new multi battery charger inverter power supply

[Spandex]

I believe that adding additional heights to the "new system" would be a fairly straightforward "fix".

But the old incompatible sys3 heights will still be out there in large numbers. Which means, as a customer, you’re in the position that you can only benefit from the ‘height system’ if you happen to have enough of the correct heights with you. Which is no different to how it is now with a mix of t-loc and sys3, which people are saying is not good enough.

That’s the issue. If having a mix of t-loc and sys3 is not acceptable, then having a mix of t-loc, sys3 and ‘sys4’ isn’t going to make that any better.

 

[mino]

But the old incompatible sys3 heights will still be out there in large numbers. Which means, as a customer, you’re in the position that you can only benefit from the ‘height system’ if you happen to have enough of the correct heights with you. Which is no different to how it is now with a mix of t-loc and sys3, which people are saying is not good enough.

That’s the issue. If having a mix of t-loc and sys3 is not acceptable, then having a mix of t-loc, sys3 and ‘sys4’ isn’t going to make that any better.

Kinda, but once I am aware of the modulo 52,5mm versions specifics, I can simply ignore the others.

Lots of tools which were shipped in SYS2 are now shipped in 187. There is exactly ZERO benefit for Festool to ship in 187 versus a 1575 aka SYS23. It would fit in the exact same places in the Bott system but in addition would be fully height-compatible with the Classic and T-Loc height system.

WIN-WIN-WIN the moment someone at Festool will come from the Olymp between the commoners which actually use their tools.
[big grin]

EDIT: The important point being there is NO height system in the the SYS3 current heights. So there is nothing to be "incompatible" with on that front either.

 

[Spandex]

You can simply ignore the sys3 boxes already, can’t you?

 

[mino]

You can simply ignore the sys3 boxes already, can’t you?

I do. Can until TANOS makes T-Locs which will be a decade or two still.

But I do also care as I like what TTS created as a whole. And would prefer they manage to fix themselves instead of hoping someone comes to fill their place in the market.
Hint: not having high hopes of someone doing better on the system thing than Festo/Festool did till recently. That needs vision and persistence and those traits are very much spat on these days.

 

[peter halle]

Debate and discussion is totally ok, please continue not making this thread personal.  That would be greatly appreciated.

Peter Halle

 

[Spandex]

I don’t mean ignoring sys3 by not buying them - that’s not an option for most of their customers. Sys3 is out there in numbers already, so no change in heights will put the system back to how it was.

When I say it can’t be fixed, I don’t mean it can’t be fixed for you. But for Festool to take the massive step of changing the heights back to what they were, it would need to be fixing LOTS of peoples issues, not a small group who had managed to hold out on buying sys3s.

 

[DeformedTree]

Folks forget that Festool may not like Systainer 3 either.  We don't know how much say they had in the matter.  Their sibling company makes them, and they report to the same parent. Festool was very well told they will change to this system, they very well expressed displeasure with this.

I would guess there was plenty of folks in Festool who didn't like this either.  But you will never see this because anyone who works in a company knows you can be un-happy about it internally, but you don't go saying stuff externally. You smile and roll with it.

The fact there are multiple issues with the new systainers, and what is the biggest issue(s) with them will vary from one person to the next. Folks within Festool very well brought all of the issues up, but if the parent company, laid down the law on the matter, it won't matter.

And no, people can't just avoid them. That is a far to idealistic idea.  Someone wants to buy a new festool tool, it comes in a systainer 3, simple as that.  Putting forth work arounds doesn't matter, they come in systainer 3s.

I don't see Festool as being the one at fault here. They don't make them, Tanos does.  Do any of use really think Festool would have requested height changes, label removal, pointless handles, etc?  Can be pretty sure the origin of these issues is not in Festool, but in Tanos or TTS Tooltechnic Systems.  As much as I would love to think Festool could have decided to stick with Systainer 2, or got Systainer 3.1 , or even be able to go back to Systainer 2 (T-Lock), that just isn't how companies work.

That doesn't mean complaining about them is bad, it very well will help something happen, maybe folks within Festool can take the complaints to Tanos and TTS and go "see see!".

The best case is a Systainer 3.1 type situation.  Tanos takes the designs they have, but makes another set of molds back to the old heights, leaves off the bottom handle while at it, brings back the side labels.  That is a lot of money to do that. But they very much could re-use a lot of the stuff on the new units that is fine or stuff no one cares about either way.  Will there be folks stuck with Systainer 3 tools, sure. But in time they can either swap stuff around, or live with them.  Some folks love classics and will swap with folks. Someone out there might love Systainer 3 and offer to swap with folks.

 

[Cheese]

Tanos takes the designs they have, but makes another set of molds back to the old heights, leaves off the bottom handle while at it, brings back the side labels.  That is a lot of money to do that. But they very much could re-use a lot of the stuff on the new units that is fine or stuff no one cares about either way. 

In actuality, it's actually simpler than that. Having designed injection molds...the smart money is on the fact that these are totally different mold sets. Because of the different dimensions, interior features, exterior features I'd highly doubt that the same molds were used. Ejector pins, ejector blades, mold cooling, everything has changed...this is all different tooling.

So, the good news is that the original T-Loc tooling is still languishing around Tanos somewhere. Now whether Tanos keeps the old tooling on storage racks for future use or just decides to recycle it for scrap prices has yet to be determined. Scrap steel is worth a lot of money these days. That's a management decision and unfortunately management decisions can be fickle at best.

As far as Festool changing direction with the new Systainer 3 system...I don't see that happening. They made a corporate decision/commitment and they are extremely unlikely to back-track on that decision, why would they, that sends the wrong message.

A better approach is to retain the tooling for some time period and then make a decision if they should reintroduce Systainer T-Locs because of "popular demand" or sell the tooling and agree upon a licensing agreement with an outside source.

 

[DeformedTree]

Yeah, they will have the old tooling, they still have the tools for classics as they make those.  My main thought was a compromise, they bring forward what every good is in the systainer design, and "just" have to make tooling for the 5 heights. No need for new tools for lids and other parts which can just be used as is from systainer 3.

I haven't done plastic tooling. But I suspect systainer tooling is very expensive just looking at the systainers. Which is why I don't expect them to do such a thing.  But it's one way to compromise and not look like they are reversing course. They are just introducing more heights, less front handles, more side labels.

In the future they can introduce "Systainer 3 T-loc  Classic Edition".  [smile] A re-introduction of classic T-loc features. Peoples heads explode over the name.

Unless Systainer 3 is found to be harmful to children, they won't go back. But other paths could happen.

 

[vkumar]

Getting late into this thread.  But is there a place that explains the difference between the TlOc and the  SYS 3.  Graphically would be nice.

 

[Cheese]

But I suspect systainer tooling is very expensive just looking at the systainers. Which is why I don't expect them to do such a thing.  But it's one way to compromise and not look like they are reversing course. They are just introducing more heights, less front handles, more side labels.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if the tooling for a Systainer base is $70K-$100K unless they are procuring them off-shore. For the Systainer cover, one size fits all but the bases are all individual items.

To increase the height of a base is "relatively" easy by inserting a spacer but it's still not a slam dunk because of the cooling and ejection issues I mentioned earlier. And then the spacer will produce a witness line in the part that people will rail against and can become a potential fracture point.

No, Festool has made the decision to go forward with the Systainer 3 and time will tell where that goes. I'm not a fan of the Systainer 3 and the klack...klack...klack of the handle smacking against another Systainer but for now, it is what it is. It's not going to change anytime soon.  [smile]

 

[DeformedTree]

Getting late into this thread.  But is there a place that explains the difference between the TlOc and the  SYS 3.  Graphically would be nice.

I have no graphic, but can sum up the major parts of it.

1) They changed all the heights,  Systainer Classics (aka Systainer 1) and Systainer T-loc (aka Systainer 2), were the same heights, the new Systainer 3's have different heights, so no combination of them matches up to the old. You also can't get a stack that comes up to the same working surface heights.  The height changes also mean it breaks things for those who have cabinet systems and such built around them or just like to be able to make stacks from various systainers all to the same height, either for just a nice look, or to use to support stuff (aka making a table).

2) They removed the side label slot.  This was probably something to do with them putting features for side rails to use with the Bott vehicle racking system. Which now means for people who use them for everything else, you can no longer have labels on 3 sides, which is just really annoying for quickly finding what you want.

3) On shorter systainer 3s there is now a built in handle to help you pull them out of racks, but the handle doesn't fit flush when you lock the stack, it sticks out, so now again you break peoples storage setups, plus it's just dumb. 

Those are the main changes/issues.  Other parts changed too, but they are not things that would really get people upset in general, and could even be minor improvements (I think the hinge got improved).  They also did stuff that makes no sense like make a new sys-cart for them, which is a different footprint than the old. So again, for those with a system of systainers, it just messes things up, you now have to hunt the internet to find the old style, all the Tanos branded ones are gone, some Festool and other branded ones can be found.

Basically, they are still Euronorm form factor boxes footprint wise, they still connect together, and connect to the older models, but other than that, it's almost like a new system of boxes. The new version won't play well with collection of the old unless your only factor in compatibility is that they stack on top of each other and connect. If you embraced systainers for more than just a box, and built out around them, the change really sucks.

 

[vkumar]

Thanks. Looks like it belongs in "what were they thinking" category. Glad I have my share of the older systainers.

 

[squall_line]

The T-Loc Sys-I is the same height as the new Sys3-M-112, but all of the others are different heights.  The Sys-M-137 is in between the height of the old T-Loc SysI and SysII, which is actually more convenient for items that were just a little bit too large for a SysI but felt lost in a SysII (prime example: the hand sanding block with dust collection connected to a 21.5mm hose).  Most of the other sizes are just bigger than the old ones for the tools that come in them.

The new front handles latch flush if the Systainer under the Sys3 has a Sys3 latch instead of the T-Loc latch or if it's on the bottom of the stack; the Sys3 latches are slightly narrower to accommodate for this.  Unfortunately, a latch is nearly 20% of the price of a Systainer, so swapping them out is a non-trivial cost, but this knowledge can help when it's time to create a stack.  The Sys3's are slightly lower priced than their same-size T-Loc alternatives, which makes the latch an even higher percentage of the price of the unit.

Latch images of T-Loc, Mini, Sys-Org, and Sys3:https://www.festoolownersgroup.com/...ches-are-interchangeable/msg635500/#msg635500

In some ways, this is similar to the Classic Systainer, which can latch on to the bottom of the Sys3 like it could with the T-Loc, but it can't latch on top of a Sys3.  Same with stacking T-Loc Midi sizes with Sys3M.

The new Sys-Cart has rail guides on it so that the base can be racked, likely used for positively securing it in a vehicle in addition to the wheel locks.  The rails themselves are mostly intended for transport, but apparently not for daily use in a cart/cabinet:https://www.festoolownersgroup.com/festool-and-tanos-systainers/sys3-mounting-rails/

 

[mino]

So, the good news is that the original T-Loc tooling is still languishing around Tanos somewhere.
...

Nothing is languishing. TANOS still makes Classics for their B2B customers and they are also generally available in etail in Europe - if you need them you can get them. And is still making piles of T-Locs for the same reason.

E.g. these days there are tons of medical T-Locs being made which will not be switched to SYS3 as there is no reason for that.

The only thing really impacted is Festool customers here - as they CHOSE (for whatever reason) to switch to SYS3 en masse.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if the tooling for a Systainer base is $70K-$100K unless they are procuring them off-shore. For the Systainer cover, one size fits all but the bases are all individual items.

That sounds about right. Though the forms are basically peanuts in the grand scheme of things.

They pale compared to the R&D that went into these which was in the millions range. Just 5 engineering employees for 1 year in Germany is about $1M in costs. So think $10M ballpark R&D here, possibly more.

If TANOS decided to make compatible heights, the new bottom forms will pay themselves just by shipping one year worth of TPC drills in them. Give or take.

 

[Cheese]

Ran across this recently from Milwaukee, their answer to the Festool SYS-PowerStation. It produces about the same amount of power, weighs about the same, is 2x larger but 1/4 the price of the PowerStation. Price will be $700. Obviously, the packaging of the Festool version is a lot nicer.
https://www.milwaukeetool.com/products/Batteries-and-Chargers/2845-20

[attachimg=1]

 

[Coen]

They pale compared to the R&D that went into these which was in the millions range. Just 5 engineering employees for 1 year in Germany is about $1M in costs. So think $10M ballpark R&D here, possibly more.

If TANOS decided to make compatible heights, the new bottom forms will pay themselves just by shipping one year worth of TPC drills in them. Give or take.

Well, room to fire some people then if it takes 5 engineers a year to design that box.

Yes on normal heights please. Even the L-boxx system has a height System. An L-boxx 102 (the smallest one) + a 136 (the 2nd size) equal the 238 in height (the 3rd size). Add another 136 and you get the height of the 4th size; 374.

I now have my first non-112 Sys3.. a 437... it doesn't play nice with anything height-wise.

 

[rvieceli]

[member=44099]Cheese[/member] here is something else I stumbled onto the other day. Uses 2 standard either DeWalt, Milwaukee or Makita batteries. Batteries are hot swappable on the two battery platform one. 600W pure sine wave.
https://store.ldsreliance.com/produ...power-inverter-for-power-tool-batteries-186-i

one battery unit
https://store.ldsreliance.com/products/millertech-18-20v-300w-edison-power-inverter-183-i

Thinking about the 2 battery unit to power some lamps when I do shows with no electricity. I'm using leds for bulbs and already have the batteries.

I'm currently using the little Milwaukee Top Off to power a few really low watt led bulbs.

Ron

 

[ForumMFG]

Ran across this recently from Milwaukee, their answer to the Festool SYS-PowerStation. It produces about the same amount of power, weighs about the same, is 2x larger but 1/4 the price of the PowerStation. Price will be $700. Obviously, the packaging of the Festool version is a lot nicer.
https://www.milwaukeetool.com/products/Batteries-and-Chargers/2845-20

[attachimg=1]

will definitely be buying this over festool.  1/4 of the price and it does the same thing

 

[Laminator]

The Millertech inverter might be nice for the festool duo light...