The following shows the message you requested. To get back to the list of browse results, click the back button on your browser.
If you are thinking of subscribing to this list, please consult the OldTools FAQ.
| 230901 | "Ron Harper" <ron@c...> | Jun-11-2012 | A Stanley 62 rule |
GGs I just got one of these off the bay for the pocket of my shop apron and it came today. It is laid out in 8ths, 10ths, 12ths, and 16ths. Is this standard for this rule=3F Ron -- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter. SPAMfighter has removed 11793 of my spam emails to date. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len Do you have a slow PC=3F Try Free scan http://www.spamfighter.com/SLOW- PCfighter=3Fcid=sigen ------------------------------------------------------------------------ | |||
| 230902 | Bill Ghio <bghio@m...> | Jun-11-2012 | Re: A Stanley 62 rule |
I have a 62 1/2 and a Lufkin 372. Both are marked that way. Bill Sent from my iPhone On Jun 11, 2012, at 2:53 PM, Ron Harper <ron@c...> wrote: > GGs > > I just got one of these off the bay for the pocket of my shop apron and it came today. It is laid out in 8ths, 10ths, 12ths, and 16ths. > > Is this standard for this rule ------------------------------------------------------------------------ | |||
| 230903 | Kirk Eppler <eppler.kirk@g...> | Jun-11-2012 | Re: A Stanley 62 rule |
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Ron Harper <ron@c...> wrote: > > I just got one of these off the bay for the pocket of my shop apron and it came today. It is laid out in 8ths, 10ths, 12ths, and 16ths. > > Is this standard for this rule? According to the 1934 catalog on Rose Antiques, pdf pg 18 , Yes. Kirk in HMB, CA ------------------------------------------------------------------------ | |||
| 230904 | Ken Shepard <waruba@c...> | Jun-11-2012 | Re: A Stanley 62 rule |
Yes. Ken Shepard On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Ron Harper <ron@c...> wrote: > GGs > > I just got one of these off the bay for the pocket of my shop apron and it > came today. It is laid out in 8ths, 10ths, 12ths, and 16ths. > > Is this standard for this rule? > > Ron > > > > > -- > I am using the free version of SPAMfighter. > SPAMfighter has removed 11793 of my spam emails to date. > Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len > > Do you have a slow PC? Try Free scan > http://www.spamfighter.com/SLOW-PCfighter?cid=sigen > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > OldTools is a mailing list catering to the interests of hand tool > aficionados, both collectors and users, to discuss the history, usage, > value, location, availability, collectibility, and restoration of > traditional handtools, especially woodworking tools. > > To change your subscription options: > http://ruckus.law.cornell.edu/mailman/listinfo/oldtools > > To read the FAQ: > http://swingleydev.com/archive/faq.html > > OldTools archive: http://swingleydev.com/archive/ > > OldTools@r... > http://ruckus.law.cornell.edu/mailman/listinfo/oldtools > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ | |||
| 230912 | "Adam R. Maxwell" <amaxwell@m... | Jun-11-2012 | Re: A Stanley 62 rule |
On Jun 11, 2012, at 11:53 , Ron Harper <ron@c...> wrote: > GGs > > I just got one of these off the bay for the pocket of my shop apron and it came today. It is laid out in 8ths, 10ths, 12ths, and 16ths. Huh. I was going to write a post saying you guys were full of it, when I noticed that my #62 changes from 12ths to 10ths along the same edge. Wonder why that seemed like a good idea?? The 66-3/4 rule (brass bound boxwood, 36") is the one I use all the time, and it only has 1/8" and 1/16" divisions. The #62 was my first folding rule, but I found that I needed extra length too often. Adam Port Angeles, WA ------------------------------------------------------------------------ | |||
| 230998 | Jon Hammer <hammej1@g...> | Mar-14-2012 | Re: A Stanley 62 rule |
I have a 62 and find the scales and the ways that they change vexing. I tend to take serial measurements using different scales without noticing the changes. Why were they made this way? Thanks, Jon Hammer Sent from my iPod On Jun 11, 2012, at 9:42 PM, "Adam R. Maxwell" <amaxwell@m...> wrote: >> On Jun 11, 2012, at 11:53 , Ron Harper <ron@c...> wrote: >>> GGs >>>> I just got one of these off the bay for the pocket of my shop apron >>>> and it came today. It is laid out in 8ths, 10ths, 12ths, and 16ths. >> Huh. I was going to write a post saying you guys were full of it, > when I noticed that my #62 changes from 12ths to 10ths along the same > edge. Wonder why that seemed like a good idea?? >> The 66-3/4 rule (brass bound boxwood, 36") is the one I use all the > time, and it only has 1/8" and 1/16" divisions. The #62 was my first > folding rule, but I found that I needed extra length too often. >> Adam > Port Angeles, WA >> ----------------------------------------------------------------- >> ------- > OldTools is a mailing list catering to the interests of hand tool > aficionados, both collectors and users, to discuss the history, usage, > value, location, availability, collectibility, and restoration of > traditional handtools, especially woodworking tools. >> To change your subscription options: > http://ruckus.law.cornell.edu/mailman/listinfo/oldtools >> To read the FAQ: > http://swingleydev.com/archive/faq.html >> OldTools archive: http://swingleydev.com/archive/ OldTools@r... > http://ruckus.law.cornell.edu/mailman/listinfo/oldtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------ | |||
Browse from Here (230998)
back (230997)
up (browse index)
forward (230999)
New Search
New Advanced Search
New Browse Form
Browse Recent Messages