I'm at a Festool Crossroad

[Michael Kellough]

Louis, I forgot to mention earlier that I like your clever idea of sliding the rail forward or back to introduce a fresh section of rail to the steel tab, but eventually (might be a loooong time) you'll be looking for another solution.

All of the factory fresh MFTs I've tried have guide rails set to the right (about an inch) so you have to pull the rail to the left a bit to set it on the steel tab. It would be better if the steel tab had a larger contact area with the rail because it will eventually wear a slot in the aluminum even with the sprung/loose fit. At that point you could slide the rail, maintaining the tension to the same side, or set the tension to the other side without sliding the rail.

Tensioning to the other side will require resetting the fence for square cuts or adjusting the guide rail stop if you use Quas's method of setting the rail to the hole pattern. I'm not a fan of depending on the hole pattern for square cuts because I've had the MDF shift in the frame.

 

[greg mann]

Michael, it would seem to me that you want the rail biased to the left so that you need to pull it to the right when dropping it over the tab. This way, the tab has no clearance on its right side and the rail can't be pushed to the left by any pressure on the saw.

 

[lat]

Michael, the more I think about it the more I am inclined toward tightfitting the rail to the steel tab. First it is foolproof in reference to Greg's point. Second the fit will last a long time, 5 years of reasonable use in my case. Third, I would thing that the gradual wear introduced by a tension bias will gradually shift your rail adjustment with usage (even in a micro way, it wears and shifts the rail on each pass), while a tight fit creates symmetrical wear on both sides and simply seats the tab more deeply in the rail before enough wear develops  and causes some play.

Louis

 

[greg mann]

Lou, I think you are trying to solve a problem that doesn't really exist. You are right that the wear is negligible, but you will also increase it by removing clearance. Biasing the rail to create a preload condition is what makes it foolproof.

 

[Michael Kellough]

Greg, with any amount of play on either side there is the possibility of unwanted movement, as Louis said, but with the weight of the saw on the guide rail it isn't likely to move. Using a cantilevered router might be different.

Louis, I agree with you except perhaps for this part, "seats the tab more deeply". The bottom of the rail should sit on the shoulders of the height adjustment bracket so the tab should always be the same distance up into the slot.

It would be best if the tab was thick enough that it engaged enough of the aluminum that wear would be extremely minimal. Maybe encase the tab in a glob of epoxy and file it down to fit snug? Or crazy glue a bit of steel, brass, or aluminum and file.

I always reset the fence to a known square hunk of wood when a square cut is critical so in practice that factors out the wear. Other angles are set as needed referencing the fence and guide rail so that isn't a problem either.

 

[festoolfan1000]

There's not much to the MFT, a simple try square will get your unit dialed. Loosen the lock and zero knob place the squares stock (the fat shorter part) on the fence and lock it down. With Michael's suggestion of the offset rail it will be square. This biggest issue I have had with maintaining square had to do with a much simpler problem; dust or particles getting jambed against the fence. The solution to this is to mount an axualier fence with a rabbett cut out at the bottom to allow dust to sit in OR to simple wipe the fence area down frequently.

M

 

[mhch]

if you use Quas's method of setting the rail to the hole pattern. I'm not a fan of depending on the hole pattern for square cuts because I've had the MDF shift in the frame.

I use 2 dowels plugged into MFT holes, to verify that rail is well resting against them, before I start a series of cut.
Same for the fence. This way  fence vs rail squareness is always guaranteed whatever happens (MFT moved,
rail or fence bumped, etc ...).

Anyway, knowing about this tensionning idea is really great and it combines well with using the hole
pattern.I wish I knew about it earlier,

 

[John Viola]

Just as your work might evolve, your tool usage may also evolve. I bought an MFT1080 quite some time ago, but only really started using it recently when I have been doing some additional trim work and alterations in our house. Prior to that, it was nice to have, but not something I felt the need to reach for frequently. (In my shop, I have a MiniMax sliding table saw) I also have the OF1010 (as well as the OF1400). While I don't use the OF1010 much, it does fill the need from time to time, especially when I'm doing something that involves multiple routers. I also like it for more "delicate" work since it's smaller and lighter. I don't use these two tools much, but I believe that over time, I'll more than get my money's worth from the investment.

There is really only one Festool product that I own that has really not gotten much use and that's one of the small sanders. But that's probably my fault for just not pulling it out when I could. If this continues, perhaps I'll consider unloading it, but then again, it's also small enough that it would be quite usable by my girls should they choose to do some more small woodworking projects.

That all said, it's good to think about this from time to time. If your work and work patterns change, perhaps reconfiguring can help you better meet your needs while giving someone else the opportunity to put a little-used tool to more frequent use. I have done that recently with some other things...like a drum sander that just was taking up space.

Jim, great post.  Nice to see you "spreading your wings", forum-wise.  You've kind of hit it right on the head: what I think I'll do, shop-wise, doesn't necessarily translate to reality, and my shop space is more and more limited (my wife has a nasty habit of picking up bikes and Little Tikes cars from the curbside-I have 3 small daughters, one under 1, and my garage has at least 8 wheeled vehicles in it).  I look at the MFT on the rolling stand I made for it, and it takes up a lot of room.  I'm getting more into handwork, and I spend more time at a "real" workbench, so I am kind of forced to make some choices.  As I've never been 100% happy with the MFT, it's a natural choice for culling.  And I think I am torn between reality and desires, which prompted the OP. 

Thanks for helping me drill it down!

 

[lat]

Greg, with any amount of play on either side there is the possibility of unwanted movement, as Louis said, but with the weight of the saw on the guide rail it isn't likely to move. Using a cantilevered router might be different.

Louis, I agree with you except perhaps for this part, "seats the tab more deeply". The bottom of the rail should sit on the shoulders of the height adjustment bracket so the tab should always be the same distance up into the slot.

It would be best if the tab was thick enough that it engaged enough of the aluminum that wear would be extremely minimal. Maybe encase the tab in a glob of epoxy and file it down to fit snug? Or crazy glue a bit of steel, brass, or aluminum and file.

I always reset the fence to a known square hunk of wood when a square cut is critical so in practice that factors out the wear. Other angles are set as needed referencing the fence and guide rail so that isn't a problem either.

Michael, your observation is correct and my choice of words incorrect. I should have said "seats the tab firmly" rather than "more deeply". Obviously I have corrected a problem that did not exist when I set up my MFT for the first time, not being aware of that induced tension bias. However, a tight fit has provided me with perfect 90 degree cuts for many years without further adjustment to the rail (my adjustments have been limited to resetting the fence square after angle cuts, using an MDF template). I would like to try the original setup (loose fit + tension bias) to compare but I can not do it without replacing the front bracket since I tampered with the tab. Well, maybe some day.

Louis

 

[Michael Kellough]

Louis, if you want to argue with me you'll have to try harder 
I still agree with you  ;D

I have two MFTs and one has less slop in the fit of the tab and I always feel a little more confident with it.

 

[Benjamin Miner]

The MFT is a very good tool for for very many things. I don't go to an installation job without my 1080. (I'm peeved that I can' get another one, but that's a rant for another time...) It's a superb work surface, and I have found it to be well within acceptable toerances of squareness. I usually use it to crosscut 3/4 panels for cabinet boxes. Also useful for processing 1/2 door panels. I don't look at the pieces with an engineer's square, as I am not building a 747. I can't tell you whether my cuts are empirically square, but they sure meet my definition of it.

Having said that, I still plan to invest in a MiniMax panel saw. In a one person shop, speed is absolutely of the essence, and cutting rough followed by fine-tuning via the TS 55, tablesaw, and MFT is not really tenable. Yeah, a MiniMax is in a whole different cost strata, but that's just the point. The MFT does an exemplary job for $500. But if you do a high volume of sheet processing, The System doesn't replace high-quality dedicated shop tools.

 

[tallgrass]

if you are looking for the old table i know where there are several new in the box. my local festool guy bought a bunch and still has some.

 

[Steve Jones]

Benjamin,

I do pretty high volume sheet processing for cabinets in my one man shop, and I'd put my shop built cutting table setup up against a panel saw anytime.

The table is simply a sheet of 3/4 MFT (which is slightly larger than a standard 8' x 4' sheet of plywood) with a scaled fence on the operator side and an alignment stop on the other (to keep the rail at right angles to the fence).

Infeed table holds the stack of new stock, each sheet is slid into position against the adjustable stop, rail is dropped into position and the fast, accurate, clean cut is made once - each cut made is the final cut for the separated parts, no cleanup with the TS55.

outfeed side is a parts bin to stack parts on end, makes getting at individual parts for later processing (shelf and pocket holes) easier. parts bin rolls to take the whole stack to the next operation (holes, edge banding, assembly) the only change I have planned is maybe a second parts bin to allow for some more pre-sorting for destined operations and larger capacity (some kitchens take more bits than my current bin can hold).

Current production record is a medium sized kitchen with 5-piece (flat panel) doors from picking up lumber and sheets goods to delivery within two days.

Someone on another thread asked me post pictures of my setup, I did once before but have no idea where they are, besides the setup has evolved a bit since then so I'll post here in a day or so (delivery deadline approaching).