Starrett combo square clarification please.

[FestitaMakool]

Well, I was kind of surprised myself to see that there were not even a hole for the pin.
I was just thinking when you wrote how and why they offer the student version.
(I’ve hear similar stories for other companies Sometimes cosmetically not perfect samples come off a production line that ends up in a “lesser” but cheaper versions of those who pass all inspections. Instead of write it off, It’s a valid choice to re-use and perfectly fine if it does it’s job as the product it was meant to be in the first place, only with lower grade finish.

The butt end of mine had a small bump in waist section. I’ve done an attempt to sand it flat and in square to the bottom - just in case I could use the small area to butt up against in a tight corner.

I’m sure all of these will serve me well, probably a lifetime if treated well. I’d be glad to pass them down to my sons, once they recognise and appreciate such a tool.
The center finder is something I’ve missed numerous times, a very welcome addition.

I was briefly thinking of a longer ruler with the 12”/300mm square, but would it be useful?
The heads base isn’t exactly long.. and I fear it will be a waste with a longer ruler.
Do you have experience with it?

I found that I can use the 6”/150mm ruler on the large head, but the 12”/300mm will not fit the small head. The 12”/300mm ruler is slightly thicker, and therefore doesn’t fit.

 

[Cheese]

Well, I was kind of surprised myself to see that there were not even a hole for the pin.
I was just thinking when you wrote how and why they offer the student version.

I was briefly thinking of a longer ruler with the 12”/300mm square, but would it be useful?
The heads base isn’t exactly long.. and I fear it will be a waste with a longer ruler.
Do you have experience with it?

Well Festita, after looking at the photos of the rear end of your square something looked very unfamiliar. I didn't know what it was until I gathered my 3 squares and took a look.
Mine vs yours...

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

Besides not having the hole for the scriber, your square is also missing "the plug". "The plug" covers the hole where the glass vial for the level is inserted.  [eek]

So for this student version square, the scriber & the level have both been deleted in the interest of reducing costs. Like I mentioned previously, I'm now curious how the other "Student" tools have been gelded.

[attachimg=3]

[attachimg=4]

For your last question I have no experience at all.

I do however use both a 18" and a 24" scale with the 2 large square heads a lot of the time for marking cut lines and thus making sure that repetitive cut pieces are the same length.

 

[ear3]

Asking [member=44099]Cheese[/member] or someone who has the 439 builders square -- does it use the same blades as the combination square?  Was trying to find clarification of this on the Starrett website, but couldn't find the info.

Alternatively, can the blades be purchased separately (I see that the head can be, so presumably the blades should as well)?  The 439-18 is selling for a much more reasonable price than the 24" version, so I wouldn't mind maybe to get the 18" version now and sometime in the future get the 24" blade.

 

[Cheese]

Sorry Edward...I don't know much about the 439 except that I always wanted one. Then Woodpeckers came out with their 2616 aluminum square and that urge to spend $500 subsided.  [smile]

I do know the blade on the 439 is 1 1/2" wide as opposed to 1" on the standard square. I have also seen photos where someone mounted the standard square head to a 439 blade so blade thickness must not be an issue.

 

[ear3]

Oh, for some reason I assumed you must have one.  I see the spec difference now on blade width b/w the builders and combo square.  So the question now is just where and whether I can get a 24" blade for the 439.

Sorry Edward...I don't know much about the 439 except that I always wanted one. Then Woodpeckers came out with their 2616 aluminum square and that urge to spend $500 subsided.  [smile]

I do know the blade on the 439 is 1 1/2" wide as opposed to 1" on the standard square. I have also seen photos where someone mounted the standard square head to a 439 blade so blade thickness must not be an issue.

 

[Cheese]

Edward, I just checked my Starrett catalog and even in that they do not separately list blades for the 439. I'm sure they're available you'll just have to give them a call.  [smile]

Athol MA
978-249-3551

 

[ear3]

Hmmm, odd.  I'll reach out to the company then.  Thx for checking!

Edward, I just checked my Starrett catalog and even in that they do not separately list blades for the 439. I'm sure they're available you'll just have to give them a call.  [smile]

Athol MA
978-249-3551

 

[ear3]

Just talked to Starrett (didn't realize they actually pronounce it "Stare-It").  Turns out the 18" and 24" blades are interchangeable on the builders tool.  So in a weird quirk of current pricing, you can actually get the 439-18, then buy the 24" ruler separately, and still spend less money than if you were to just buy the 24" version.

Amazon currently lists the 439-18 at $314; whereas the lowest I've seen for the 24" model is $473.  The price for the separate 18" and 24" rulers are basically the same at around $101 

 

[Cheese]

Amazon currently lists the 439-18 at $314; whereas the lowest I've seen for the 24" model is $473.  The price for the separate 18" and 24" rulers are basically the same at around $101

Very interesting Edward as the head-only direct from Starrett, H439, goes for $364.  Amazon sells the head-only for $376.
https://www.starrett.com/metrology/product-detail/H439

Thanks for the info...it's been saved.  [big grin]

 

[ear3]

This is weird.  When I saw the price so low at $314, I decided to pull the trigger and get it.  Less than an hour later I was checking back on the listing and it went back up to $451.  If you look at the price history it had been creeping down incrementally over the past month, but is back now to what it usually goes for.  Dynamic pricing in action.

 

[demographic]

For me the 300mm ones arent that great.
They don't really fit into my tool pouch, and if they do they jab me in the leg/elbow when I bend down.
I have been using a 150mm one for a few years now and it does 90% of what I want but fits nicely into my pouch and doesn't try to stab me 3 times a day.
Then I have a 400mm one thats more or less just as bad to carry as the 300mm but I just leave it on a bench and don't even try and that does most of the rest of the square marking thats not covered by a full size framing square or the 345 method.

 

[FestitaMakool]

For me the 300mm ones arent that great.
They don't really fit into my tool pouch, and if they do they jab me in the leg/elbow when I bend down.
I have been using a 150mm one for a few years now and it does 90% of what I want but fits nicely into my pouch and doesn't try to stab me 3 times a day.
Then I have a 400mm one thats more or less just as bad to carry as the 300mm but I just leave it on a bench and don't even try and that does most of the rest of the square marking thats not covered by a full size framing square or the 345 method.

Second that that the 300mm is not a carry on tool. Neither are the many regular squares available here, where most happens to be 250-300mm as the shortest available.
That’s also annoying, that there is almost no option in shorter framing squares, and I’ve heard professional carpenters and framers say the same. Though speed squares are increasingly more popular. Got one of those myself - but pocket friendly, no! [mad]
I have a couple of really good Bacho squares, one being a little tired on the not so business end - having been used for filling insulation around windows and many other things, so markings are long gone. I was thinking shortening it to a maximum of 200mm or less, maybe just above 150mm. That length is usually more than enough for most framing tasks and more. Being old It’s still square, and being near half the length of it’s original 300mm it can live in a pocket without poking all kinds of stuff, including me [big grin]
That’s basically why I bought the shorter Starretts, but the extras can only be acquired with the 300mm as a set or separate. Then for me its a shop tool, and that’s fine.

 

[ear3]

Builder's tool arrived.  The head is so massive that it actually makes the 18" blade seem small

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

I'm going to get the 24" blade separately to have greater length capacity, but the smaller blade is actually a good fit for storage in my tool cabinet.

Tool is dead on square at 90 doing the flip test

[attachimg=3]

The only thing that might be off is how the markings on either side line up.  On one side you have the traditional 0-90 angle markings, and on the other inches per foot.  When you lock it down to 12 inches per foot, the reading on the other side is slightly off 45 degrees

[attachimg=4]

[attachimg=5]

I've tested it up against a fixed 45 degree triangle, and found that the 45 degree angle setting lines up perfectly with true 45, whereas the 12 inches per foot marking falls around 45.2.  Not a huge discrepancy, and since I will probably only use this with the angle markings, one that will not be consequential.  But I'm curious to hear from anyone else who has this whether there is a similar differential alignment?  Maybe even enough to ask for a new head?

This will definitekly come in handy though next summer when I plan to rebuild the deck at my parents' house.

 

[acer66]

Here's a few screen shots from the Starrett catalog that may help decipher all of the Starret offerings for squares, square sets, blades and heads. They aren't real easy to read so I've included a link below to the .pdf of the Starrett catalog if you want to use that instead. Squares start on page 266.

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

[attachimg=3]

[attachimg=4]

And while we're talking about Starrett, here's a page where you can order some free printed literature. I find the Decimal Wall Charts and the Metric & Decimal Equivalent Cards to be the most useful. Just order what you want and the large wall chart will arrive in a mailing tube. It works nice in the shop because you can read it from a distance [big grin]
https://www.starrett.com/catalogs

Thank you for posting this, I have my mind set on a 300mm, cast head with satin finish and if I read that right that it is the c11mh-30p I want or am I off?

Might be a simple question but my head is turning from all these options.

Thank you.

 

[rvieceli]

[member=4427]acer66[/member] probably a typo, but its a Starrett C11MH-300

Ron

 

[Cheese]

Ron is correct, the correct number is C11MH-300, a cast head with wrinkle finish.

The chrome blade you ordered is killer.  [smile]

 

[acer66]

[member=4427]acer66[/member] probably a typo, but its a Starrett C11MH-300

Ron

Yeah, when I went to Starretthttps://www.starrett.com/metrology/product-detail/C11MH-300 it says available in regular or satin chrome finish but I do not find away to select the finish.
I might have overlooked it in the pull down menu but the day was too long to do any methodical search in there.

 

[Cheese]

Yeah, when I went to Starretthttps://www.starrett.com/metrology/product-detail/C11MH-300 it says available in regular or satin chrome finish but I do not find away to select the finish.
I might have overlooked it in the pull down menu but the day was too long to do any methodical search in there.

The C in C11MH refers to the chrome blade.

Also click on your link and check out the last sentence...Satin Chrome Blade.  [smile]

 

[acer66]

Yeah, when I went to Starretthttps://www.starrett.com/metrology/product-detail/C11MH-300 it says available in regular or satin chrome finish but I do not find away to select the finish.
I might have overlooked it in the pull down menu but the day was too long to do any methodical search in there.

The C in C11MH refers to the chrome blade.

Also click on your link and check out the last sentence...Satin Chrome Blade.  [smile]

Haha, that shows me where my head was yesterday.
Thank you for clearing that up for me.