Review on 📏 IGaging Dual Square High Precision Woodworking Tool by Eric Rose

06.07.20 - Early. It's been over 20 years since I worked as a machinist at GE making engines, and 20 years before that. So I was looking forward to this one. When I got to the door, I took a quick look at them and found the following: * Readability - Verifying, as others have said, isn't the best. Combine that with old eyes and it's hard. * The body is pretty good, as long as the hinges hold, it protects items. * Threaded locknuts - the verification, as others say, is quite rough. I might try lapping the threads or see if I have bolt color. * Deburring - check as others have said. Where necessary I bring the stone to the edges. * Accuracy - Sellar has no traceability to the National Bureau of Standards. Rubber. As others have said, the accuracy listed here was 0.0008 per inch! The box says .0015 but no other information. So is it the full length of the item or an inch? I have no idea. What I can tell you is that I put the small square inside the big square and looked at the light. I saw a small amount of light along the long edges. I tried using a .0015 thickness gauge in between and it was unacceptable. Hm, so far so good. I have a special 0.0006 thickness gauge and I will feel it. Don't go into it either. Doesn't stink at all. These measurements were taken along the full length of the longitudinal edges. For that reason they are stewards, at least for the ones I have! I would say if you have received a set and are unhappy with them in that area, send them back and try a replacement. Make sure the nut is tight and there is no movement between the ruler and the crossbar! At least for that old machinist from the old days, I'll recycle them and find a good place for them in my shop! Cheers and I'll update as soon as I "dig" PUPDATE 7-6-20 20PM. This time I'm going to the Brain Dump. I had the opportunity to work on 2 squares and here's what I found and did: I didn't find the threads on my M/F squares to be tight or rough, but I did find things leading to the bad "feeling" they have . What everyone says about sharp edges is true. Will it cost a penny more if someone in China takes these things out? From what I've seen, this is a common problem with Chinese instruments. - So the files and stones came out. I used a thin file and a 2"1/2" square tool stone. I went over every edge, corner and also got the slits, the important thing here is the central slit in the scales. I used the stone there at a 45 degree angle. Another key to the more Starrett-like feel is that the front of the nut hooks onto the beam's contact points! The action is much smoother now, and drop M! Starrett oil or light machine oil for moving parts is also a great help. Wipe off excess after working a little. And now the bad news. In both squares there is a fairly large gap between the scale sheet and the bar slot! So unless you have fingers to hold the vise, you will have a hard time "locking" the scale in the beam slot no matter how tight you tighten the knurled nut. The sag becomes visible when you turn the dial in the beam body! You can help by turning the scale clockwise with your right hand, with the scale slot facing you. I measured a small scale and found the gap to be about 0.020. The reason it will never be as close to Starrett as it could be. Also, I bet the threads on the Starrett have a finer pitch. These are pretty gross. Coarse threads don't help with "feel" or the ability to hook and lock the scale blade. I'll update if I find that the "movement" mentioned above causes intermittent perpendicularity issues! all the best with your squares, P