Michael Kellough said:
Make a small A frame rack for carrying the cut ply pieces. A frame similar to those used to transport stone and glass but made of wood. If you’re clever you can make it with hinges so it can fold flat when not in use. Clamp or strap material to the frame. You should be able to find a way to use the seatbelt anchors to pass a strap across the top of A frame and ply. Guide rail passes between legs of A.
If I was going to go through all that trouble I'd just remove the bike racks from the top of my car and ratchet strap the plywood pieces to the rack on top.
While I do enjoy using my Festools, I do get tired of all these little non-value added steps, shortcomings, or "mods" I have to deal with to mitigate the shortcomings.
I just want to buy the tool, do what I need to do, and move on. It's kind of like doing actual work on Macs vs. Windows software. Windows software is designed to just get the work done. But no one will sing its praises. Apple stuff requires lots of little extra steps to get work done and it often falls short. People sing its praises regardless.
I'm puzzled as to why certain decisions are made with many of the products and accessories. Why are the rail connector screws slotted when every other fastener in the Festool world is Allen or Torx? Why a 1080 rail instead of 1200? I could start a smooth plunge on a full-width piece on the MFT, accommodate the cord deflector, and have enough left on the back to clamp the rail up so it didn't fall and hit me in the head later in the day.
Why a 1400 rail instead of 1500 or even 1600? The 1400 length seems just a bit short for crosscutting plywood. Certainly too short for 5x5 BB sheets.
I'm curious what variables are being optimized that drive these design decisions. Otherwise, these little compromises here and there add up to "death by 1000 cuts".