Precision Squares for MFT

[edanielvijay]

Hi,
I am looking for a good precision square for squaring up my MFT table. Most of the woodpecker big squares are one-time tools, long-wait/not available - I am currently using a HD drywall square.
Could anyone advise on some other bigger/precision squares thats available in US.

Thanks,
Danny

 

[sgryd]

You might want to look up other options than squares to square the MFT. I'd suggest that you start with Paul-Marcel's review of the Qwas Dogs and then go on with some searching here on FOG. Others will probably chime in here as well.

Paul-Marcel's Qwas review

//Michael

 

[Michael Kellough]

The problem with squares and even QWAS dogs is that they aren't tall enough to register against the fence and guide rail (when the guide rail is at cutting height) at the same time. If the guide rail is not at cutting height you can loose the position you set when it is raised. The guide rail mounts are pretty good for what they are but they aren't precision tooling. I think the best procedure is to set the guide rail to the height needed (I put the wood under it and then use another straight piece of wood to press the guide rail down evenly while I lock the mounts) and then adjust the fence as needed.

Using the four cut method you can adjust the fence to produce extremely square cuts. Squarer than all but the most costly machinists tooling. When you have that dialed in just cut a few extra pieces of ply and set them aside (take care of them) as squares to quickly re-set the fence in the future. If you want to get fancy start with rough triangles of ply. If the ply has tension in it cut twice.

 

[John Bates]

Try the "Parf" dogs, designed by Stone Message, that might be an answer to your problem of Qwas dog height.

 

[Ken Nagrod]

This is not meant to come across as me bashing the MFT/3 or Festool, but in my years of use of the MFT/3 and many, many hours of frustration with its design, I feel the Festool engineers/designers fell short.

I don't care if it's a 4 cut method or a 60 cut method.  There are too many variables in setting square and STAYING square on the MFT/3, especially with the guide rail mounts.  That hinge is probably the biggest source of error.  Thank god for the precision of the 20mm holes in the top!  That's the ONLY saving grace for that thing!

In my opinion, if you own or are planning to buy an MFT/3 for cutting, the Qwas dogs, Parf dogs and rail dogs are MANDATORY.  Even with both the Woodpeckers 18" precision triangle and the 26"/660mm square, I experience the above mentioned difficulties.

Keep in mind the acronym KISS.

 

[John Bates]

Ken I agree 100%, the parf or rail dogs raise the level of where you want hold the square line in such a simple way that the grid system works as it was intended. No slack, adjusting or rechecking. It's right, make the cut!

 

[greymann]

When I started addressing how to set up my MFT's, I had all the parts I ordered from Tool Improvements threaded with M8 standard threads.  I selected M8 for no other reason than the spare knobs we all have from the clamps are.  Once I had them delivered I started to realize that I now had a little erector set of dogs.  Here are some of the variations.  One even resembles Stone Messages "Parf" dog which isn't available over here yet as far as I know.

[attachthumb=#]
I started with these either from the Festool bag or from Ace Hardware.

[attachthumb=#][attachthumb=#][attachthumb=#]
As you can see, you can let your imagination or budget be your guide.

[attachthumb=#][attachthumb=#]
And here is the combination that might help in this situation, you would need two however.

Dick

 

[Corwin]

Keep in mind that these dogs will become useless if/once your MFT's top begins to sag due to humidity -- sagging top leaves holes that are no longer plumb.  [huh]

 

[greymann]

After rereading this post I took a look on my MFT to see if I could see any loss of position as I raised the rail.  I originally had set the rail with it flat on the table and cut the kerf some time ago.  Today I raised it with a piece of 3/4 at each end and tested the only way I knew how in the first picture.  I then doubled it and finally added another 3/4.  I couldn't see any indication of lateral movement of the rail.

[attachthumb=#][attachthumb=#][attachthumb=#]
Every shot shows the rail lining up with the cut line as accurately as I can see it.

I found the guide rail mounts to be as precisely milled as the rest of the table design and haven't seen them locking in any position other than as vertical as I can measure.

Has anyone else experienced the problem stated as fact above?  If so, is there a better way to measure it?

Dick

 

[Ken Nagrod]

Dick,

That's a static test on what looks to be a relatively lightly used MFT/3.  That may or may not have something to do with your findings.  Also, I think you'd get more accuracy gauging off of the metal edge of the guide rail instead of the plastic strip.

I'm only stating my experiences, above and just looking at the parts make up of the MFT/3, let's just say it's not an accurate rip fence on a decent table saw kind of design.  Too many alignment variables, especially when you throw guide rail height changes into the mix.  I'm not expecting perfection.  Really!  Just keep the error down enough that I can repeatedly and reliably get square cuts so when joining multiple pieces together, the gaps are decent or insignificant and stuff lines up.

This is one of the reasons why I'm a proponent of NOT getting rid of your table saw, even if you own the Festool system.

 

[vkumar]

What is the source of the aluminum bushings that you show?

When I started addressing how to set up my MFT's, I had all the parts I ordered from Tool Improvements threaded with M8 standard threads.  I selected M8 for no other reason than the spare knobs we all have from the clamps are.  Once I had them delivered I started to realize that I now had a little erector set of dogs.  Here are some of the variations.  One even resembles Stone Messages "Parf" dog which isn't available over here yet as far as I know.

[attachthumb=#]
I started with these either from the Festool bag or from Ace Hardware.

[attachthumb=#][attachthumb=#][attachthumb=#]
As you can see, you can let your imagination or budget be your guide.

[attachthumb=#][attachthumb=#]
And here is the combination that might help in this situation, you would need two however.

Dick

 

[TomGadwa1]

Actually since the track saw blade runs on the plastic strip and NOT the metal side of the rail greater accuracy should be obtained by squaring up on PLASTIC side as the above pictures show. However I have achieved good results by using a square on the metal edge as Ken states. If you have the room a table saw is nice and the more efficient solution, just be cautious about the kickback issues. But using an MFT3 and taking some time to square it up can get one pretty darn close on building a square cabinet. I have built some now that are within 1 mm of being perfect. I am not a professional but I think that is decent.

 

[Ken Nagrod]

Actually since the track saw blade runs on the plastic strip and NOT the metal side of the rail greater accuracy should be obtained by squaring up on PLASTIC side as the above pictures show. However I have achieved good results by using a square on the metal edge as Ken states. If you have the room a table saw is nice and the more efficient solution, just be cautious about the kickback issues. But using an MFT3 and taking some time to square it up can get one pretty darn close on building a square cabinet. I have built some now that are within 1 mm of being perfect. I am not a professional but I think that is decent.

Tom,

That thinking is understandable, but my thinking is that the plastic guide rail strip is an unreliable reference for checking squareness because it's a soft flexible plastic that is only held on by adhesive, so it can shift and it's edge has probably changed every time a saw blade has passed against it, especially when using multiple blades over the coarse of the life of that guide rail strip.  It seems too inconsistent and unreliable as a reference, to me.  The other edge of the guide rail, the metal edge, should remain consistent as long as there hasn't been any physical damage to it.

 

[TomGadwa1]

Duly noted.

 

[greymann]

Ken,

I think we are looking at two different issues with mine being much simpler than yours.  All I was trying to measure was whether raising the height of the rail by itself introduced positioning errors.  It seemed to me to be a good question and one I hadn't looked at. 

It also just happened that on my 1080 I had recently reset it in a different configuration and had the benefit of a fresh kerf line.  Of course when I set the rail I used the metal edge as the reference.  So given this I wanted to see if the current edge of the rail remained directly over the cut line as it was raised.  On my table I couldn't see any error introduced just by raising the rail.

The final result is of course influenced (often in a multiplicative way) by all of the errors in each of the processes.  But I would also point out the obvious that the guide rail strip is meant to be replaceable and that if you want a "dialed in" accuracy, replacing the blade would necessitate recalibration.  This would differ depending on your goals.  Mine are squareness of cut and repeatability.  Usually sub mm accuracy is not a goal.

vkumer - They are from Tool Improvements.    www.toolimmprovements.com  or also an ebay site I don't have on hand at the moment.

Dick