Slightly loose fit on 30mm template guide for OF 2200 router?

[luvmytoolz]

Hi all, I couldn't find this on the site, but I'm curious to know if anyone with the OF 2200 finds the template guide supplied as standard has a fraction of slop?

I haven't got shims handy to accurately measure the OF 2200 I just bought, but a rough check with calipers indicates around 0.15-0.2mm slop, which doesn't sound like much, but it's enough to be able to "thud" it side to side in all directions, and when doing inlay work of course this size doubles, which can leave gaps/tightness, and very visible glue lines.

I did bring it to the support division and they tried a ring from another router which was a tight fit, so that ruled out a manufacturing fault with the router base, so they sent me a new template guide. Unfortunately the new one is exactly the same, which now leaves me confused and wondering if I'm being overly critical?

I find if I put bits of masking tape along 4 of the edges it gives a firm fit, but I must admit I am really surprised a router of this quality and cost may have a template design tolerance of that level? My Makita is almost identical in that regard, but that cost only $175.

I don't want to seem a whinger so before I maybe go hassling them again, I'm just wondering if that's just how it is, or is this abnormal, and if others have noticed this with their OF 2200?

 

[Cypren]

I have not seen this issue with either my OF 2200 or OF 1400, but if you search the forums you'll find people complaining about excessive play in the snap-in templates in the past. It seems to be a case-by-case thing: some people get routers and templates in perfect alignment and others get ones with tiny amounts of slop. If they tried a template that had no slop, though, it may be that your router's fine and you got two templates in a row that were a bit off. The QA on the routers is probably a lot more thorough than the QA on the templates, if I had to take a guess.

This is a case where I would say keep bothering them until they get it right and don't feel bad about it. At this price level, three to four times what comparable tools cost, you are paying for precision manufacturing and excellent service, and you should demand both for your money. There's no reason to be rude to the service folk, but polite firmness is the way to go here: you bought a tool sold as a precision instrument, not some cheap import bargain bin item, and you should reasonably expect it to be precise.

While I'm not going to suggest "buy another tool to make up for the problem with your first one!" as any kind of solution, I will mention that I have an OF 1010 specifically for using bushing guides and doing inlay work, because it's the only one of the three Festool plunge routers that uses a screw-in base -- which can be perfectly aligned with a centering mandrel -- rather than snap-in templates. As I said earlier, I haven't personally experienced any alignment issues with the larger routers, but I'm excessively paranoid about these things and I'm never going to trust a spring-loaded mechanism to be as rigid and stable as a screwed-down one, especially when working with expensive exotic woods. Also, the 1010 is just lighter and easier to use for delicate work than the larger routers are.

 

[Cheese]

I had my 2200 out of the CMS today so I decided to check the slop that I visually noticed a while back.

The first measurement is along the axis of the template ears, around .006" of movement.

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

The second measurement is 90º to the axis of the template ears, around .004" of movement.

[attachimg=3]

[attachimg=4]

These numbers are similar to but not as bad as what I previously measured on the 1400.

Along the axis of the template ears, around .003" of movement.

[attachimg=5]

[attachimg=6]

At 90º to the axis of the template ears, around .008" of movement.

[attachimg=7]

[attachimg=8]