Newbie question: can MFT and TSC replace my table saw?

[lshj]

..
I also got the Festool SYS CSC 50 recently.  It's so compact that takes very little space. I think it's a game changer for people who have limited space and for people who need tools at the site.  Unless you need to rip board wider than 11 inches, I see no reason to choose MFT than SYS 50 table saw.

Bold emphasized.

Got your point.  I have the festool track saw that I used to cut and rip large board. Cutting large board is not very convenient on table saw unless you have very large extension table.  My point is not about the track saw. It's the MFT. MFT is not cheap for what it is, take quiet some space, not sturdy compared to conventional workbench and have very limited usage, not as good and as easy to use as the table saw for most of the cutting. For ripping or cutting large board, MFT is not big enough either. I just see no point to have the MFT if you have a table saw. 

I just read that using MFT with track saw is good for crosscut for larger board than table saw, maybe that is the real advantage of MFT with track saw. 

 

[mino]

Got your point.  I have the festool track saw that I used to cut and rip large board. Cutting large board is not very convenient on table saw unless you have very large extension table.  My point is not about the track saw. It's the MFT. MFT is not cheap for what it is, take quiet some space, not sturdy compared to conventional workbench and have very limited usage, not as good and as easy to use as the table saw for most of the cutting. For ripping or cutting large board, MFT is not big enough either. I just see no point to have the MFT if you have a table saw. 

I just read that using MFT with track saw is good for crosscut for larger board than table saw, maybe that is the real advantage of MFT with track saw.

But, But!
The MFT/3 is very explicitly a multi-function table, not a "cutting station". It is a portable flexible work table that can be used to cut on. As for it not being "stable". Well, it is portable, one needs to look what other *portable* options are out there with comparable flexibility. Not much can best the MFT/3. Even after 30+ years it is on the market. That says something to me.

Being the workbench, it does not take any *additional* space, excepting any needed to store the protractor assembly. The hinge and the rail get out of the way when not in use. Now, I am not saying an MFT/3 is the most economical or best functionality for static shop use. There better options indeed. The Paulk-style setup is probably better for semi-static use and the various firmer workbenches are also a good choice for static use.

But it is a portable, relatively light, and relatively big work surface that can take the cutting station role pretty well. And when using professionally, people usually have two of them. Then there is the STM 1800 to complement it for sheet processing. Looking at the MFT/3 - no mention buying it - as a dedicated cutting station makes very little sense indeed. But once in the good-enough-yet-portable talk takes place, it is a whole different discussion.

As for price .. I was just last month disassembling a statically placed workbench. It is was a cheap-as-it-gets setup, yet still $150 worth of material in it that now cannot be reused for original purpose. Plus about 1 workday ($300) for assembly, and 1/2 workday to disassemble so the materials from disassemble did not even pay for the mantime to do so .. Had I instead purchased an MFT, it would be 5 minutes and no wasted time/material for assembly/disassembly.

Yes, now I am in the market for an MFT for a future workshop next year. Whether an MFT/3 or a Paulk-style one. Both go in the $600+ range total cost. And it is justified. My time is not free, and over just two re-build cycles it adds up on the material costs as well. Good stuff is not cheap.

 

[rst]

Yes, no, maybe

 

[luvmytoolz]

The MFT/3 is very explicitly a multi-function table, not a "cutting station". It is a portable flexible work table that can be used to cut on.

Couldn't agree more, I use mine as an invaluable work surface that I can lug around without too much effort and clamp material to that's being worked on. I've never actually used it as a precision cutting surface as others do, I use squares and angles for that when cutting timber. It's not perfect but it's by far the best "luggable" work station I've ever used.

 

[lshj]

Got your point.  I have the festool track saw that I used to cut and rip large board. Cutting large board is not very convenient on table saw unless you have very large extension table.  My point is not about the track saw. It's the MFT. MFT is not cheap for what it is, take quiet some space, not sturdy compared to conventional workbench and have very limited usage, not as good and as easy to use as the table saw for most of the cutting. For ripping or cutting large board, MFT is not big enough either. I just see no point to have the MFT if you have a table saw. 

I just read that using MFT with track saw is good for crosscut for larger board than table saw, maybe that is the real advantage of MFT with track saw.

But, But!
The MFT/3 is very explicitly a multi-function table, not a "cutting station". It is a portable flexible work table that can be used to cut on. As for it not being "stable". Well, it is portable, one needs to look what other *portable* options are out there with comparable flexibility. Not much can best the MFT/3. Even after 30+ years it is on the market. That says something to me.

Being the workbench, it does not take any *additional* space, excepting any needed to store the protractor assembly. The hinge and the rail get out of the way when not in use. Now, I am not saying an MFT/3 is the most economical or best functionality for static shop use. There better options indeed. The Paulk-style setup is probably better for semi-static use and the various firmer workbenches are also a good choice for static use.

But it is a portable, relatively light, and relatively big work surface that can take the cutting station role pretty well. And when using professionally, people usually have two of them. Then there is the STM 1800 to complement it for sheet processing. Looking at the MFT/3 - no mention buying it - as a dedicated cutting station makes very little sense indeed. But once in the good-enough-yet-portable talk takes place, it is a whole different discussion.

As for price .. I was just last month disassembling a statically placed workbench. It is was a cheap-as-it-gets setup, yet still $150 worth of material in it that now cannot be reused for original purpose. Plus about 1 workday ($300) for assembly, and 1/2 workday to disassemble so the materials from disassemble did not even pay for the mantime to do so .. Had I instead purchased an MFT, it would be 5 minutes and no wasted time/material for assembly/disassembly.

Yes, now I am in the market for an MFT for a future workshop next year. Whether an MFT/3 or a Paulk-style one. Both go in the $600+ range total cost. And it is justified. My time is not free, and over just two re-build cycles it adds up on the material costs as well. Good stuff is not cheap.

Totally understood. I think probably I use wood working hand tool a lot. When I first saw the MFT/3 I felt this thing is so unstable and have very little usage as a workbench for hand tool wood worker, more likely an assembly table than a real workbench.  I think you explained it very well.

Recently, I built a workbench using Douglas fir which is cheap, cost $200 for the Dougals fir. But I added two nice bench vise which cost me close to $700 just for the vises alone. The workbench ended up more than 300 lbs and it's very sturdy, but not portable. I think people could built a sturdy workbench within $500 if choose less expensive bench vise. To buy a nice workbench will cost easily several thousand dollars if using hardwood. MFT is relatively cheap compared to that although it's not a fair comparison.

 

[ChuckM]

Yes, no, maybe

You can say that again!

And this answer works for so many questions we've seen on this Forum.