Which Starrett Combination Square to begin with
Welcome! / Forums / General Woodworking Discussions / Which Starrett Combination Square to begin with
Tagged: combination squares
- This topic has 5 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 6 months ago by Ed.
-
AuthorPosts
-
24 November 2014 at 7:38 am #121389
I am currently using a Miller Falls combination square that was handed down to me. I was a vast improvement over the Stanley with the plastic head. I want to upgrade to as good as I can get, and from what I’ve been reading, it appears that Starrett is the way to go. Which model you anyone recommend, and why? Thank you in advance for your input.
24 November 2014 at 1:05 pm #121395The Starrett’s come in models with cast iron heads or hardened forged steel. The rules come in regular or chromed. And you can get the single head or the square and center heads. The model numbers reflect these options. The forged heads are harder and will resist a drop to a concrete floor better if you want to spend the extra $30. 12″ is the most useful. I think 18″ rules tend to be awkward. For me, at least.
I think for a starter the cast head with only the square is perfectly fine. It runs about $100 on Amazon. I like the chromed rule. The model number for that with a 12″ rule will be C11H-12-4R or C11H-12-16R where the “C” is for chromed, “11H” is for the cast head (33H is the forged head), “12” is the length of the rule being 12″, and “4R or 16R” is the graduations on the rule.
If money is no object, you can buy the model with the center head on it, too. You can also get the model with the square, center head and protractor head in a nice box but that runs about $250. I find that I don’t use the center head very often on my 6″ model. You can always buy the extra heads later.
You won’t be sorry for buying a Starrett square and you’ll have it for the rest of your life.
24 November 2014 at 10:27 pm #121410I will agree that you will not be sorry for buying a Starrett. I just bought a 12″ Starrett a few months ago. I did not get the centering or protractor heads. I had an old (very) cheap combo square that I did not like or trust (and trust is very important). The Starrett is at least twice as heavy as the junky one and has taken some getting used to, but I like it very much.
I hit a garage sale on Sunday and found a 9″ Starrett combo square in fantastic condition. I can’t wait to start using it. Incidentally, at the same garage sale I also picked up a 6″ combo square by Brown and Sharpe, a small Craftsman divider and a few other items – the whole lot for $5.00. I was singing on my way home. The Brown and Sharpe is missing the knurled nut and spring that hold the rule to the stock, and I’m working on replacing them. But it will be nice to have small square for small work and large for bigger work.
Good luck on your decision.
20 September 2016 at 5:16 pm #140500It’s great when you get quality at a low price, Matt.
I personally did due diligence research and found that PEC Tools comes in second to Starrett a lot of the time. Then I found that if their engraved tools are blemished, the PEC name is ground off and and then the tools are sold off as “Blemished”. HarryEpstein.com sells them at quite a bargain price.I’ve found that the straight rule and the square attachment are the most useful for our kind of work. The Protractor was the next thing I picked up, and then — why not? — I got the centering attachment. (It’ll come in handy when I put tips on my Paul Sellers’ walking sticks.)
The 12″ rule seems most useful for me; for smaller work I got a small set of small engineer squares (no marked gradations). Then, because I’ll be sharing a shop in the foreseeable future, I picked up a second 12″ rule because sooner or later, some doofuss goofball is going to assume that the detachable rule on my precision combination square would be a good way to underline sentences on his child’s homework paper.
Buying second best “blemished” was a good cheap way to go. Making sure that the gradations are marked on a matte surface and not a polished surface is also easier on elderly eyes.
Oh, I also tested all this against the Lufkin that “Zada” Polaski handed down through my father, and found that the old Lufkin combination square is dead square, most of a century later.
- This reply was modified 7 years, 6 months ago by jeffpolaski.
20 September 2016 at 5:52 pm #140502Jeff, I did just that for the extra 24″ rule I have for my square. The “blemish” is a tiny speck of the etching on one spot where the number line isn’t as sharp. I think I picked it up a bit more than a year ago for around $25. That sure beats the full price of over $100.
I use the 4″ double square more than any other square. Because it is smaller, it is more agile and does not wobble when placed on a narrow edge because of being overbalanced by a long 12″ scale. I can check most tenons and mortises with it. It is the cornerstone of my accuracy in most cases. The double square (body) is useful in and of itself as a squaring block, e.g., to check a shoulder. I use the 4″ double square for both layout and for testing and tuning joinery.
The 4″ size is not big enough to handle all of the layout, but I’d rather have the Starrett precision in the 4″ and go cheaper on the 12″, although, to be honest, buying a quality 12″ combo square is high on my list.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.