MFT Slab

M

macmad

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2010
Messages
2
Finally got round to making an assembly table. Pleased with the jig to make the 8x4 top
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3838.jpg
    IMG_3838.jpg
    1.8 MB · Views: 4,653
  • IMG_3839.jpg
    IMG_3839.jpg
    1.9 MB · Views: 2,726
  • IMG_3842.jpg
    IMG_3842.jpg
    1.8 MB · Views: 36,814
I've seen multitude of contraptions and templates to make custom tops and can't understand why people even bother.
If you are happy with MFT hole size and spacing use genuine MFT replacement top as a template with flush trim router bit. Most of Festool users already have both. If not, you can buy one of those smaller plates (488565) for under $90 and I'm sure any woodworker has a trim bit.
This is by far the cheapest, most accurate and time efficient way to make it.
 
Svar said:
I've seen multitude of contraptions and templates to make custom tops and can't understand why people even bother.
If you are happy with MFT hole size and spacing use genuine MFT replacement top as a template with flush trim router bit. Most of Festool users already have both. If not, you can buy one of those smaller plates (488565) for under $90 and I'm sure any woodworker has a trim bit.
This is by far the cheapest, most accurate and time efficient way to make it.
Click to expand...

I have spent 3 years working on an accurate method to produce an array of 20 mm holes and using templates is not the answer.

Take a look at this thread for my solution:
http://festoolownersgroup.com/festool-sales-dealer-area/ujk-parf-guide-system-videos/

In particular look at the 4 cut test which is the ultimate test of any solution and something I have yet to see done by anyone else.

Peter
 
Peter Parfitt said:
I have spent 3 years working on an accurate method to produce an array of 20 mm holes and using templates is not the answer.

Take a look at this thread for my solution:
http://festoolownersgroup.com/festool-sales-dealer-area/ujk-parf-guide-system-videos/

In particular look at the 4 cut test which is the ultimate test of any solution and something I have yet to see done by anyone else.

Peter
Click to expand...

Peter, can't think why template is not the answer. I've produced exact replicas of MFT top in little over half an hour. And by exact I mean absoluty perfect copy of the original. Lined up the two plates and stick half a dozen precision machined 20 mm rods through both. Hole size was also exactly the same well under 0.05 mm difference.
 
Svar said:
Peter Parfitt said:
I have spent 3 years working on an accurate method to produce an array of 20 mm holes and using templates is not the answer.

Take a look at this thread for my solution:
http://festoolownersgroup.com/festool-sales-dealer-area/ujk-parf-guide-system-videos/

In particular look at the 4 cut test which is the ultimate test of any solution and something I have yet to see done by anyone else.

Peter
Click to expand...

Peter, can't think why template is not the answer. I've produced exact replicas of MFT top in little over half an hour. And by exact I mean absoluty perfect copy of the original. Lined up the two plates and stick half a dozen precision machined 20 mm rods through both. Hole size was also exactly the same well under 0.05 mm difference.
Click to expand...

I would love to see an uncut (boring as it may be) video of the 4 cut test - no rush, just a thought.

Peter
 
Svar said:
Peter Parfitt said:
I have spent 3 years working on an accurate method to produce an array of 20 mm holes and using templates is not the answer.

Take a look at this thread for my solution:
http://festoolownersgroup.com/festool-sales-dealer-area/ujk-parf-guide-system-videos/

In particular look at the 4 cut test which is the ultimate test of any solution and something I have yet to see done by anyone else.

Peter
Click to expand...

Peter, can't think why template is not the answer. I've produced exact replicas of MFT top in little over half an hour. And by exact I mean absoluty perfect copy of the original. Lined up the two plates and stick half a dozen precision machined 20 mm rods through both. Hole size was also exactly the same well under 0.05 mm difference.
Click to expand...

I also can't think why a template, provided it is properly aligned and securely fastened wouldn't make perfect copies.  However, at the same time, I imagine Peter has spent more time, effort and thought on devising a non-CNC method to cut our own MFT tops than anyone else on this forum, possibly the world! I also don't think he'd rubbish an alternative method to promote his own device (it's already selling like hot-cakes), so if Peter says it's not the most accurate way, I'll take that at face value.
 
I would say a template would be more accurate. I actually made something very similar to UJK but I found it was a pain to setup. Once I'd cut a few holes then I used that as a template and it was much quicker. Drop a few dogs through a couple of rows and cut the next couple of rows. The only downside to that would be wear, and obviously storing a large template.
 
RickyL said:
I would say a template would be more accurate. I actually made something very similar to UJK but I found it was a pain to setup. Once I'd cut a few holes then I used that as a template and it was much quicker. Drop a few dogs through a couple of rows and cut the next couple of rows. The only downside to that would be wear, and obviously storing a large template.
Click to expand...

What did you make that was similar to the UJK system? Do you have a photo to share?

Peter
 
I used the Woodrave router base and pegboard.  I wanted to use right angle jigs in the holes but thought the holes wouldn't be accurate enough.  They are.  I suspect that they are actually measurable off, because I know the pegboard holes are not perfect, but it doesn't seem to affect accuracy enough I can measure it.  Fortunately, I'm working in wood so the requirements are not as tight as they would be for metal. 

So for a practical alternative, I suggest the Woodrave router base.  I have no doubt that Peter's setup is capable of greater accuracy and I would prefer using a drill as opposed to a noisy router.  But the Woodrave router base works fine for me. 
 
RickyL said:
I would say a template would be more accurate. I actually made something very similar to UJK but I found it was a pain to setup. Once I'd cut a few holes then I used that as a template and it was much quicker. Drop a few dogs through a couple of rows and cut the next couple of rows. The only downside to that would be wear, and obviously storing a large template.
Click to expand...
I agree. If you don't own MFT you can simply buy small Festool plate (488565) for $86 shipped. If you do, there is nothing to buy.
Put perforated plate on top of the work piece, clamp, drill 1/2" holes freehand, flip over, widen holes with 1/2" pattern bit. Once you finish two holes, drop dogs in them just in case. I prefer this method instead of top (near shank) bearing bit as there is no danger of accidentally cutting into the template. It's super fast (
 
Peter Parfitt said:
RickyL said:
I would say a template would be more accurate. I actually made something very similar to UJK but I found it was a pain to setup. Once I'd cut a few holes then I used that as a template and it was much quicker. Drop a few dogs through a couple of rows and cut the next couple of rows. The only downside to that would be wear, and obviously storing a large template.
Click to expand...

What did you make that was similar to the UJK system? Do you have a photo to share?

Peter
Click to expand...

I don't have a picture but i'll grab one. It is basically like a framing square with holes in it. Maybe my shortfall was the 20mm drill I used. It never cut that clean so I prefered the router.

I'm not knocking your product, I think its a good idea, obviously people don't like using a template or they would have just done that for years, but for me at least the template is easier.
 
What do people have against using the lr32? Are they not coming out accurate that way?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

 
john5mt said:
What do people have against using the lr32? Are they not coming out accurate that way?
Click to expand...

I would think that the main reason would be that they don't have an LR32 plus you need to buy a 20 mm boring router bit.

I have used the LR32 to make my own custom 8'x2' "MFT" tops and they worked out real well. Once you develop a system it goes very fast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Questionable design choice - or am I a curmudgeon?
Replies
5
Views
204
smorgasbord
S
S
Domino Face Mortising Jig - Any Interest?
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
smorgasbord
S
O
My Little Pine Base Racks - Should I Be Concerned?
2
Replies
21
Views
22K
onocoffee
O
O
Domino Legs to Table?
Replies
12
Views
1K
Packard
P
L
LR32 dimensions to router bit centerline
Replies
6
Views
1K
rmwarren
rmwarren
Back
Top