32" FS 800 Guide Rail,

[chrisrosenb]

How useful is the 32" FS 800 guide rail?
I now have a used TS55 & MFT 1080 with 42" & 55" rails. I am going to be adding some other rails. Looking at the 106" FS 2700 for 8' cuts & maybe the 32" FS 800 for short cuts.
Also would the Parallel Guide be useful on the TS 55?
I am open to any other suggestions.

 

[semenza]

Hi,

        I used to have the 800, 1400, and 2700.  The 800 got the least use of the three. It was handy for shorter cuts, but not enough that I wanted to buy it again when I upgraded to the FS /2 rails. I think that you will find the 1080 that you have already to be long enough to do many more cuts than the 800 without being so long as to get in the way on short cuts. I would think that most of your shorter cuts would take place on the MFT anyway.
        I now have the 1400, 1900, and 3000.  So far  I have not found the 1400 to be too long or in the way for  short cuts.  I bought the 1900 because I did used to find that using the 2700 for everything over 48" was a real pain. Making 60" cuts with a 106" rail, it definetly got in the way.  The 2700 is certainly long enough to make 8' cuts. I went to the 3000 because  I like having the extra space at beginning and end of the cut. In fact most of the time I use the 1900 for 48" cuts for the same reason.
      My current set of rails works very well for my set up. I like the lengths much better than my previous set.

Seth

 

[Greg in Memphis]

Hey Chris
I started out with an MFT 800 deluxe, which came with the 800 (32") rail. I purchased a 1080 standard and switched all the MFT extras over to it and bought a 1080 (42") rail to put on it. I have both tables side by side in my small shop and they work great together.
Most of the cuts that I make are for home improvement on my own house. Your needs may be different.
For me, the 32" rail has been pretty handy when I need to make short cuts off of the table where I either have lumber too long to fit on top of both my tables, or it is quicker and easier to cut above some sawhorses. It is also handy if you want to make cuts in a confined area.
I don't cut many 8' long cuts, but when I do I use a 1900 (75") and a 800 connected together. I like this setup very much. When I tighten the two connectors to the rails , I make sure they are both straight by setting them on end (rubber strip facing skywards) on a level surface.
I don't have much extra room at the beginning of cuts this way, but I don't feel I am missing too much. I guess it's all what you get used to.
All of the cuts I have made so far in this way have been perfectly straight from one end to another. I have not been able to tell where the rails were spliced just by looking at the wood.

hope this may help

Greg

 

[Lou Miller]

As with most of this stuff, it really depends on how one works and what type of work they are doing.

For me, the 800 rail might be the one I use the most. I find that most of the time, setting up my MFT on a jobsite is more of a PITA than its worth. So I don't bother with it and make my crosscuts using an 800 rail and a speed square. The 800 is much better for use this way than the 1080 or the 1400. Being that its shorter, it has less tendency to tip when you set the saw down on it. If you're going to use your MFT for the majority of your crosscuts, than an 800 rail probably wouldn't be much good to you.

 

[Dave Rudy]

Also would the Parallel Guide be useful on the TS 55?

Chris, Check out woodshopdemos.com.  John has a sequence on the parallel guide which he found extremely useful for cutting multiple narrow strips of exact width.

HTH

Dave