Anyone ever do it this way?
 

Nope. But then again, I never had that specific junk lying around. Or a welder...or a magnetic base dial indicator...or a metal chop saw.

I have no doubt it works (well, maybe a little doubt), but just in principle I'd prefer the wheel to be supported on both sides.

A truing stand needs only two features to serve the purpose.

1- a reliably rigid mount for the hub
2- a fixed point of reference to observe deflections at the rim.

This stands meets both conditions, though IMO the dial indicator is overkill. Like goatalope, I also prefer supporting both ends of the axle, but is doesn't matter as long as there's no load while measurements are taken.

Would be more helpful for others if:

1. The title indicated the topic in some way, certainly at least in the post itself.
2. The pic(s) were included in the post instead of having to click on a link.

As for the stand, don't see that it matters if someone else has done it. If you did and it works, great.

Personally I prefer having two pointers and two supports. One cannot always rely on undamaged rims, so one side does not always tell the entire story. In addition, to get a solid hub mounting on a q/r one would have to add spacers to take out the play present in an unclamped hub, and to mount a nutted hub would require two wrenches. Too much trouble for the sake of a "cool' solution.

Hmmm. At first I didn't like the idea. But one of my "issues" with my current stand (Minoura Workman Pro) is in spreading the supports for 100 vs 126 vs 130 vs 135 widths. I'm skeptical of the supports "spreading" perfectly around a center point (i.e. one side slides out farther than the other and the whole hub shifts in that direction). Using the supplied calibration guide I've determined my supports seem to center 2-3 mm left of the center point on the dial, so I mark it with a pencil and center toward that mark. Maybe this one sided support doesn't suffer from that kind of float.

And now that I think about more (while I'm writing), I again don't like it. The single sided calibration would need to be set to specifically accommodate different width hubs AND different width rims. Maybe you could just keep flipping the wheel around and "iterate" toward a perfect center, but I'd rather have a target center point to begin with.

Nope. Don't like it.

Its a nice idea, but i just put my bike on the stand and true it with the distance on the brakes, simple.

It would work just fine. The only thing being that it demands the use of a dish guage to properly center the rim. Or some sort of scale that can be indexed to indicate the proper center for each axle spacing.

It's not that different from mine. This was originally built to hold an electric drill to mix paint in a 5 gallon bucket. I really do not paint that much nor do I work on bicycles all that much, but I do enjoy welding projects such as building this paint mixer/truing stand. I do agree that dial indicators might be overkill but the magnetic bases were the A number one easiest way to attach a reference point to indicate run out.
Attachment 234482