How Big is a 520 Main Table

[reible]

I went out to measure mine but figure it would be a lot easier to do if I tilted the table up and just did a direct measurement like this

[ATTACH]17865[/ATTACH]

The tape is showing just over 26 (1/64) but if I used another tape it might well come under 26, the luck of he draw on tape measurements.

[ATTACH]17866[/ATTACH]

The picture is showing more over then the eye did in the reading, forgot to off-set the camera to get the picture straight on...

In order for us to get any closer we would need a more precise measuring tool or use the same tape measure.

Ed

[JPG]

I went out to measure mine but figure it would be a lot easier to do if I tilted the table up and just did a direct measurement like this

[ATTACH]17865[/ATTACH]

The tape is showing just over 26 (1/64) but if I used another tape it might well come under 26, the luck of he draw on tape measurements.

[ATTACH]17866[/ATTACH]

The picture is showing more over then the eye did in the reading, forgot to off-set the camera to get the picture straight on...

In order for us to get any closer we would need a more precise measuring tool or use the same tape measure.

Ed

Or NOT use the 'hook'. Measure from say 10" to 36" on the tape.


Requires steady hands etc., but eliminates 'hook' error.




Orrrrr, measure each(front/rear) rail 'thickness' and add their sum to 22 5/8".

[dusty]

Thank you for your assistance.

This certainly is not a critical measurements. Between Ed's machine and my two 520 tables, we have measurements of 26 (1/64)", 26.0" and 26 3/32".

For what I was checking, what is necessary is that whatever that measurement is, it needs to be consistent from one side of the table to the other. Two parallel lines (the two rails) are at all points equidistant.

[JPG]

Since the 520 rails reference surface for the tubes is the top(inside) of the rails, measuring a tube pair(f/r) as they exit the rail would be more informative.