It's Back - Odd Jobs

[Jim Koepke]

it seems Woodpecker Tools is going to make another batch of the Odd Jobs tool. Here is a video from an earlier production of the tools:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BNOzq9Es-U

A good demonstration of its many uses.

It seems a little pricey to me. My Stanley Odd Jobs only cost me $25. Had to come up with my own ruler.

Click here for the current info.

This is kind of a surprise since others have made this tool and it didn't seem to be a sustainable product. Maybe running with made to order makes it viable once in a while.

jtk

[Derek Cohen]

Jim, I received the promotion, as many others no doubt did as well. My first reaction is "that looks good .. I need one". Then I let my brain take over and recognised that I had all the individual tools in my shop. There actually was no reason to purchase one ... and deleted the email.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Bill Houghton]

I have never understood why people spend real money on this tool, whether the original or reproductions. The baselines for measuring angles are so short that it's intrinsically inaccurate when working with wood, which is always slightly irregular. I've always seen it as a gimmick tool, although I will acknowledge I may be missing something.

As with Derek, I look around my shop and see every function covered, and better, with the tools in my shop, all of which together don't add up to $370 (not even sure they'd have added up to that if acquired at retail).

[William Adams]

I picked up a reproduction made by/for Rockler from Jim Bode Tools a while back, because I knew one old cabinetmaker who had one and I've always been fascinated by multi-function tools. Paired it w/ a suitable Stanley four-fold rule (#62 I think).

It's interesting to me --- the combination square was developed by Starrett shortly thereafter, and seems to have overtaken it more gradually than I'd expect --- I suspect because the combination square was patented and only available from a single source and because of the cachet of the combination square being developed by Starrett, so even when it was available from lesser manufacturers was still perceived as a better tool. Comparing the ads for the twain is revealing.

Some observations:

- the Odd Jobs can do more, but requires more fiddling, and some functions are inobvious
- the combination square has a larger registration surface (as noted by Bill, though addressed by the XL size at the expense of pocketability and weight) and so feels more precise / reliable
- the combination square has a couple of functions which folks don't realize and are seldom used, even when appropriate (see the afore-mentioned ads)

It's interesting that the asymmetry of the combination square is so advantageous, and that the two symmetrical add-ons for it (center finder and protractor) are so seldom-used/added (says the guy who needs to buy the full set and is debating on a PEC blem. from Harry J. Epstein).

[Jim Koepke]

My Stanley Odd Jobs is used almost exclusively for scribing lines for rip cuts. Occasionally it is used for a mortise depth gauge, a level and scribing 45º lines. Of course this can also be done with a combination square.

When Starrett first introduced the combination square was it marketed mostly to machinists and metal workers or was it also marketed to woodworkers?

the two symmetrical add-ons for it (center finder and protractor) are so seldom-used

My combination squares tend to be used only occasionally. The centering head and protractor tends to be used the most, both have their own blades.

jtk

[Frederick Skelly]

As an aside, Garrett Wade has an interesting version of their own in two different sizes, starting at $40. LINK

[ken hatch]

As an aside, Garrett Wade has an interesting version of their own in two different sizes, starting at $40. LINK

Fred,

While I might not want an "Odd Job" Garrett Wade will always have a soft spot in my heart. Back in the dark ages Garrett Wade was about the only source of woodworking tools for this West Texas farm boy. I can remember hours and hours spent looking and lusting when the Garrett Wade catalog showed up.

Jim, sorry about the high jack but the link brought back great memories. BTW, I still have and use some of the tools I ordered from the catalog 50 or so years ago.

ken

[William Adams]

When Starrett first introduced the combination square was it marketed mostly to machinists and metal workers or was it also marketed to woodworkers?

Good point. Mentioned in The Starrett Book for Machinists' Apprentices in 1917: https://books.google.com/books?id=GYxEAAAAIAAJ

And here's an actual history: https://books.google.com/books?id=8Z...square&f=false

and a pair of ads (long on invective, short of descriptive): https://books.google.com/books?id=CN...square&f=false https://books.google.com/books?id=Ey...square&f=false

and a mention which covers some of the specifics: https://books.google.com/books?id=YT...square&f=false

>For carpenters and others not requiring the finer graduations the No. 94 combination square is particularly recommended...furnished with level and plumb.

[Jim Koepke]

Jim, sorry about the high jack but the link brought back great memories.

No problem Ken, it is almost always enjoyable to read of the memories which have been awoken.

jtk

[Frederick Skelly]

Fred,

While I might not want an "Odd Job" Garrett Wade will always have a soft spot in my heart. Back in the dark ages Garrett Wade was about the only source of woodworking tools for this West Texas farm boy. I can remember hours and hours spent looking and lusting when the Garrett Wade catalog showed up.

Jim, sorry about the high jack but the link brought back great memories. BTW, I still have and use some of the tools I ordered from the catalog 50 or so years ago.

ken

Ken, I liked them too. I bought my first set of decent clamps from them on closeout. They are becoming a shadow of what they once were, but I still like to buy from them when they have something I need. Glad it stirred some good memories!

Fred