Systainer3 and T-Loc sizing comparison image

[Bob D.]

The only thing that interests me with the new Sys3 is the handle. But as Cheese pointed out when mixed with T-Loc Systainers makes for a noisy ride.

Will the catch from the Sys3 fit a T-Loc? They appear to be smaller and maybe that would let the handle lay flat.

If the new Systainer was the T-Loc that kept all the current heights but included the Sys3 handle, that would be great.

When I buy my next FT I will have to consider selling the Sys3 and replace it with an appropriate size T-Loc to to maintain symmetry with all my other Systainers.

 

[Imemiter]

The only thing the new systainer design ‘breaks’ is the stacking height system.

I wouldn't go so far as 'broken', but there are some bugs. In the design's defense I'd offer the new hinge. That adds a lot of strength to the stack. But that front handle... ugh. Is there a recommended way to remove it yet?

 

[mrboult]

The Sys3 Latches are swappable with T-Loc no problem.

The front handle not clicking closed is not an issue with Systainer compatibility, but an issue with the design of the new Sys3, or at least the shorter units it affects.

On the smaller units the handle mars with the latch of the below Systainer regardless which type it is.

 

[Bob D.]

"On the smaller units the handle mars with the latch of the below Systainer regardless which type it is."

Thanks for that.

 

[Michael Kellough]

If you put a Sys3 latch on the T-lok Sys below then the Sys3 handle would close?

I have several tall stacks of Systainers on dollys. I have to unstack down to the box I want. If the Systainers were Sys3 style I could make a simple box with cleats that fit the slots in the new Sys3 and it would be much more convenient for me to pull out the Sys I want. But I m not going to spend $$$ to replace the existing Sys.

I too think it was a dumb mistake to loose height compatibility but I seldom depend on the height of a stack to get things done. And I always have a few wedges on hand.

 

[Cheese]

When I buy my next FT I will have to consider selling the Sys3 and replace it with an appropriate size T-Loc to to maintain symmetry with all my other Systainers.

My thought exactly...was just thinking last night about my next purchase and looked up to confirm that it still came in a regular Systainer.

The SYS³ Org is slick for small fasteners and the like and the SYS³ XXL is also nice but that's where it ends.

 

[DeformedTree]

Do we know if the inserts for t-lock fit in sys3?

New conspiracy, this was a plan by Festool and Tanos owners,  sell stuff with Sys3, then make more money when festool buyers buy a T-lock from Tanos to "fix the glitch"

Maybe we just all need to wait for "Systainer 4: Lets just forget Systainer 3 ever happened, back to old heights, removed the handle, put the side labels back, but we kept the beefed up structure"

 

[mrboult]

If you put a Sys3 latch on the T-lok Sys below then the Sys3 handle would close?

No, that is not the case.

With the smallest (2 sizes?) of Sys3 there simply isn’t room on the front of the Systainer for the handle to not overlap the T-Loc latch of the Systainer below (if the latch is in the locking/connecting orientation)

To my investigation it doesn’t matter what kind of T-loc Latch/Systainer is underneath. They all affect it the same.

 

[pettyconstruction]

The only thing the new systainer design ‘breaks’ is the stacking height system.

I wouldn't go so far as 'broken', but there are some bugs. In the design's defense I'd offer the new hinge. That adds a lot of strength to the stack. But that front handle... ugh. Is there a recommended way to remove it yet?

I had a sys-3 fall and break the front handle , doesn’t seem to bother me that it’s gone. Lol
Charlie

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[demographic]

Dunno about anyone else but I wouldnt complain too hard if they were made out of better plastic as well.ABS is kind of brittle. Don't get me wrong, its been fine for a few years Ive had T-Loc boxes but its still fairly crap plastic isn't it?
Was quite impressed by the Milwaukee Packout boxes I saw today. Tough plastic, waterproof seal, decent  size and solid cart.

 

[usernumber1]

Dunno about anyone else but I wouldnt complain too hard if they were made out of better plastic as well.ABS is kind of brittle. Don't get me wrong, its been fine for a few years Ive had T-Loc boxes but its still fairly junk plastic isn't it?
Was quite impressed by the Milwaukee Packout boxes I saw today. Tough plastic, waterproof seal, decent  size and solid cart.

i can't find what the packout boxes are made out of. they only mention 'impact resistant polymers'. it would be good to compare to known plastics but i suspect it's not very strong so they have to make it thicker which makes it appear stronger
https://omnexus.specialchem.com/polymer-properties/properties/toughness
i disagree abs is brittle and you can see from the charts above.

there's also this video from the germans confirming in some non-scientific testinghttps://www.festoolownersgroup.com/festool-and-tanos-systainers/systainer-drop-test-i'm-impressed/

 

[cpw]

I don't like the height change, and am dissapointed they took out the side labeling cards.  I liked making 3 duplicate picture cards so that I could identify a box from 3/4 sides.

I do like the new sys rolls better than the old ones.  For me, I think the big advantage of the new line is that they are taking the "L" (MIDI) size more seriously.  I also like that the toolbox will be open instead of divided in two and not have the handle sticking up all the time.  I find the handle just makes them store worse, because I have nothing permanently in my existing T-LOC style toolboxes, I just dump job-specific things that won't fit into a normal Systainer in there; but when they are on the shelf waiting for something it takes up extra space, and is harder to unstack.

The rails don't hurt or do anything for me.  I like the SYS-AZ, because I can access the contents while they are in my sysports.  I would like them to introduce SYS-AZs that fit the SYS3 L and MIDI.

 

[Crazyraceguy]

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.

This was my point from the beginning. It all startedas an integrated system, with specific heights for a reason. Seems like a new generation of designers have forgotten that? or think that people wouldn't care?
Plus there is the dumb name. Why would they call them Sys3 when that is already the name of one of the sizes of Tloc?

You can clearly see the new one at the bottom of the stack. Mine are never in a van, they fit into a drawer system based upon the 1, 1.5 ,2 ,3 ,4 unit sizes.

 

[Coen]

And now the tool is in a bigger Sys, that takes yet more space in the cabinet

 

[Crazyraceguy]

And now the tool is in a bigger Sys, that takes yet more space in the cabinet

It's not really about "more space", it's about random heights that do not fit the "unit" sizes.

 

[demographic]

And now the tool is in a bigger Sys, that takes yet more space in the cabinet

It's not really about "more space", it's about random heights that do not fit the "unit" sizes.

In general I like the changes, just not the heights not working out that irritates me. Especially when Festool themselves have made such a thing of it over the years.
The drawer slide things are great, the front handle seems a good idea to me so its not all bad, its more or less there on the design front.
Just sort the height issue and we're golden.

 

[DeformedTree]

Plus there is the dumb name. Why would they call them Sys3 when that is already the name of one of the sizes of Tloc?

No, the old sizes were Systainer EYE,  EYE EYE, EYE EYE EYE, EYE VEE, VEE, and VEE EYE.  Pronouncing them any other way would be silly.

So be fair,  they should have called them. Systainer, Systainer 2, and now Systainer 3.  And then had the sizes be 1,2,3 or their heights in mm.  Calling systainer 2 "t-lock" was a mistake.

Calling them systainer 3 is one of the few things I think they got right.  But really they should have done. Systainer B or 3B (for Bott), made the special changes for that stuff, while making a Systainer 3 that got hinge/structure type changes, but kept the heights, side labels, no dumb handle.

 

[Crazyraceguy]

T loc 2? would have signaled the next generation much better w/o reusing an existing name.
The idea that there is a size of T loc called Sys3 an the following with the next generation calling it Sys3  is confusing.

 

[blaszcsj]

So I just got the pdc/ tid combo in the new systainer. I had read this thread before it came and can see the issue with the height, but I must say the new systainer itself is much better than the first gen tloc. The whole unit is much more robust an the hinge is really nice. The box does not flex and has a nice positive feel when latching or closing the lid. So I kinda like them. Will I sell my 30 some odd systainers to upgrade, no. Accept it and move on buying new systainers as needed, yes I would consider it.

Also really like the foam insert for the drill/impact combo all in one systainer. Need one for the cxs and c18.

 

[Bird]

I've been thinking of drinking the Tanos kool-aid as I organize a new shop. I appreciate the pictures of the different sizes and hearing all the gripes. I have a question about the sys3 line. I don't see the combi boxes. Will one like this be coming?
https://www.woodcraft.com/products/...21f669702d06760016d6,576455ee69702d3c42000be6