Festool LEYSYS-FT1 spirit level

[Spandex]

Not exactly groundbreaking, but pretty cool nonetheless. Made by BMI too, so not just rebadged tat:

 

[Holzhacker]

Sweet
maybe now people will stop complaining about the new systainers

 

[tsmi243]

Sweet
maybe now people will stop complaining about the new systainers

Boo, hissss

 

[Crazyraceguy]

Sweet
maybe now people will stop complaining about the new systainers

Nope, not even if one came with every one.....  [big grin]

It's still an abomination

 

[GaryA]

Just bought one

 

[woodbutcherbower]

I’m sure it’s very nice and all, but the only level I’ve ever trusted is a Stabila. A small torpedo level like this is also invariably used to level something relatively small. Having to use the whole Systainer kinda defeats the object. Plus - the slightest amount of flex or locating accuracy on the mounting mechanism will result in an inaccurate reading. The promo pic doesn’t exactly inspire much confidence;

[attachimg=1]

Hard pass from me.

 

[bobtskutter]

I assume it comes out of the handle, might be difficult balancing a Systainer on a small cabinet.

hahahaha



bob

 

[Spandex]

I’m sure it’s very nice and all, but the only level I’ve ever trusted is a Stabila. A small torpedo level like this is also invariably used to level something relatively small. Having to use the whole Systainer kinda defeats the object. Plus - the slightest amount of flex or locating accuracy on the mounting mechanism will result in an inaccurate reading. The promo pic doesn’t exactly inspire much confidence;

Lol. No, it’s just stored in the handle. The whole thing comes out to use it.

And as much as I like my Stabila levels, BMI are a well known and trusted German manufacturer of tapes and levels. This isn’t quite as accurate, at 1mm/m vs 0.5mm/m for the Stabila levels.

I think this is actually 35cm long, so a little larger than your typical torpedo level. It’s also solid aluminium.

Wait, just checking… when you see promo pics of Festool tools stored in their systainers, you do realise you can take them out to use them, right?  [big grin]

 

[memtew]

I need this level! How to buy it?

 

[PaulMarcel]

Haha, the image of someone holding the Systainer up against a picture frame  [tongue]

Here's an IG video from a while ago when I first saw it. Love the idea. Too bad it won't fit in the handle of the new toolbag:

Festool Level

 

[woodbutcherbower]

Lol. No, it’s just stored in the handle. The whole thing comes out to use it.

Doh. I feel like a bit of a chump for not realising that  [big grin] So now I understand that, the fatal flaw for me would be that I’d have to bring that one specific Systainer into every job I do. All my small levels are in my hand tools box, and the big stuff sits in the ceiling-mounted van rack holding my rails. Neat idea though, and I see the appeal.

 

[Spandex]

So now I understand that, the fatal flaw for me would be that I’d have to bring that one specific Systainer into every job I do. All my small levels are in my hand tools box, and the big stuff sits in the ceiling-mounted van rack holding my rails. Neat idea though, and I see the appeal.

Well, you could put it into the handle of whichever systainer you were taking with you. But of course, it’s only compatible with the new Sys3 models, so the reality might not be so convenient.

For someone who wants to have a hand tools systainer, or a marking out systainer, it would be a nice addition I think, as it would save finding a space for a small level in the box itself.

 

[Coen]

Sweet
maybe now people will stop complaining about the new systainers

Haha, forget it.

With all the space-wasting going on with newer inlays... the level will fit just fine INSIDE a systainer.

But at least they made up something as an exuse for the less comfortable handle on the Sys3... great. Now dump the whole design, take T-Loc, add the 3rd hinge and presto; something useful.

 

[Spandex]

It does amuse me that when I defended the sys3 boxes over the course of maybe three posts, someone told me I’d made my point and didn’t need to keep going on about it. The irony is palpable…

 

[Cheese]

That level would be perfect for my installer set with attic, unfortunately it’s the earlier T-lok systainer.  [sad]

 

[Crazyraceguy]

It does amuse me that when I defended the sys3 boxes over the course of maybe three posts, someone told me I’d made my point and didn’t need to keep going on about it. The irony is palpable…

I would never criticize someone's opinion about things like that. They may be great, for some people.

My thoughts are much like Coen's. I dislike them mostly for the turning away from the original engineering aspect. The sizes were intentional...and they destroyed that and they are not compatible with the T-loc.
Even if all a guy has are the new ones, the stacking sizes don't line up.
I keep going on about it hope that we will be heard....someday

 

[Jacks Moonshiner]

I’m wit ya Spandex !!

Been standing on the sidelines till now hearing most everybody have a go at
What I feel is an absolute work of art.

I really dunno what y’all old timers have against these beauties.
Sys3 is in my opinion much more sleekly designed, the additional front handles are super handy , the reverse closing of the main handle is genius and imperative for one handed taking out/putting back in the shelf .The storage rails… that’s an outright genius invention ..how can anyone have anything against that?
everything about Sys3 is simply awesome!!

There are also the little things that few people talk about… the fact that you can remove or put in the Sys Label without needing to open the lid.

The fact that the “Festool” Logo is written “upside down” so that if your mate is opening his/her Sys3 and you happen to be hanging around in the vicinity and that open lid is facing you , well then that upside down is now right side up…and you absolutely KNOW it’s Festool and you get that warm fuzzy feeling inside just from reading that name….
()

What else… oh yeah …removing/replacing lids has become THAT much easier with Sys3…very hard to damage any plastic when popping out those lil pegs now….

And what’s all that about not liking the sys3’s most amazing signature ‘SNAP!’ ??? That’s a totally gnarly n excellent feature!! I love hearin that sound so much I close the lid every chance I get just to hear that snap man! And if you don’t get why the added that , it’s for locking it in when you’re carrying it by the side handle..so it doesn’t open up unintentionally…ok maybe that one’s pretty obvious then…‍️

CrazyRaceGuy please excuse my ignorance, what do you mean by ‘engineering aspect’ ,
And ‘the stacking sizes don’t line up’ …

if you can explain why the height change is so fundamental to y’all , that would be great !

I’m sure I’m missing something there, because aside from having to perhaps rebuild any Sys-Cabs that were perfectly sized and specifically built for T-Loc, I don’t understand entirely why the new heights got to be so problematic.

I’m relatively new n green (XCuse the pun) to this craft, ‘specially compared to all you old timers n professionals, so any enlightenment is greatly appreciated

 

[squall_line]

CrazyRaceGuy please excuse my ignorance, what do you mean by ‘engineering aspect’ ,
And ‘the stacking sizes don’t line up’ …

if you can explain why the height change is so fundamental to y’all , that would be great !

I’m sure I’m missing something there, because aside from having to perhaps rebuild any Sys-Cabs that were perfectly sized and specifically built for T-Loc, I don’t understand entirely why the new heights got to be so problematic.

The Original version of the Systainer, as far back as 1993, was built intentionally in height increments of 52.5mm.  The T-Loc version carried on this tradition starting in 2010.

Thus, it was possible to stack multiple Systainers of different sizes into the same height, allowing one to use them as an impromptu sawhorse or other flat surface.

Borrowed from Wikipedia:

Type Stacking height increment (mm)
I 105.0 (2 × 52.5 mm)
II 157.5 (3 × 52.5 mm)
III 210.0 (4 × 52.5 mm)
IV 315.0 (6 × 52.5 mm)
V 420.0 (8 × 52.5 mm)

So, two T-Loc Sys-I's would stack and be the exact same height, to the millimeter, as a T-Loc Sys-III.

Two T-Loc Sys-II's would stack and be the exact same height, to the millimeter, as a T-Loc Sys-IV.

Two T-Loc Sys-III's would stack and be the exact same height, to the millimeter, as a T-Loc Sys-V.

And in between, you could mix and match to get similar heights between two or three stacks, like 3 Sys-II's, 2 Sys-III's, and a Sys-V.

The new Systainer3, introduced in 2019 after 26 years of Systainers in the field, has no equivalent.  The only Sys3 that is the same height as a T-Loc Systainer is, ostensibly, the M-112.

Sys³ Stacking height increment (mm)
112 105.0 (2 × 52.5 mm + 0 mm — "4 inch")
137 130.0 (2 × 50 mm + 30 mm — "5 inch")
187 180.0 (3 × 50 mm + 30 mm — "7 inch")
237 230.0 (4 × 50 mm + 30 mm — "9 inch")
337 330.0 (6 × 50 mm + 30 mm — "13 inch")
437 430.0 (8 × 50 mm + 30 mm — "17 inch")

And all of the Systainer3's are larger than their old counterparts for the same tool, so your stack is taller, with more empty air inside.

Someone took a lot of time and effort to come up with the Systainer heights originally, and made sure that you could mix-n-match them for jobsite flexibility.  There is SOME intentionality to the Sys3, but for transport and racking, not for jobsite use.

It's like the first 26 years of Systainer history didn't mean anything.  It's probably the most hated thing about the Sys3; the handles and whatnot are rarely as derided, other than the front handles that can't latch when they're stacked and locked to another Systainer.

 

[Cheese]

The Original version of the Systainer, as far back as 1993, was built intentionally in height increments of 52.5mm.  The T-Loc version carried on this tradition starting in 2010.

Thus, it was possible to stack multiple Systainers of different sizes into the same height, allowing one to use them as an impromptu sawhorse or other flat surface.

Borrowed from Wikipedia:

Type Stacking height increment (mm)
I 105.0 (2 × 52.5 mm)
II 157.5 (3 × 52.5 mm)
III 210.0 (4 × 52.5 mm)
IV 315.0 (6 × 52.5 mm)
V 420.0 (8 × 52.5 mm)

So, two T-Loc Sys-I's would stack and be the exact same height, to the millimeter, as a T-Loc Sys-III.

Two T-Loc Sys-II's would stack and be the exact same height, to the millimeter, as a T-Loc Sys-IV.

Two T-Loc Sys-III's would stack and be the exact same height, to the millimeter, as a T-Loc Sys-V.

And in between, you could mix and match to get similar heights between two or three stacks, like 3 Sys-II's, 2 Sys-III's, and a Sys-V.

The new Systainer3, introduced in 2019 after 26 years of Systainers in the field, has no equivalent.  The only Sys3 that is the same height as a T-Loc Systainer is, ostensibly, the M-112.

Sys³ Stacking height increment (mm)
112 105.0 (2 × 52.5 mm + 0 mm — "4 inch")
137 130.0 (2 × 50 mm + 30 mm — "5 inch")
187 180.0 (3 × 50 mm + 30 mm — "7 inch")
237 230.0 (4 × 50 mm + 30 mm — "9 inch")
337 330.0 (6 × 50 mm + 30 mm — "13 inch")
437 430.0 (8 × 50 mm + 30 mm — "17 inch")

And all of the Systainer3's are larger than their old counterparts for the same tool, so your stack is taller, with more empty air inside.

Someone took a lot of time and effort to come up with the Systainer heights originally, and made sure that you could mix-n-match them for jobsite flexibility.  There is SOME intentionality to the Sys3, but for transport and racking, not for jobsite use.

It's like the first 26 years of Systainer history didn't mean anything.  It's probably the most hated thing about the Sys3; the handles and whatnot are rarely as derided, other than the front handles that can't latch when they're stacked and locked to another Systainer.

Nice job [member=75217]squall_line[/member] ...that's pretty succinct and to the point.  [big grin]

However, the front handles not latching also produces a klack...klack...klack sound when you're driving over bumps or going around corners. It's horrific, more annoying than a dog barking in the car because it's continuous and never stops.

And the slides that they offer don't allow you to fully open up the Systainer...that's annoying. How convenient is this situation? How much stuff can you retrieve from that Systainer unless your fingers are the size of an 8 year old?

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

And for those that store their Systainers sideways which I do...where's the label to identify what Systainer this is?

This Sys 3 may be great for the newbies because it's what they know, but for the older adopters it's really a BS system.

 

[Jacks Moonshiner]

Yes that was completely through and totally clarifying


Thank you squall_line, Cheese…

Ok yeah I get it.
I was aware of the lack of incremental height compatibility once I started using Sys3 , but I guess I would just improvise workarounds on the fly…sort of mix T-Locs with the new generation till I found the height I needed  for a specific task.
Didn’t give it too much thought because the whole system was still new to me.

I guess your last statement sums it up perfectly,Cheese…
If I had years n years of getting used to that functionality, and then it would all of a sudden “change”, or disappear altogether…
well I guess a groovy ‘snapping’  latch would not cut it for me either….

I still LOVE Sys3 though

And I guess you guys won’t till/if they introduce …
SysGen IV ! Now with 27.5mm less redundant matter!!!