Festool Table Saw

Birdhunter

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2012
Messages
4,144
I was at a Rockler store today and had a chance to see the Festool table saw

My first impression was “that is a tiny saw”. The second impression was “the quality is awesome”.
 
I am fundamentally opposed to projects were artificial parameters are set in place by marketing.

So marketing says, “We want a cordless full functioning saw that fits in a Systainer.”

Engineering says, “OK, We will work on this.”

Then Engineering says, “We have looked at this, and we can make a vastly more usable saw with an integrated case that only requires a lid, but it needs to be 2” longer front to back to make the fence usable.  It will be cheaper to produce, work better and cost less than fitting it to a standard Systainer.”

Marketing:  “Nope.  You have your marching orders.  Make it fit in the Systainer.”

A classic case of marketing-compromised design.  Who knows how good this saw could have been if marketing had made a more open-minded set of parameters.

“We want a highly compact and light weight full-functioning cordless table saw.  We want to produce the lightest, most compact and competent table saw on the market.  It would be nice if it fit in a Systainer—but come as close to that as possible without compromising utility.”

As it is, an interesting and entertaining engineering feat.  I suspect it will be ignored by most professionals, perhaps embraced by those who have to ride a multistory elevator to do trim work.  I really don’t see this. 
 
Haha, nice take on the “development” Packard  [big grin]

My first thought was, considering the price, at 90% finished, the rest was sort of thrown in.
It’s impressive, I too had the first thoughts that with a little more effort it would have been outstanding. And that even at almost the same price point. There’s a couple other size systainers.. and for a heavy tool like this, it serves the life in the bottom of any trolley stack anyhow.
 
Packard said:
I am fundamentally opposed to projects were artificial parameters are set in place by marketing.

So marketing says, “We want a cordless full functioning saw that fits in a Systainer.”

Engineering says, “OK, We will work on this.”

Then Engineering says, “We have looked at this, and we can make a vastly more usable saw with an integrated case that only requires a lid, but it needs to be 2” longer front to back to make the fence usable.  It will be cheaper to produce, work better and cost less than fitting it to a standard Systainer.”

Marketing:  “Nope.  You have your marching orders.  Make it fit in the Systainer.”

A classic case of marketing-compromised design.  Who knows how good this saw could have been if marketing had made a more open-minded set of parameters.

“We want a highly compact and light weight full-functioning cordless table saw.  We want to produce the lightest, most compact and competent table saw on the market.  It would be nice if it fit in a Systainer—but come as close to that as possible without compromising utility.”

As it is, an interesting and entertaining engineering feat.  I suspect it will be ignored by most professionals, perhaps embraced by those who have to ride a multistory elevator to do trim work.  I really don’t see this.

None of us have any idea what the design goals were nor who set them. The only fact we have as it concerns to a systainer is it happens to fit inside one. Consider nearly all of their tools fit in a systainer it is not a stretch for that to be a design goal (or at least a strong consideration), nor is battery power since all tools are rapidly moving towards being cordless. Additionally there are plenty of portable, semi-portable, and stationary tablesaws to be had so there was no need to replicate those form factors. As you know Festool sells (3) other tablesaws and SawStop has (2) that are portable.

While anecdotal there was demand at my local Woodcraft (VA Beach) where they sold 21 units the first day. I was shocked when I asked about sales as I too had mistakenly thought the price/size combination was not going to sell well. I still do not see this saw aimed at hobbyists as there are too many choices that are all around better products, which is not hard considering the size of the top and the fence quality. The sub $500 Dewalt Flexvolt tablesaw has a geared fence and larger top both of which make it a better choice for a small shop where portability is needed and/or for those who dislike cords. It does weigh close to 60 lbs though. The roughly equivalent SawStop CTS (requires AC power) weighs even more and has a less than stellar fence.

In a dream world I could shrink my ICS to fit in a systainer and then expand it at a job site, but that is not the case yet. I then would have everything I wanted when working at a customer site.
 
Does it do everything? No. This saw can deal with 90% of jobsite needs though. Quiet operating, fairly long runtime, excellent dust control and light and compact. I originally thought having it fit in a systainer was stupid but it’s actually excellent, stacks and stores perfectly. Any dust you’ve made is kept in the box and the accessory storage excellent. Personally think this is a must have

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
It’s not a tool that fits my needs, but I do admire the design and engineering it shows.
 
I am puzzled to tell the truth. I don't have track saw but I have the use of one and used it two or three times so have to ask why anyone would use this saw over a track saw. Maybe the tradies have a preference in Europe that I can't see.
 
It reminds me of the cameras in the early 1970s.

I had a workhorse Nikon F camera and several amazingly sharp primary lenses (zooms of that time were not very good).  The ergonomics were excellent, image quality superb, and the versatility was amazing with a huge range of lenses with some ultra-fast lenses that allowed for low light photography.

But then Olympus came out with a reduced size 35mm single lens reflex that was well-received (though not much smaller than a standard 35mm SLR).

Efforts to reduce the size of the cameras continued, with Olympus producing a range finder (Pen F) and a half frame camera that was very compact but only used half of the frame per shot.

The then came Rollei with the Rollei 35 and the Rollei 35S.  It fit in the palm of your hand, had extraordinary Zeiss optics, a super accurate Compur shutter, and a built in Gossen meter.  And it was engineered by the unlikely manufacturer of world famous twin lens reflexes, which were notorious for be big, heavy and clumsy to use. 

But the ergonomics were dreadful, it was difficult to hold steady and camera shake was an issue for many.  It came with one lens that collapsed into the body for storage.  A flash that mounted underneath the camera resulting in weird shadows on faces, and a camera case that permanently mounted on the wrist strap and would get in the way of some shots. 

It had no focusing aids.  You had to guess the distance from the subject and then turn the barrel of the lens until it aligned with the indicated distance. 

It was fully manual (a requirement of mine), and you had to set the shutter speed, distance and f-stop manually.

Because it was difficult to hold steady, many owners relied on small tripods—negating the one superiority that it enjoyed.  It became bulky and heavy with the little tripods.

I still have mine somewhere in the house.  I have not seen it for probably 45 or 50 years, but I know I never sold it.  It quickly ended up in my sock drawer.  When I go to sell my house, I will find it. 

It was a flawed concept from the beginning.  When do you need a really small and really quiet camera?  When you are taking surreptitious shots of people.  But it came with a 35mm (or 40mm) semi-wide angle lens with a F3.5 maximum aperture.  So not good for low light and not a focal length suited for candid photos.  A 70mm - 85mm F1.8 would have excelled at that but would have been too bulky.

So you have a very small camera that is best suited for architectural images (with a tripod).  So what was the compelling reason I bought one?  The exquisite craftsmanship (maintained even after Rollei shipped manufacturing off to Japan—rumored to be assembled by Beseler-Topcon), the top of the world components and the feel of a really precise piece of equipment.

But it ended up in my sock drawer.

The Festool table saw will not fit in a sock drawer (but perhaps in one of the bottom drawers).  I predict it will be relegated to the same disused category as the Rollei 35.  But people will fondly remember how well-made and clever was the design.

rollei-35-camera-10.jpg


The camera that made Rollei famous was the roll film (2-1/4” x 2-1/4”) twin lens reflex.

Rolleiflex-scaled.jpg
 
When my Nikomat and lenses got stolen in ‘78 (welcome to NYC) I bought a Rollei 35S. Very compact and sharp but pretty clunky. For flash pics of people I turned the camera upside down. Later replaced it with the very svelte Ricoh GR1. Not as sharp but fantastic ergonomics.
 
Don't confuse the Festool saw with a real table saw.  But also, don't discount its utility.

I am serious hobby woodworker, mostly building period reproduction and original design furniture. I have an SCM siding table saw.  Big monster.  I can use it to cut virtually anything that might go into a piece of my work, as long as it is a linear cut.  BUT, it is somewhat terrifying to use for small cuts on small pieces.  It is also somewhat temperamental to set up.  I bought one of the Festool CSC Sys 50's a few weeks ago to use for small cuts and oddball angles.

So, after about three weeks, I want to say that it is a game changer for its intended use.  I can set it up and cut tenon shoulders with incredible accuracy in about three minutes.  No test cuts needed (although I still do them).  I can set it up and cut a 15 degree miter just as fast.  Compare that to the same operation on the big beast and I can tell you that pushbutton simplicity is a thing of beauty.  Plus, there isn't the fear of amputation using the little beast on small pieces.  And when I am done with it, I vacuum it off and put it on a shelf, freeing up much needed space in my shop.

I am fortunate to own both ends of the spectrum when it comes to table saws.  A monster, and an incredibly useful gadget.  I'll continue to use both.  If I only had one tablesaw, I wouldn't pick either of them.

 
[member=74278]Packard[/member] Very eloquently put. My reasons for not buying one are much simpler;

1 It’s cordless. Why? In 36 years as a pro - I never worked in a house or on a site which didn’t have power sockets.

2 It’s crammed full of clever electronics, just like modern cars = unfixable by the owner. When these decide they aren’t gonna work today (as they inevitably will) my job doesn’t get done, food doesn’t go on the table, and a roof doesn’t stay over my head.
 
I tried the upside down thing.  It made me feel like I must have dyslexia.  All the controls were reversed, most especially the shutter button. 

But it did solve the upside down thing.  Instead I made a mount for my Vivitar 283 flash. Basically the camera was attached to the flash, and not the flash to the camera. 

But it was ridiculous.  As big as my Nikon and not as good.  But it shows to the extent I went to continue to use an engineering gem even when it was becoming apparent that it was not a good choice.

My next camera was a Omega Rapid (2-1/4” x 2-3/4” film). It is big enough that I know where it is in my house.  I have not used in in nearly 50 years.

A heavy beast. Probably  4 or 5 pounds.  Plus the potato masher flash and the heavy waist mounted battery pack.  But the perfect wedding camera and it was used most weekends in the summer  and sporadically throughout the year for about 5 years.  Wedding photography can wear you down. 

341829-image2_470x470.jpg


Which demonstrates my point:  The big, heavy and super competent equipment gets heavily used, and the elegant, sophisticated and precise equipment gets admired. 

 
woodbutcherbower said:
[member=74278]Packard[/member] Very eloquently put. My reasons for not buying one are much simpler;

1 It’s cordless. Why? In 36 years as a pro - I never worked in a house or on a site which didn’t have power sockets.

2 It’s crammed full of clever electronics, just like modern cars = unfixable by the owner. When these decide they aren’t gonna work today (as they inevitably will) my job doesn’t get done, food doesn’t go on the table, and a roof doesn’t stay over my head.

I had little use for cordless until I remodeled a small bathroom.  I needed a 15 gage angle nailer for the moldings.  The bathroom was not big enough for my ladder, the pancake compressor and the air hoses.  So the compressor was out in the hall.  I had to remove the door from the bathroom. 

That same evening I ordered a Milwaukee battery powered 15 gage.  Perfect for that application and my go to gun for 15 gage (I never had good experience with my P-C 15 gage).

But my pin gage nailer is always used at the work bench and I have no need for a Milwaukee for that.  I have both battery and air fired 18 gage.  The pneumatic is used at the bench, and the battery is used onsite. 
 
JimH2 said:
Packard said:
I am fundamentally opposed to projects were artificial parameters are set in place by marketing.

So marketing says, “We want a cordless full functioning saw that fits in a Systainer.”

Engineering says, “OK, We will work on this.”

Then Engineering says, “We have looked at this, and we can make a vastly more usable saw with an integrated case that only requires a lid, but it needs to be 2” longer front to back to make the fence usable.  It will be cheaper to produce, work better and cost less than fitting it to a standard Systainer.”

Marketing:  “Nope.  You have your marching orders.  Make it fit in the Systainer.”

A classic case of marketing-compromised design.  Who knows how good this saw could have been if marketing had made a more open-minded set of parameters.

“We want a highly compact and light weight full-functioning cordless table saw.  We want to produce the lightest, most compact and competent table saw on the market.  It would be nice if it fit in a Systainer—but come as close to that as possible without compromising utility.”

As it is, an interesting and entertaining engineering feat.  I suspect it will be ignored by most professionals, perhaps embraced by those who have to ride a multistory elevator to do trim work.  I really don’t see this.

None of us have any idea what the design goals were nor who set them. The only fact we have as it concerns to a systainer is it happens to fit inside one. Consider nearly all of their tools fit in a systainer it is not a stretch for that to be a design goal (or at least a strong consideration), nor is battery power since all tools are rapidly moving towards being cordless. Additionally there are plenty of portable, semi-portable, and stationary tablesaws to be had so there was no need to replicate those form factors. As you know Festool sells (3) other tablesaws and SawStop has (2) that are portable.

While anecdotal there was demand at my local Woodcraft (VA Beach) where they sold 21 units the first day. I was shocked when I asked about sales as I too had mistakenly thought the price/size combination was not going to sell well. I still do not see this saw aimed at hobbyists as there are too many choices that are all around better products, which is not hard considering the size of the top and the fence quality. The sub $500 Dewalt Flexvolt tablesaw has a geared fence and larger top both of which make it a better choice for a small shop where portability is needed and/or for those who dislike cords. It does weigh close to 60 lbs though. The roughly equivalent SawStop CTS (requires AC power) weighs even more and has a less than stellar fence.

In a dream world I could shrink my ICS to fit in a systainer and then expand it at a job site, but that is not the case yet. I then would have everything I wanted when working at a customer site.

Not aimed at hobbyists, but at rich dentists and doctors with more money than sense. 

Leica produced an early SLR camera (after generations of range finder cameras) that was more expensive, less versatile, and produced images that were at best equal to Nikon’s images. 

It was widely dismissed as a “toy for rich dentists and doctors”.

I apologize for harping on the photography analogy.  But the parallels are very similar, and it makes my point fairly well in my opinion.
 
woodbutcherbower said:
[member=74278]Packard[/member] Very eloquently put. My reasons for not buying one are much simpler;

1 It’s cordless. Why? In 36 years as a pro - I never worked in a house or on a site which didn’t have power sockets.

2 It’s crammed full of clever electronics, just like modern cars = unfixable by the owner. When these decide they aren’t gonna work today (as they inevitably will) my job doesn’t get done, food doesn’t go on the table, and a roof doesn’t stay over my head.
Agree about the electronics, no need for them to have designed it in this way.

Ya there is basically always power at every home and every jobsite. Cordless tools provide comparable or often improved performance  with the added benefit (and cost) of them being cordless. I once thought stationary tools were best corded, this is no longer necessarily the case. Cordless tools in general will let you get more work done, safer and more conveniently

This is of course only my opinion

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I have been on a few job sites where there was "somewhat limited" power. There would be a temporary breaker box set up with a string or 2 of lights and only a few receptacles. Since there might be 4 or 5 trades in the same space, there would be a handful of chargers and not capacity for much more.
Plus, some jerk might come along and disconnect yours to charge his.... [eek]
In general though, there wasn't much need for a table saw. The shop where I work has always tried to get as much as possible of that kind of thing done in the shop first, to cut down on "field fabrication"
They do have a couple of portable table saws but it's more of a "just in case thing"
I have considered one of these for my home shop, but the battery is what holds me back. I'm not already in the Festool battery platform, so I would rather just have mains power (or at least an adaptor for such)

Mini Me said:
I am puzzled to tell the truth. I don't have track saw but I have the use of one and used it two or three times so have to ask why anyone would use this saw over a track saw. Maybe the tradies have a preference in Europe that I can't see.
Though I love my track saws, they are not a 100% solution. There are indeed cuts that are better made with a table saw. They "might be" possible with a track saw, but it wouldn't be prudent or expedient.
Like something as simple as grooves in a few parts to make a drawer or 2. Sure, you could set that up on a track saw or even a router table, but you would be done on a table saw before either of those other methods was even set-up. There are other examples too.... tapering legs with a jig. Could you do it all upside-down with a track saw? maybe, but again, you would already be done with a table saw (and wouldn't have to stand on your head to do it.
I had considered not having a table saw in my home shop, but talked myself out of it. I haven't made the choice of brands yet, but I have some time.
 
The world is in love with rechargeable batteries, sometimes in the face of logic.

I had a remote keyboard (Logitech) that used AA batteries. As I recall, the instructions said that battery life was approximately 3 million keystrokes, but batteries should be replaced annually.

When that keyboard failed, I bought a far more expensive Apple remote keyboard with rechargeable batteries factory installed.

So instead of replacing two batteries a year, I am recharging the built in batteries once a week.  It is probably more often than needed, but there is no way to tell the charge level in the keyboard. And when the batteries fail, I have to ship it to Apple for replacement.

When this keyboard dies, I will replace it with one that uses replaceable batteries.
 
Packard said:
The world is in love with rechargeable batteries, sometimes in the face of logic.

I had a remote keyboard (Logitech) that used AA batteries. As I recall, the instructions said that battery life was approximately 3 million keystrokes, but batteries should be replaced annually.

When that keyboard failed, I bought a far more expensive Apple remote keyboard with rechargeable batteries factory installed.

So instead of replacing two batteries a year, I am recharging the built in batteries once a week.  It is probably more often than needed, but there is no way to tell the charge level in the keyboard. And when the batteries fail, I have to ship it to Apple for replacement.

When this keyboard dies, I will replace it with one that uses replaceable batteries.
Presumably you are using the keyboard on a mac, if you select the option to show the bluetooth control in the menu bar, it will show you the battery level of each bluetooth device. The bluetooth system preferences app probably will too, but I’ve never looked.

As for the saw, battery power was one of its selling points for me, as I have very limited power in my workshop space. So, one less thing that needs a full-time plug is a huge plus for me.The other thing I don’t have much of is space, so, the saw is a winner there too, for me. OTH, after working with it for a bit, you see the compromises that were made for fitting it in a systainer. I think they could have sacrificed the fit in a systainer thing a produced a better tool.

 
I've been framing all week on a barn conversion with sketchy power. We don't really know what's wrong yet. The electricians start on Monday. It's already killed a compressor and two chargers. I haven't needed my cordless table saw (Milwaukee,) but I'm super grateful for my cordless saws and nailers and completely understand the need for cordless table saws and vacuums even if they aren't quite there yet. 
 
macanter said:
I can use it to cut virtually anything that might go into a piece of my work, as long as it is a linear cut.  BUT, it is somewhat terrifying to use for small cuts on small pieces.

Remove the terror by using a Frits and Franz jig, the smallest pieces can be cut using an F&F jig with zero terror and all ten fingers and both hands intact.
 
Back
Top