How to square tracks for Track Saw

[Jim Matthews]

Yeah, the commercial rail squares do seem a bit spendy. I made my own. It is essentially a big speed square which clips on to the rail with the same kind of draw latch used by the commercial rail squares. My speed square is built from some baltic birch I had around the shop. Took me less than an hour.

Pictures, please in the shop made tool section.

[Dan Rude]

Check out Peter Millard's 10-Minute Workshop on making a square for your track-saw. He also reviews the one mentioned. I have the TrueTrac System, I just purchased their Square and really like it. Once setup, I can pull it off and put it back on and it is calibrated due to the dual dovetail keys. Besides, it was a reasonable price of only $90 (I paid $130 with a 2' track). Dan

[Evan Van Dyke]

If it is for narrow stuff (18” or less), a good set of square bench dog holes laid out from something like the parfdog system will let you square your track to the piece. Plus, the dog holes are useful for so much other stuff...

I use a good square and layout lines for wide cuts. At least in my use, the longer the cut is, the more likely I am to want parallel edges than I am square ones. I can square up the end later easily enough. So I rarely need to do many wide, square cuts. Parallel is pretty easy with a combination square to align both ends of the track. Or pick up a set of parallel guides if you are cutting a lot of stuff to the same dimension.

[Dave Sabo]

I have a hard time digesting $180 for that accessory, but I'm a "light" user of the track saw.. I use a carpenters square which I know to be accurate to set the track. I give up the ability to clamp the track in place, and maybe that would be the feature that justifies the purchase if I used the track saw more.

Not to chide, or tell you what's valuable to you, but isn't this the same sentiment that you "digested" when you bought a $400-$700 track saw instead of a $50 circ. saw and a piece of straight plywood or a clamp/edge for under a hundy combined ?
https://www.harborfreight.com/50-inc...ide-66581.html

You don't give up the ability to clamp the track if you get track specific clamps that attach into the track and grab the edge of the sheet or underneath.

https://www.google.com/search?q=trac...firefox-b-1-ab

[Mike Cutler]

I cut a piece of birch ply square using the five cut method (about 16" square) and glued a rail along one edge to catch the edge of the stock to be cut. It serves as a cheap but accurate square. I just slide the rail up against it's edge.

Bingo!!!
It's been working for decades.

To the OP
If you want accuracy in a device robust enough and large enough to establish a square reference up to 8' long, it is going to cost some $$$$
I use a Brian Lamb, Large Triangle Square for most things, just because it's so easy and convenient, but it was not an inexpensive device.

[Jim Dwight]

I use two different methods depending on how many cuts I need to make. For a fairly small quantity I use an Anderson Plywood layout square. I tried to find a link but it appears they are not currently available but I may not have looked hard enough. I put threaded inserts along one edge and normally have a small plywood scrap screwed on to make it a large speed square. I put the track on the cut mark and then square it to the edge with the big (18 inch) speed square.

The other method uses the 20mm holes in the top of my outfeed/work table. I have a fence I can use or it can be done with dogs. Either way, I put rail dogs on my shortest track and then hold the work piece against either dogs or the fence and make my cross cuts. I have been using the fence because my holes are either not perfect or my rail dogs are not working perfectly with my DeWalt track (they aren't really sold for DeWalt tracks). The result is a small error in the angle sometimes. To avoid this, I have a fine adjustment capability in my fence. The fence also gives me a stop to make repetitive pieces. It only takes a couple minutes to set up the fence and put the rail dogs in the rail but for a cut or two, I just use my oversize speed square.

[Brian Tymchak]

Not to chide, or tell you what's valuable to you, but isn't this the same sentiment that you "digested" when you bought a $400-$700 track saw instead of a $50 circ. saw and a piece of straight plywood or a clamp/edge for under a hundy combined?

No, not for me. if I had had to pay full price I likely would not have made that purchase. My out of pocket was a couple hundred bucks so I took the opportunity to try Festool gear, a TS55. It's certainly a nice saw, but not worth $700 to me. As I stated in my original post, if I was a heavy user of the track saw, the rail square might be worth it to me.

[Eric Arnsdorff]

Dave Sabo if I were doing cabinetry or woodworking for a living then it would be crazy not to just buy the commercially available and quality tool such as the TSO or Insta-RailSquare (I've been swayed for the patriotic original TSO).
But I'm a hobbyist and I'm not rich. I have enough to spend on my hobby but life is much better when my wife agrees with my purchases. She's okay with me spending money on my hobby and she gets things made for her as well. But there is a balance that all of us come for spending disposable income on our hobby and the benefits it provides. I can't put a number on it and I could easily spend a few extra hundred over my recent track saw purchase financially. But my balance of expenditures along with my inherent desire to design my own solutions determines what I buy. I think this is typical of the hobbyist. I have spent a lot of time and effort making do when I should've just spent the money to get things done. Interestingly, my wife was okay with me buying a commercial square along with additional accessories. But the simple methods available to achieve a solution as good as what is commercially available while providing a happy wife with an understanding of why I'm buying a different tool for my addiction (I mean hobby) is the reason why. I agree with your statement but it also fall into the grey fuzzy area of what to spend my limited hobby money on.
I have purchased a few items to make a DIY square (still awaiting an Amazon clamp item) that I think will work as good or maybe better than the commercial solutions. As a hobbyist I've spent more time than it would've been worth as a professional. I'll report back once assembled. Hopefully, I won't need to spend even more. It's all a learning experience. Sometimes I waste more money doing such things.

[Will Blick]

I have the TSO... I thought it was square, it was not...
The TSO joins to the rail, so the connection must be square. It relies on the rail slot which are not all perfect, as they were not designed to have a square put into them.
I understand your budget issues...
just sharing my solution from my experience using Festool rails for 12 years.
I use the WPeckers 2616, a bit more than than the TSO, but if you work with sheets, its has so many uses, its NOT a one trick pony like the TSO. Its reliable for all types of tasks... and it works soooo easy with the rails... as it slices along the edge of the wood with a nice size lip, unlike the lamb triangle, which is nice, but not as ideal IMO for squaring a rail.
Also with the TSO, u always have to take it off, re position it, put it on a new rail...if you bump it, you can tweak the rail a tad throwing it slightly out of square, etc.

[George Bokros]

I use the Woodpeckers 2616 for squaring my track saw also. And as Will says it has many other uses also.

[Jim Matthews]

Check out Peter Millard's 10-Minute Workshop on making a square for your track-saw. He also reviews the one mentioned. I

Excellent suggestion.

Kudos

[Jeff Bartley]

What about just measuring a 3-4-5 triangle? Takes 30 seconds longer than bumping a square up to a reference edge but it's accurate to whatever length your reference edge happens to be.

[Will Blick]

> If you want accuracy in a device robust enough and large enough to establish a square reference up to 8' long, it is going to cost some $$$$

BTW, I generally agree with Mike here... if you want a RELIABLE means to square up a 8ft run, or even 4ft, you need a super reliable reference that is machined to tolerances which is very difficult to achieve with ww tools. And even if you did get it close with a wood product, wood moves, even man made wood composites... tiny amounts, but that is all we are talking about here, as errors double each time you double the distance of the reference.

Also, no matter how good your reference is, it only represents a starting point. When put to use, there is then additional variables, such as straightness of the rail, slight rail flexing, etc. While some of this can be controlled by good technique, errors will still be introduced. So while some ww always scream, its ww, we dont need resolutions to thousands of an inch, they often overlook how fast the downstream errors come into play, further multiplying errors, creating an undesirable cut in the end product. Again, if it's for construction, this is a non issue. My comments reference fine woodworking where gaps are trying to be avoided in the final product.

OTOH, if you simply need to make a few cuts, and the need for extreme squareness is not required, there is many techniques offered in this post that will more than suffice to get close. I like the math triangle method, assuming u are not cutting thin strips, where triangle math and measurement becomes difficult to implement.

The ideal squaring method is to use a reference system that is the same length of the final part you are cutting. For small parts, that is often easy, or even mid size parts, the WP 2616 can handle. Unfortunately, WPeckers (or anyone I am aware of) does not make a 8ft long square, hence why shorter references must be of super high precision, as its errors will double every length of the reference.

[Mike Cutler]

Will

Definitely, the error compounds, but as you stated, a person has to start somewhere.
I don't know what Eric's needs are, or the "accuracy" he needs to work to, but there are solutions to every problem. Eventually, the blade has to hit the wood.
Whomever believes that wood working isn't a game of thousandth's, is spending more time than required with a palm sander. The shaper and the moulder are definitely machines that are setup to thousandth's.