subaru. I just don't understand car people, but I don't begrudge them their preferences. I also don't understand people who would rather go on a cruise than stay in a hostel or go camping, or those who would spend $50 on a steak or glass of wine. It doesn't bother me, though.

To each his own, live and let live, everyone marches to their own drummer, etc.

[David Kumm]

I like the analogy with "car people" vs "non-car people." I don't need my slider or my WP T-Square or my Starret combo square (or, or, or...), but they make me happy. Nobody else needs to understand why since it's my money. I'm not even sure I understand why.

I've driven my father's Porsche and BMW, and they're nice. I genuinely prefer my 10 year old Subaru. I just don't understand car people, but I don't begrudge them their preferences. I also don't understand people who would rather go on a cruise than stay in a hostel or go camping, or those who would spend $50 on a steak or glass of wine. It doesn't bother me, though.

To each his own, live and let live, everyone marches to their own drummer, etc.
Brian, I am completely the opposite in what I enjoy but agree completely. Makes the world work. Dave

[Alan Schwabacher]

I mostly have used and inexpensive tools I have fettled into accuracy. However, I have and use a Starrett combination square, and find that the easy to read scales, crisp gradations, and particularly the flat ground edge make precision much more pleasant. In combination with a marking knife, I can work faster at high precision with the Starrett. Another brand that is properly ground would work, but a cheap square with rounded edge to the rule and wide markings does not work the same way. I have a bunch of other squares that are good enough for most woodworking, and I like speed squares for rough carpentry as they are unaffected by falls, and are thick enough to use as a circular saw guide. But they most definitely do not all match, unless I put in some work.

Many people find that expensive, beautiful tools are worth it to them, and I usually find that they are not worth it for me. A well made square is worth it to me, and I don't mind helping in a very small way to support William Hodge's neighbors.

[Mike Cutler]

I don't need my slider or my WP T-Square or my Starret combo square (or, or, or...), but they make me happy. Nobody else needs to understand why since it's my money. I'm not even sure I understand why.
To each his own, live and let live, everyone marches to their own drummer, etc.

Brian
I think it's because we appreciate that someone, or a company, is more involved with manufacturing a quality product, than the "race to the bottom". It's the same with my Lie-Neilsen planes and chisels. The Stanley's and Miller Fall's tools I've picked up through the years will do exactly the same thing, but I like using the LN's. It's rewarding to have a tool that a company cared about making.
Let's face it, at the end of the day, with the exception of the people on the forum that make their living from wood working, we would be better off economically to have gone to IKEA, than to have made our last project ourselves.
But we don't. ;)

[John Sincerbeaux]

When I buy tool and machines, I do so to increase my accuracy, speed, and utility. The four machine upgrades for me have been a slider, a widebelt, an oscillating edge sander, and planer. Except for the widebelt, each machine is either a Martin or Kundig. Crazy expensive machines and in the same discussion of BMW’s, Range Rover, Patek Phillepe, but for me, the level of accuracy, efficiency, and utility these machines bring is night and day. And certainly, like the feel of a LN handplane, the “tactile” experience is real.
After reading this thread, ironically, I realized all my squares are probably way below what most would consider high-end. And I know a top of the line, best in the world square would not yield the same monster leaps in my work and experience that other tools/machines have brought.

[Chris Fournier]

It's hard for me to not buy Starrett tools. My neighbors and relatives work there. This ad was in the local newspaper today. I t means a lot. Go look around Athol on Google Street, and you can see how important this is to the local economy. The are also great to use.


https://greenfieldrecorder-ma.newsmemory.com/newsmemvol2/massachusetts/greenfieldrecorder/20180825/gr-grr_20180825_c8.pdf.0/page/pag_7_0.gif?mtime=075442
As a Canadian I can tell you that I have your back! I buy North American every chance I get, your neighbours are my neighbours. And not just when it comes to Starrett. Never shed a tear for spending money on high quality goods. I have cursed my stupidity for cheaping out. But that was a loooong time ago. Buy once cry once and spend your money as close to where you live as possible!

[Patrick Walsh]

I personally loose my freaking mind when my square is not square and or a machine is not setup square and I am getting out of square cuts.

I make boxes all day for a living and inevitably many end up slightly out of square despite my best efforts. Well my best efforts can get a perfectly square result but the boss can’t afford to pay for perfectly square every time when a 64th out is just fine.

There are times and quite often time when square has to be square. There are the majority of times when reliably square just makes life way easier and thus productivity goes up.

Plus there is just the satisfaction of perfectly square. Maybe it’s not so much the satisfaction of perfectly square as much as it’s the disappointment and aggravation of out of square. Comes down to pride I suppose.

I have many squares all the above mentioned. My Sterret was out right out of the box to the tune of 32nd over 12”. My mini Sterret is perfectly square and a dream of a tool. My empire was square but the locking mechanism makes it the most aggravating piece of crap in the world to use. My red square is perfectly square and a joy to use due to the ledge design and beef and heft allowing to easily stand it up in or on a work piece. My Chris vesper square is perfectly square well designed and just a plain old joy to use.

I use my tools 60-70 hrs a week most years 52 weeks a year. All I really do is work so it’s nice to work with nice tools.

[Van Huskey]

each machine is either a Martin or Kundig. Crazy expensive machines and in the same discussion of BMW’s, Range Rover, Patek Phillepe,

While Patek fits the analogy to Martin with cars it should be Ferrari, if being country specific Lange & Sohne and Porsche's GT2 cars and above.

I spent quite a bit of time drooling on the Martin's at IWF, wonder how much they had to knock off the price for the rust. There is no machine I lust for more than a Martin T27 FleX.


It seems many and I am guessing most of us appreciate "quality" squares whether or not the much cheaper ones are just as close to square.

[Ellen Benkin]

I love the scientific method!

[John Goodin]

William,
I guess you are not going shell out $640 for the new red "ultimate doweling jig." https://www.woodpeck.com/ultimate-doweling-jig.html
Looks like a pain to use and not much cheaper than a Domino.

[lowell holmes]

I say you need at least one of each kind, I do and I bet others do also.

[David Utterback]

I only bought the red squares because previously purchased fixed squares from woodworking shops were not square in comparison with each other. All but one failed the scribe and flip test. In the end, the red squares allowed me to find that the only square that was nearly true was a 4" try square which is great for machine tuning but not for marking lumber. All of the others of greater length were out including several that were advertised as square within 0.001" per inch of length.

That being said, I have several combination squares that are dead-on. And as others have noted, they are adjustable.

[Carlos Alvarez]

The physical usability of Big Red is also a factor for me. I'm faster and more confident when I hold them. They have features to make them more reliable without great effort. The end result makes me happy. Using them makes me happy. Also the better stuff stays square while light-duty ones go off over time from being dropped or whatever.

[Rick McQuay]

When I was younger and had less disposable income I bought speed squares, Craftsman squares, Stanley squares; they were okay most of the time, sometimes dead on and sometimes not. Then I bought a vintage Lufkin square and my eyes were opened. It was dead nutz and it just ... worked, every time. I didn't have to check it before every use to see if it was square. It locked up tight. The measurements were accurate. Then I scored some deals on Starrett and forget it, I never looked back. They are square every day, every time, and they bring me joy because I do not have to worry about them and they feel good in the hand. I've also bought some Brown & Sharpe, they are 'almost' as good as Starrett. My favorite is a 24" B&S, love that thing. People say a 12" is the most useful size square but for me, I love that 24".

[Eduardo Fenili]

Im rather new to woodworking (a few years) but I would say name brand domestic tools bought new being really expensive is the norm and not the exception.

I find "big red" tools to be on the higher end for cost definitely but great to use and also great quality even if the resulting woodwork could be achieved with a piece of plastic. I've "wasted" money on plenty of woodworking tools if you think finding the cheapest version that gets the job done is the bar that is set....and maybe it is for many.

As a hobbyist maker I woodwork because it makes me happy and is an amszing way to enjoy a a day....and sometimes using fancy tools or whatever from any company makes the process and experience that much better.

I suppose you can hate their marketing strategy and prices but im not sure I see any bad practice going on. They seem no different than any other company in any other category these days. They are actually very good at it from what I can see and working in that industry.

Seems odd to hate them over these things

[Brian Holcombe]

I’m glad to have many choices that are very good. I haven’t bought a tool from the big box stores in a very long time, so I’m pretty unaware of their pricing but the pricing of brands such as woodpeckers, matsui, vesper, starrett and mitutoyo have been pretty good, given the quality provided.

Its hard to always buy a high quality thing, but when you do it’s nice that they’re reliable.

[Alex Burkhardt]

I'm all for discussing and debating a tool or brands inherent "value", but it's a bit disheartening when the conversation begins with "disgust" over all the "sell-outs" on the internet. I'll never understand why people get bent out of shape when individuals who create free content and publish it on the internet for the world to consume at their leisure are criticized for taking money, tools, sponsorship, etc. Many of them use those things to fuel their brands, pay their mortgages, and feed their families. Just a thought ...

Second, the final line relegating the tools to all "hype" is missing the point. Hype is the latest diet fad, or the next "superfood" that you must eat. Eventually we learn more, and discover it's not quite as rosy as we had originally thought, and we move on to the next. Red squares will still be good squares when we're long gone, and someone is pillaging our shops in preparation for the estate sale. They're well-made in the US, and serve their purpose. WP isn't claiming their competitors products aren't square, or don't work -- they just know how much we, as a community, geek out on the idea that perfectly flat, square, and smooth = quality. So they made something that's pretty darn square. But knowing that B&S, Starrett, and others also exist, the added some value by making it feel nice in the hand, letting it sit well on the edge of a board, and anodized it an eye-catching color. For some, that's cool, and worth the price tag. Don't fault the company for knowing their market. A market who, if i'm guessing, may just already own the box store square, and the Starrett, too!

[Patrick Walsh]

So today I did something that made me think about this thread.

What seems would be a very simple task and I guess is is not so simple if everything is not perfectly square.

I was very very happy to quality tools I couple spend on being square when setting up my machines to both mill up my stock to make the moulding used to make the frame. Then when it came time to make my cuts man was it nice to have a square I knew did not lie to me in the slightest.

Thank you Chris’s Vesper. And no he has never given me anything for free and I love giving him my money!

Forgive the first pic it’s all I have and nothing more than a point of reference.

392407

392408