Systainer3 and T-Loc sizing comparison image

[wpz]

Personally, I've always found that the sys classic and T-Loc should have had more logical names, but that might just be my OCD.

sys I -> sys 1
sys II-> sys 1,5
sys III-> sys 2
sys IV-> sys 3
sys V -> sys 4
Since they are multiples of a sys I height (10,5mm without the feet)

I see that the new sizes increase by 50mm or 100mm, probably to fit into the bott system.
The heights are very similar to the sortimo (now bosch-sortimo) L-boxx system.
Let's hope Tanos copies the LS-boxx and i-boxx rack (they seem to have copied the LT-boxx already)

The more options we have, the better.

wpz

 

[jimbo51]

I wonder if a few smart folks with good PowerPoint skills sold this as the greatest idea since... 

Great ideas of the past include Polaroid movies and movies on laser disc introduced shortly before VHS crushed both of them.

 

[pixelated]

I almost hate to ask the question, but are there any adapters that allow classic systainers to use the systainer3 racking?
I like the relative simplicity vs things like theses-ax drawers.

 

[Mortiser]

What [member=8955]Coen[/member] said.
I just don't see the advantage of Sys3. I do believe large industrial users/fleets drove this decision.

 

[Coen]

I'm glad you are all voices your likes or dislikes on this sizing. 

I do what I can to get feedback to Tanos, and having this thread is very helpful.  I've found that some customers don't care or mind the sizing, some love the new sizing and others hate it.  None the less, T-Loc isn't going away, not yet.  The colors of T-Loc are discontinued, but Light Grey and Anthracite will be around for a while.  That is to say there isn't a forced departure.  Though it does look like Festool is transitioning over when it makes sense.

Just like [member=68525]usernumber1[/member] I have yet to hear or read from anyone that likes the new heights.

That the T-Loc's aren't discontinued isn't the issue. The issue is that Festool now uses the Sys3 by default. One of the reasons of buying Festool was that it compared somewhat favorable to another brand + buying separate systainer. Now that discount is gone... it's either other brand + Systainer of Festool + Systainer. And I absolutely do not like the idea of having to buy and sell all these different Systainers.

They need feedback that they messed up bigtime by nixing the whole idea of easily making stacks of the same height!!

I might be an outlier, but I couldn't care less whether they stack the same height. I'd rather have the box fit the tool without wasting space.

Different reason but same result: T-Loc >>> Sys3.

 

[DeformedTree]

if someone owns no existing systainers, then systainer 3 heights aren't a huge issue,  though the stack height to get to 900mm is a valid point.

The design changes are still issue, the dumb handle, no side labels, etc.

Most folks are going to be stuck with a mix, that is the issue.  As has been said before, if Tanos made this system for the BOTT stuff, but kept T-locks for Festool, and or even expand that system, folks would be happy. 

I don't think many people have a fundamental issue with there being a 3rd generation systainer, or new models, and some changes. It's just that there is basically no good to be found in the changes.  I don't think many people are giving much hope to festool re-thinking and going back to T-lock and offering a trade in program for those who got a systainer 3 dumped on them.

How much this will impact new tool buying, not sure, but I think a lot of folks will pause for a bit, or delay, or just go look at other options more verses just accepting a systainer 3 based tool.  After all, systainers are one of the key selling point of festool, and they just broke that.  It's not unlike when they ditched metric in some regions, some folks don't care, some like it, and a lot hate it with a passion as it broke part of the system.  Maybe going forwards festool will just randomly remove dust ports from tools  [tongue], who knows.

Festool will just tell themselves everytime they sell a tool that ships in a systainer 3 that people bought them because of systainer 3, and various other positive spins.  And of course a lot of buyers won't care in any way.

 

[AstroKeith]

I recently bought a Rotex because it was in a SYS2 T-LOC.

I have about £2000 worth of Systainers - OK some came 'free' with tools, but most I paid for. I've built shelves and drawers and have a very neat workshop layout now. It works for me too.

Plain and simple, the SYS3 wont fit in most of my spaces, and will certainly spoil the 'look'.

Buying a new tool in SYS3 will be a serious issue for me, and I certainly wont be buying any empty SYS3.

In the last 4 weeks I have sent back the Organiser set - inferior quality, & the Toprock - poor sound quality. Both were in SYS3 systainers and represent the latest Festool product development/offerings. Not a good sign for me at least.

 

[Coen]

Two different PDFs, one with feet height included... the other not?  [huh]

 

[Coen]

Two different PDFs, one with feet height included... the other not?  [huh]

SYS T-LOC.PDF is for the “old” Systainers - SYS3.PDF is for the “new” Systainers.

I hope this helps . . .

One PDF has the height of the feet included... the other does not. Still have no clue what column 2 is supposed to show.

 

[Cheese]

I first mentioned this almost a year ago when the first SYS³ Systainers were released.

Quiet stack...an old one on the top and the new one on the bottom with it's handle snapped into the closed position.

[attachimg=1]

Klack stack...the new one on the top with the handle free to move because the T-loc latch on the lower Systainer prevents the handle from snapping into the closed position.

[attachimg=2]

Over bumps, around corners, braking, pot holes, you name it...klack, klack, klack, klack....I finally pulled over and took off one of my gloves and wrapped it around the noisy handle.

 

[Svar]

Not long ago a tradesman truck or shop was just a dump of steel and blow mold cases. Now we write illustrated essays on tool boxes and people get emotionally traumatized when a case handle protruding by 2 mm breaks the harmony of their perfectly color and height coordinated stack.

 

[Cheese]

Not long ago a tradesman truck or shop was just a dump of steel and blow mold cases. Now we write illustrated essays on tool boxes and people get emotionally traumatized when a case handle protruding by 2 mm breaks the harmony of their perfectly color and height coordinated stack.

Yaaaaaa...isn’t progress a thing of beauty.

 

[demographic]

Personally I like the idea that these new systainers work well as drawers but the way they're now in dodgy heights is a massive fail.
They have been selling festool tools and these boxes using the stacking in regular heights as a selling point for years.
Then they chuck that idea in the bin and are surprised when everyone who bought into that idea is irritated by their change away from it?

Can't be the sharpest tools in the box can they.?

Oh and thevan racking thing? Naaaah, yer alright I'll  not bother. I'll stick with my toolsafe thanks.

 

[Coen]

I first mentioned this almost a year ago when the first SYS³ Systainers were released.

Quiet stack...an old one on the top and the new one on the bottom with it's handle snapped into the closed position.

[attachimg=1]

Klack stack...the new one on the top with the handle free to move because the T-loc latch on the lower Systainer prevents the handle from snapping into the closed position.

[attachimg=2]

Over bumps, around corners, braking, pot holes, you name it...klack, klack, klack, klack....I finally pulled over and took off one of my gloves and wrapped it around the noisy handle.

You are supposed to use the Bott mountaing in the van he  [unsure]

 

[Spandex]

Then they chuck that idea in the bin and are surprised when everyone who bought into that idea is irritated by their change away from it?

Can't be the sharpest tools in the box can they.?

Are they surprised? I’m not sure where you got that idea. I suspect they’re well aware that a small portion of their customers will be irritated by the change. They’ve clearly made a decision about what features are more important to them (and what they’re willing to sacrifice) in light of their plans for systainers in the future.

 

[Coen]

Then they chuck that idea in the bin and are surprised when everyone who bought into that idea is irritated by their change away from it?

Can't be the sharpest tools in the box can they.?

Are they surprised? I’m not sure where you got that idea. I suspect they’re well aware that a small portion of their customers will be irritated by the change. They’ve clearly made a decision about what features are more important to them (and what they’re willing to sacrifice) in light of their plans for systainers in the future.

Well, since none of the people that were involved with these decisions ever voice any such consideration in public... you never know.

 

[Spandex]

Well, since none of the people that were involved with these decisions ever voice any such consideration in public... you never know.

It’s common sense to me that a company that created and advertised a piece of functionality will be aware that removing that functionality will affect, and therefore upset some of their previous customers.

So it follows that they must feel the benefits of removing that functionality outweigh the drawbacks of upsetting those customers, otherwise they wouldn’t have done it. Unless they’re no longer trying to make money and are simply out to troll certain forum members. Amusing though that would be, it seems unlikely to me.

 

[Imemiter]

Personally I like the idea that these new systainers work well as drawers...

That's the thing though, they're not drawers at all. Drawers can be opened and accessed, the Bott system is a rack. Now a Systainer has to be removed entirely in order to access the contents. If the Bott rails functioned as a drawer, I think they'd have a lot more appeal. But as it is it seems as if they gave up a lot of system specific functionality to gain glaringly little. We're to roll our carts (Sys Rolls, MW 1000s) to the van only to have to remove each and every individual Systainer and install it on it's each and individual Bott rail?? The whole system seems to create otherwise unnessecary work. I don't get it. 

 

[Svar]

Personally I like the idea that these new systainers work well as drawers...

... Now a Systainer has to be removed entirely in order to access the contents...

No, you can still put it on SYS-AZ or whatever drawer system you want and continue using them as before. Nothing is lost comparing to T-loc, just added side slots. You can choose to use those slots or not, but it's there if you need it.

 

[Spandex]

Personally I like the idea that these new systainers work well as drawers...

That's the thing though, they're not drawers at all. Drawers can be opened and accessed, the Bott system is a rack. Now a Systainer has to be removed entirely in order to access the contents. If the Bott rails functioned as a drawer, I think they'd have a lot more appeal. But as it is it seems as if they gave up a lot of system specific functionality to gain glaringly little. We're to roll our carts (Sys Rolls, MW 1000s) to the van only to have to remove each and every individual Systainer and install it on it's each and individual Bott rail?? The whole system seems to create otherwise unnessecary work. I don't get it.

The only thing the new systainer design ‘breaks’ is the stacking height system. Apart from that, they do everything the same but in addition will work in van racking. Being ‘rackable’ doesn’t meant you have to rack them.

If you want to wheel your loaded MW1000 to your van and just strap it straight in, then that’s what you do.