Since when did track saw rail clamps become the defacto MFT clamp?

[smorgasbord]

Maybe it's just Peter Millard:=5BLsbZUqiVojWEbC&t=70

But, I've seen other people use them this way too. Millard runs on about how this doesn't work with tops thicker than 18mm unless you chamfer the tops of the holes, and even rails against (pun intended) Makita rail clamps for having a longer arm that makes fitting them into MFT holes even more difficult/impossible.
=70O6rPzb_VNHahlx&t=571

Call me old-fashioned, but this was solved centuries ago with the use of an end vise and bench dogs (ironically enough, the UK company Benchdogs Tools don't make actual traditional bench dogs). When I built my bench 30 years ago, I had read "The Workbench Book" cover to cover a few times. This was way before MFTs and the 96mm spacing standard, but there's a section there about square versus round dog holes with wear being the main reason not to go round. That, of course, is rendered somewhat moot by the use of relatively frequently replaced tops made from MDF, but without that end vise, or at least a horizontal moving dog, you don't get the great surface hold-down that has the additional advantage of not protruding above the work surface, so you can plane/sand that surface in its entirety while held securely.

Some old benches do have round holes for the hammer-in single piece cast iron clamps, which were used where there weren't parallel edges to squeeze between bench dogs.

I'm not an MFT user, but it strikes me as weird that clamps designed to hold track saw rails to a workpiece have been adopted as the main/preferable way to hold workpieces to a workbench, especially when there's no track in sight.

 

[hdv]

Yeah, I am on the same page here. I don't like to use rail clamps on a "modern" bench at all. I have a number of different clamps for my traditional workbench, but plain old hold fasts are still my go-to for that bench. I have a thin-topped bench made of aluminium profile and MDF too (even though that one is in storage for now). But even on that bench I don't use the rail clamps. I prefer my to use wooden Klemmsia clamps or Bessey toggle clamps when I use that workbench. But I only use it for assembly, not for sawing.

 

[cpw]

I use the "track clamps" on my MFT more than the track.  I've got 4 of them above my MFT that permanently live there.  I prefer to use the vac sys or clamping elements; but especially for bigger or oddly shaped work pieces the track clamps work in more situations.

I have the Festool take on the holdfast (MFT-HZ), but it isn't my go to solution at this point.

 

[Crazyraceguy]

I have always used them in the table, though never actually owned a real MFT. Back when I made my first 49" x 97" top, it was 1 1/8" MDF. I cut the holes with a 20mm Freud bit, with a 1" bushing and CNC made template. It worked fine with the clamping elements, but the rail clamps would not "go around the corner". I cured the problem by chamfering the bottoms of the holes, deep enough to allow them in, and used them ever since.
It was great, the extra heft of the thicker sheet was much stiffer than the previous 3/4" top. That one had some bounce.
Having lost that one in a fire, I had to make a new one, but the CNC was down too. That was when I purchased Peter Parfit's drilling system. It has served me well, for nearly 6 years. I would replace it with a thicker one, but "spare" sheets of that don't appear often.

I use the track clamps and clamping elements every day. The hold-downs are very useful too, but not as often. I have 6 of the Festool branded ones 2 of the screw type, that I bought separately, and 4 of the quick clamp type that came in the kits. (1 pair with the elements set, the other pair with the hold-down set) I also have a pair of the Micro-jig ones, which fit the table, but not the track.
I probably use the Rapid-Clamp as much (or more) than the rail clamps, for the rails themselves.
That is often for some weird vertical orientation. About the only time I clamp the rail, on a horizontal surface, is when doing a bevel cut or with a router.

So, yes, people do use them in tables too.

 

[onocoffee]

I modified my the old workbench in my garage that I built in the 90s with two 3/4" plywood sheets. Recently, I MFT'd it with 20x96mm dogholes. The 1.5" depth means I cannot use the track style clamps so I've been using the MFT-HZ 80 clamps and they've worked very well. I'd like to try the MFT-SP but haven't sprung for those yet. Maybe I should look to Banggood...

 

[Lincoln]

They were always for use with the MFT, as far as I can remember, were always part of the advertising when showing the uses for MFTs. The dedicated channel on the MFT was always for the clamps. And just a correction, you chamfer the underside of holes if your top is over 18mm thick, not the top side. Works well, though you can't flip the top later on.

 

[mino]

Maybe it's just Peter Millard:=5BLsbZUqiVojWEbC&t=70

But, I've seen other people use them this way too. Millard runs on about how this doesn't work with tops thicker than 18mm unless you chamfer the tops of the holes, and even rails against (pun intended) Makita rail clamps for having a longer arm that makes fitting them into MFT holes even more difficult/impossible.
=70O6rPzb_VNHahlx&t=571

Call me old-fashioned, but this was solved centuries ago with the use of an end vise and bench dogs (ironically enough, the UK company Benchdogs Tools don't make actual traditional bench dogs). When I built my bench 30 years ago, I had read "The Workbench Book" cover to cover a few times. This was way before MFTs and the 96mm spacing standard, but there's a section there about square versus round dog holes with wear being the main reason not to go round. That, of course, is rendered somewhat moot by the use of relatively frequently replaced tops made from MDF, but without that end vise, or at least a horizontal moving dog, you don't get the great surface hold-down that has the additional advantage of not protruding above the work surface, so you can plane/sand that surface in its entirety while held securely.

Some old benches do have round holes for the hammer-in single piece cast iron clamps, which were used where there weren't parallel edges to squeeze between bench dogs.

I'm not an MFT user, but it strikes me as weird that clamps designed to hold track saw rails to a workpiece have been adopted as the main/preferable way to hold workpieces to a workbench, especially when there's no track in sight.

Since when the MFT is a thing. The MFT was literally made developed for this. The choice of 96 mm (module of LR32) and of then-non-standard holes was specifically done to leverage the rail clamps that were an integral part of the Multi-Function-Table SYSTEM which, in turn, integrated with a Basis (for semi-static-tools) System. At a time every other tool maker just sold individual tools ...

Repeat. Table. Not a Bench. Table. Table you cut into. Table which is mobile - something which precludes thick (and heavy) tops which, in turn, precludes the traditional way holes and dogs were used for clamping on wooden (not MDF !) benches. Table with which you re(use) as much as possible of your kit so you do not have to carry two tonnes of kit up the stairs to that appartment at the 6th floor of a Paris city house from the 1880s ..

The Festo(ol) MFT as a concept is a solution to a hand-power-tool based workflow. A workflow which was not a thing at the time Festo power tools became capable-enough to enable it but there was nothing (not even a concept) on the market really enabling that.

We may argue about any of these points. Reality is that Festo(ol) was right and created a whole category of worktables in the process. Some more stable, geared more to the static use, others mode mobile (and more flimsy) than the MFT/3 "golden standard". A normal development as new market matures by niches being filled.

But what did not change is the concept of "soft" clamping and precision (MDF) as opposed to the traditional (heavy) wooden benches "hard" clamping and uneven surfaces. These two concepts are at the opposites of the spectrum. Arguing about them is like arguing what is better - a Lorry or a Compact (car). Neither is the answer to both questions.

/end night mumblings ..

 

[smorgasbord]

Since when the MFT is a thing. The MFT was literally made developed for this....

The earliest info I can find is on the MFT 800 and 1080. Here's a 16-year-old video. It does NOT show the use of rail clamps:

Instead, it shows the "in-line" Festool 488030 clamps, which fit into the holes and have a lever to apply the final horizontal pressure.

And not shown in the Festool USA channel 14 years ago:

Although Festool does show using rail clamps 13 years ago, maybe that's when they were introduced?:

Seems pretty cumbersome for the "repetitive work" of cutting dominos into both ends of a workpiece with the narrow trim stop/fence, with the clamps falling down after each release.

 

[grbmds]

Festool has several types of clamps; most recently a sort of bench dog clamp. On MFT's, the f-style clamps with a dovetailed profile work the best; at least for my work. It seems as if clamps are, well, clamps. They get used where they work and more often where they work best.

 

[mino]

Since when the MFT is a thing. The MFT was literally made developed for this....

The earliest info I can find is on the MFT 800 and 1080. Here's a 16-year-old video. It does NOT show the use of rail clamps:

Instead, it shows the "in-line" Festool 488030 clamps, which fit into the holes and have a lever to apply the final horizontal pressure.

And not shown in the Festool USA channel 14 years ago:

Although Festool does show using rail clamps 13 years ago, maybe that's when they were introduced?:

Seems pretty cumbersome for the "repetitive work" of cutting dominos into both ends of a workpiece with the narrow trim stop/fence, with the clamps falling down after each release.

The (screw-style) rail clamps were a thing at Festo since the first FS series rails in the late 1980s/early 90s, not sure when FS rails came out exactly, but deffo before 2000. Those clamps were made for those rails/rails were made for them as a single setup. MFT only leveraged them more.

I guess You are thinking the US market ... I am sure Coen would have some 1990s catalogs ..

Also, not all, actually most, use cases were not shown back in the day. This was before internet, let alone video presentations, were a thing. Stuff was show in real life at dealers .. and TV commercials were short and expensive so very sparing on information. Outside of some documentary you are unlikely to see footage from this period on "how to use tools". It was never made.

 

[tjbnwi]

I must be the weird one, I use the rail clamps on the MFT more than any other clamping system. Sometimes they’re inserted from the top, sometimes they’re inserted from the bottom.

Becomes second nature setting them with one hand after a few uses.

Tom

 

[Michael Kellough]

I must be the weird one, I use the rail clamps on the MFT more than any other clamping system. Sometimes they’re inserted from the top, sometimes they’re inserted from the bottom.

Becomes second nature setting them with one hand after a few uses.

Tom

Same here. I even prefer the screw version to the ratchet.

 

[woodferret]

Team screw here.  The ratchet is too bulky/heavy in a lot of configurations, not to mention it slides laterally at times when clamping.

 

[Crazyraceguy]

Festool has several types of clamps; most recently a sort of bench dog clamp. On MFT's, the f-style clamps with a dovetailed profile work the best; at least for my work. It seems as if clamps are, well, clamps. They get used where they work and more often where they work best.

Exactly. I use all of them, at various times, depending upon the situation. The TSO Dog Stops play into the whole thing very well too.

I must be the weird one, I use the rail clamps on the MFT more than any other clamping system. Sometimes they’re inserted from the top, sometimes they’re inserted from the bottom.

Becomes second nature setting them with one hand after a few uses.

Tom

I use them to clamp my Shaper Workstation to the edge of my main table.

I must be the weird one, I use the rail clamps on the MFT more than any other clamping system. Sometimes they’re inserted from the top, sometimes they’re inserted from the bottom.

Becomes second nature setting them with one hand after a few uses.

Tom

Same here. I even prefer the screw version to the ratchet.

For me, it depends. I feel like the ratchet version is capable of more force, but that comes at a cost. The square pads don't pivot very far, and they can mark softer materials if you are not mindful. The screw type also has quite a bit more travel, so it's a toss-up.

 

[jeffinsgf]

Another member of Team Screw. That lever is almost always in the way and if you don't have the head perfectly positioned when you start ratcheting, there's at least a 50/50 chance you won't have enough/any clamping pressure.

 

[smorgasbord]

Sedge just came out with a workbench video.

He's using an older round dog hole workbench without a tail vise. He bored the ¾" holes out to 20mm to use new things, including the Festool cam clamp I described earlier. It's thick, so he doesn't use track clamps.

I think by not using a tail vise to pinch wood he's missing out. He demonstrates using a TSO thin plate (For which he had to drill another row of holes) to support thin stock. I use the old-fashioned dogs just barely sticking up and tail-vise pinched to hold stock while he's just relying of forward pressure and the hoping the stock doesn't pop over (which it almost did in the video). I sometimes use thin wood in front of the metal dogs to avoid the possibility of hitting the dogs with a plane blade.

 

[Spandex]

I'm not an MFT user, but it strikes me as weird that clamps designed to hold track saw rails to a workpiece have been adopted as the main/preferable way to hold workpieces to a workbench, especially when there's no track in sight.

I have to say, I’d think it was weird if Festool HADN’T designed the MFT to use the same clamps as the rail. The more things that use the same clamps, the better the ‘system’. And the less things you have to carry to the work site.

 

[smorgasbord]

Every video I’ve seen of the clamps used in an MFT looks awkward and non-optimal. The clamps fall down in the holes when released, so for repeated item clamping it’s not ideal.

Izzy Swan just released a video on changes to make an MFT suitable for some things. Rail clamps are not part of his solution.
=3cAQoLx6ArmD7pcv&t=37

 

[mino]

Every video I’ve seen of the clamps used in an MFT looks awkward and non-optimal. The clamps fall down in the holes when released, so for repeated item clamping it’s not ideal.

Izzy Swan just released a video on changes to make an MFT suitable for some things. Rail clamps are not part of his solution.

/pontificating hat on:

You are walking past the elephant. The light and transportable i.e. site use part of the MFT concept. It is not (meant to be) a (production) shop animal.

It does not matter if the (original, screwy) rail clamps are ideal for all tasks. They are good-enough.TM
The thing is, no mobile/site solution can afford to be ideal on pure function. Ideal function means heavy and/or big and/or task-dedicated, means high space/transport requirements, means bad bad bad for site use.

Second, in small shop use, i.e. not a production line style setup, flexibility is extremely valuable. To the point of trumping pure function in most cases. Even where weight is not an issue, ability to use the same tool for multiple tasks means less tools, means less space, means less walking around to grab/store it, means .. workflow efficiency. Efficiency means time saved, means money made.

Not all tools which are workflow-efficient are optimal for the task. Far from it. Then tools which are optimal for a diverse one-man-show workflow, are rarely ideal for semi-series production.

/hat off

ADD
In short, the MFT (and the CMS) are not optimal for static shop use. Never tried to be. There are many threads on FOG advising newbies against going the MFT route for home shops for this reason. It can be done, but the value is not there for pure static use.
Not unless some other restriction like the need to pack-up every day comes to play. That is OK. There are other solutions for static usage.
[smile]

 

[Michael Kellough]

“The clamps fall down in the holes when released”

The simple solution someone presented here years ago is to add a small O ring to the bar. Roll it down to touch the sliding head when it is clamped to the work. When the clamp is released the bar will not drop.

Similarly, someone else suggested using very small paper clamps, the kind with swinging levers. They are more convenient for the purpose.

Back to the original question, I think the clamps existed (and anyone with a Festool guide rail had a pair) before MFT’s with holes came along so…