MFT 3 question

[Toolpig]

Is the MFT 3 large enough for cutting a full 4x8 sheet of plywood down to size using my TS55?

Jason

 

[johnsonri]

Jason,

It depends on what you mean be large enough. The MFT3 alone may not be enough to support the full sheet of plywood. If you have the MFT along with a support at the same height as the MFT, then the setup will be sufficient to support the full sheet.

Now for cutting the sheet, you need a rail long enough for the cutting operations. The rail that comes with the MFT, FS1080 is not long enough. The FS1400 rail is long enough for cross cuts and the FS2700 is long enough for both rip cuts and cross cuts.

FS1400 - cross cut in one pass
FS2700 - rip cut in one pass

Also, the two rails mentioned above would not be connected to the MFT for the cutting operation. When the rails are connected to the MFT, there is not enough layout room for the full plywood sheet.

Bottom line, it can be done...with the right configuration and accessories.

Rey

 

[Nigel]

Jason,
I suppose the answer is it depends on how much you need to cut off.If you are trimming it a bit then yes you might get away with it just as a table support but you couldn,t use the rail and supports as it would be to wide.If you need to cut it in half or even a third off then no, you need more support.A frame type setup would be best on trestles maybe.I use a 2.5m x 1.2m frame on a trailer .In dry weather you can transport on site and cut with it and it's good for carrying plasterboard aswell.

 

[jeffinsgf]

I have an MFT-1080, an MFT-800, an FS-1400 and the little bit of hardware used to join two rails together.  I do all first cuts with the rail separate from the table.  The pistol grip quick clamp is a wonderful accessory for this.  If the first cut is a full length rip, I join the FS-1080 with the FS-1400 and I'm covered.  As soon as the pieces are cut down enough to fit within the capacity of the fixed rail system, I move to that. I can move the MFT-800 around wherever it needs to be to support whatever part of the sheet isn't on the MFT-1080.  I took the table clamping mechanism from my MFT-800 and use it on the FS-1400.  That way I can make a long cut or a cross cut without mucking about with swapping rails.  As it turns out over the last few years, the MFT-800 has turned out to be little more than a glorified roller stand  (for me that is -- but one that is exactly the right height).

 

[Daviddubya]

If you are asking whether or not the MFT3 can be used with its guide rail and fence to cut down a 4X8 sheet, the answer is no - not without making a first cut to reduce the width of the sheet.  If you mount a longer guide rail on the MFT3 in the long dimension, it is still too small to make a cut on a 4' sheet.  The "work space" in the long dimension is 43-3/8", according to Festool specifications.

 

[johnsonri]

Here is a picture (I like pictures...one is worth a 1000 words sometimes...unless it is a picture of words  [wink])

[attachimg=#]

That's an FS1400 rail in the pic over a 48x96 sheet on top of an MFT. It all fits, but the rail is not connected to the MFT in the pic and the part of the sheet that hangs off the MFT needs to be supported.

Hope that helps.
Rey

 

[Roseland]

Someone's been busy with Sketchup!

Nice drawing!  Makes it very clear.

A 

 

[johnsonri]

Someone's been busy with Sketchup!
Nice drawing!  Makes it very clear.

Thanks.

Indeed, that is a pic from my SketchUp library...I just love SketchUp!!!

Before SketchUp, I would prototype things with MDF before committing to more expensive stock. I do all prototyping in SketchUp now.

Rey

 

[score0matic]

In my view Festool droped the ball here.  Why they didnt make it 6" longer is a brain Freeze. 

The US is the largest user of the MFT,  and in the US the rail saw is used to break down sheetgoods.... Festool Germany failing to recognise that the TS is a "sheet cutting System" and failing to make their MFT compatible with standard Sheets is  [blink]
  There are now direct competers to the rail system and Festool has failed to grab the next competive advantage. When Makita or Dewalt brings to market a portable table that can quickly and accuratly rip and crosscut 49 x 97 those who do not already bleed Festool Green will buy the better system.

Craig

 

[Daviddubya]

In my view Festool droped the ball here.   Why they didnt make it 6" longer is a brain Freeze....

Where would you draw the line on the size of an MFT?  Baltic Birch (often imported from Europe) typically comes in 5'X5' sheets.  One could argue the MFT should allow a 61" cut.  Following your thought further, perhaps the MFT should allow a 97" cut using a guide rail the fence.  I suppose a 49"X97" MFT cut would work for just about any sheet.  Oh yeah, and make the fence really quick and easy to move from the short side to the long side.  And it should come with two guide rails to cut 47" and 97", or maybe an extendable fence and guide rail.  And it should fold in half and weigh less than an MFT3.  And it should sell for way less than an MFT3.  If Dewalt or Makita come out with this table, I want royalties!  Smile.

Portability is another issue.  The MFT is used by lots of people as a portable work table.  Make it bigger and it is less portable.

Cut big sheets down using guide rails and a saw.  Make cuts on the MFT using the guide rail/fence setup whenever you can.

 

[sw1211]

In my view Festool droped the ball here.   Why they didnt make it 6" longer is a brain Freeze....

Where would you draw the line on the size of an MFT?  Baltic Birch (often imported from Europe) typically comes in 5'X5' sheets.  One could argue the MFT should allow a 61" cut.  Following your thought further, perhaps the MFT should allow a 97" cut using a guide rail the fence.  I suppose a 49"X97" MFT cut would work for just about any sheet.  Oh yeah, and make the fence really quick and easy to move from the short side to the long side.  And it should come with two guide rails to cut 47" and 97", or maybe an extendable fence and guide rail.  And it should fold in half and weigh less than an MFT3.  And it should sell for way less than an MFT3. 

Perfect, I'll take one!

 

[score0matic]

Where would you draw the line on the size of an MFT?

Dave... I Clearly drew the line at 6" [wink]

Cut big sheets down using guide rails and a saw.  Make cuts on the MFT using the guide rail/fence setup whenever you can.

So Dave what do you do with big sheets?  Lay them on the floor to cut them?  Use a "special table besides the MFT?  Uncouple the MFT's rail guides to make a few cuts and then reinstall them when you finally get wood that fits? Those methods don't sound Faster or Simpler to me.

 Following your thought further, perhaps the MFT should allow a 97" cut using a guide rail the fence.  I suppose a 49"X97" MFT cut would work for just about any sheet.  Oh yeah, and make the fence really quick and easy to move from the short side to the long side.  And it should come with two guide rails to cut 47" and 97", or maybe an extendable fence and guide rail.  And it should fold in half and weigh less than an MFT3.

that sounds like an awesome idea Dave......   add in wheels, an optional router table,  the ability to have the whole thing set up and cutting in under 5 min and I think it is a table worth looking at

PS. with the lock-in tables and rip guides in place it will rip 3 to 4, 8' rips a min, but I am having trouble storing the Incra LS 17 for the router top. 
Thanks Craig

 

[jvsteenb]

The US is the largest user of the MFT,  and in the US the rail saw is used to break down sheetgoods.... Festool Germany failing to recognise that the TS is a "sheet cutting System" and failing to make their MFT compatible with standard Sheets is    [blink]

I wasn't aware of the fact that the US represents the largest MFT userbase, and must admit it feels somewhat unlikely....
But I can tell you that the TS-and-rail definitely is considered a sheet cutting system where I live.
There's the FS1900 and FS3000 to acommodate it: long enough to crosscut (FS1900) or rip (FS3000) a full sheet, and support a lead-in and lead-out area for the saw as well. The FS3000 is a pain to transport, but that goes for full sheets as well.

But I don't think the MFT system was ever meant for breaking down sheetgoods. Upping the size any more AND keeping the stability on par would probably make it less portable, and I don't consider it very portable as is.
Breaking down full-size sheets on site can easily be done with a couple of 2x4's as a support, or on a couple of styrofoam insulation sheets. In my view, this is definately not MFT-territory.
Personally, I keep a pack of 40mm styrofoam sheets handy, and an FS1400 and FS1900, that I can couple for ripping full size, or I use the 1400 as a guide to reposition the 1900 if I need just one or two ripcuts. Quick and dirty, but it works nonetheless.

So for me, there's no problem in the MFT/3 being as it is. I actually consider it one of my most valuable tools. If only it were a bit lighter....

Regards,

Job

 

[score0matic]

Job
I was surprised to read that the US was the largest users of the mft. I read it here and we can probably find it with a search.  I also agree that portability is so important for on sight use.  Weight can be overcome with a well designed Wheel kit.  I couldn't believe how much of a difference they made to the Walko.  you are right

But I can tell you that the TS-and-rail definitely is considered a sheet cutting system where I live.

But I don't think the MFT system was ever meant for breaking down sheetgoods.

All I am suggesting is that they should have designed the table to bring out the Full (sheet)  potential of the system.

I am not saying that it preforms badly at anything it does.  Im saying that it had So much more potentiol  within easy reach.

 

[jvsteenb]

Perhaps you're right.

But although I consider myself as quite a creative thinker, I just cant envision how they could have met this purpose without sacrificing one very important asset, that it doesn't feature in spades to begin with : (trans-)portability.
To cater for a full sheet crosscut, AND the use of the fence it would have to be at least 8" wider (actually longer) , preferrably 10". So at least two 96mm increments to keep the raster, or even three. That would render it a LOT less portable.... The longer rail that's necessary would add to that.

Just my ?0.02

Regards,

Job

 

[jeffinsgf]

...
Personally, I keep a pack of 40mm styrofoam sheets handy, and an FS1400 and FS1900, that I can couple for ripping full size, or I use the 1400 as a guide to reposition the 1900 if I need just one or two ripcuts. Quick and dirty, but it works nonetheless.
...
Regards,

Job

I really like the styrofoam idea.

For a small shop or a job site system it seems to me that an MFT-3 (or in my case MFT-1080), an FS-1400, a rail joiner and an adjustable roller stand -- plus the brilliant sheet of styrofoam -- could get anything done that needs to be done.

I bet if you're careful with setting your depth of cut, a sheet of foam could last a long, long time.

 

[Notorious T.O.D.]

I use a sheet of 2" insulation foam board which is 4' x 8' to support full sheets and even less for cutting on a table, the MFT or even on the floor/ground...although I am getting to old to be working on the ground...LOL. It works great, is light and easy to store and only costs about $25.

Best,
Todd

 

[counterfix]

i like the simplicity of the foam however the mft sys was design to be connected together so to accommodate any size or shape. its only limitation is  the cost [eek] as for setup its vary quick and  accuracy well thats hard to beat ;D
Lance

 

[WarnerConstCo.]

Festool told us at the training thing last month, that they sell more MFT's in the US.

Mine is pretty much a portable work table and now out feed support for my saw.

I have done a little cutting on it.

If I want to cut up some sheet goods, I just use a couple saw horses and my rails.  Yes, I get funny looks from people when I cut roof sheeting with my rail saw but, it fits perfect every time. [big grin]

 

[score0matic]

That is a Pimped  [big grin] Walko.