Woodpeckers new MFT Square

[SoonerFan]

…Looks like I will have to "settle" with continuing to use my 1281  to square my MFT  [tongue]

Last time I squared my MFT/3 I used a 1281 and I will the next time.  Like you I have to "settle" for the 1281.

 

[sicd_steve]

Wow guys try living in Australia.... I priced one $289 plus $80 delivery making it $369 USD and the Aussie dollars is now around 79 cents makes it $479 AUD......MAn in anyone's terms that's expensive for a square, I will stay with
my Woodpecker 450mm triangle square does seem to do the job.

 

[Birdhunter]

I've read most of the posts on the new MFT square. If Woodpecker were to make two mods to the design, I'd buy one.

First, provide the option to add 3 QWAS dog like locators. The Qwas-like dogs would be placed in a triangular pattern to drop into the MFT holes. The Qwas-like dogs would be attached to the square with machine bolts so they can be removed.

Second, add a red Anodized "leg" to the long side of the triangle. With this mod, you get a massive triangle and a MFT Square.

I think the ability to place one, two, or three Qwas-like dogs on the now three-sided square and use the tool anywhere on the MFT adds a lot of value. The holes for the Qwas-like dogs would give the jig builders attachment points.

Just an idea.

 

[Gary in Texas]

Have you thought about calling and discussing your additions with Woodpecker?  You should be able to get a quick yes or no to your additions, which would either add to the conversation, or shut it down completely.....

Gary

 

[Frank Pellow]

Have you thought about calling and discussing your additions with Woodpecker?  You should be able to get a quick yes or no to your additions, which would either add to the conversation, or shut it down completely.....

Gary

Calling them is a good idea.  They may well be receptive.  About three years ago, I talked to them and they did modify the one-time item to incorporate my suggestions.

If they were to make the two changes you suggest, I might even purchase this very expensive square.

 

[waho6o9]

Good ideas, maybe have them incorporate a couple of rulers

as well.

 

[JayStPeter]

I've thought of this before, but wondered if there would be some wood movement. I realize that MDF is not prone to do that, but I still would wonder if even some slight expansion or contraction from varying moisture levels would make just enough difference that it wouldn't remain square. I thought of mounting some aluminum track along the two edges used to square thus making it similar to the Woodpecker square. With holes drilled exactly in the right spot for dogs, it would simplify the squaring process. Does plywood or MDF move even slightly with differences in humidity?

Definitely move when humidity gets to 100%, but otherwise both are stable.  I used my wooden square for 3 years or so before I got in on another iteration of the one-time squares.

 

[Birdhunter]

I just forwarded my suggestions to Woodpeckers. Thanks for the suggestion to do so.

 

[grbmds]

I've also emailed Woodpekers with the question about why they didn't incorporate dog holes so that you could square the fence and guide rail to the MFT holes in one step. Maybe if enough people made the same comment, they would consider it.

 

[Grasshopper]

Great discussion here.  Without capitalizing on the dog holes in the MFT, the "MFT square" really isn't an MFT square at all. 

I'd imagine they could really simplify the design (not have a triangle that can be calibrated…since that means it can come out of square as well).  I'd prefer a larger square, based on the 1281 that was thicker to reference off the rail and fence.  If this were milled like the 1281, you wouldn't need to worry about "calibration".  I'd actually prefer that it have integrated dogs that are part of the square vs. dog holes so this was dedicated to the MFT.  If the dogs sat proud of the square even 20mm, machined as part of the square, you could simply throw the square up, and be done in one simple step.

Either way, some dog or dog hole integration would make this a compelling tool.  As it currently stands, looks like a really expensive triangle.

 

[grbmds]

Not sure why Woodpeckers even addressed the issue of calibration in their video. It doesn't seem as if it would ever go out of square anyway the way is constructed. As long as the dogs were integrated in a way that they weren't an obstruction for other uses of the square, OK. Otherwise it would seem as if incorporating holes which were machined to just fit the dogs would be better.

 

[JBird]

Where would you want it to locate the rail relative to the holes? Dead center between two rows? What about the fence?

 

[Grasshopper]

Here is what I envision.

(I'm not a machinist, so I don't know how feasible this is):

One solid block of milled aluminum, perfectly square.  A lip that extrudes 3/4" or so on either side to rest on the guide rail.  Dogs milled to extrude below, or holes to place dogs at the right location for MFT setup.  Holes would be nice as this could be a square for other purposes.

See view from the top
[attachimg=1]

View from the bottom with a couple dogs as an example
[attachimg=2]

 

[grbmds]

I would expect that, about the best you hope for at this point, is incorporation of dogs in some way in the current Woodpecker design rather than a re-design of the tool.

 

[leer]

Grasshopper,

One suggestion on the two dogs on the square.  Make one of them sliding.  I CNC-machined my own top for my own workbench.  It is 36"X84", so I chose 4" spacing on the holes, and not 96mm.  I saw no reason the adhere to the "MFT standard", other than the holes are 20mm.  I use both Qwas and Parf dogs. 

 

[Mike K.]

I helped in the design of the MFT Square from Woodpeckers and would love to join in and answer some questions and hear your feedback. Reading through, all of your posts are valid and I hope to address most of them, as many of these thoughts were considered during our design and prototyping process of the Woodpecker MFT Square.

A little about the design behind the Square; it was inspired by the need for a large thick webbed square to ensure the guide rail is 90 degrees perpendicular to the back fence. The approach to exclude the use of the holes as a feature in squaring up the rails is due to the inability to adjust such fixed and uncontrollable features. When features are fixed, you are subjected to rely on the integrity of their perpendicularity and the MFT holes integrity are affected through realistic factors such as true position of MDF holes, age, heavy use and atmospheric conditions.  These factors were key in us deciding to exclude the use of the MFT holes as a squaring feature as we could not guarantee or control the true 90 degree perpendicularity to our standards.

However, the option to square up the holes to the tracks as best as possible, still exist with the use of the MFT Square and the QWAS dogs. See photos below. This free moving option allows for infinite positions compared to the option of including holes for QWAS dogs or integrated/removable dogs in the legs or stainless web of the square. If the square was to include holes for QWAS dogs or if the square was to have integrated/removable dogs in the legs or stainless web, it would limit the flexibility to move the tracks to multiple positions perpendicular to each other. For instance, if the square was fixed through dogs to the limited set grid positions of the MFT holes, you must then move the tracks to such positions. Having the free moving option allows you to slide the square in infinite increments along the dog generated edge allowing for maximum flexibility and setup positions.

Through the internal company expectations, we don’t bend on quality but certainly include flexibility. Every day we enjoy sitting down and figuring out on how to to offer better tools above our competition. The MFT square is hefty and it is a beast. I think it’s just one of those tools you have to pick up to feel the quality (ok …that part may be biased, but in all honesty, the reaction from external customers shared the same feeling). I hope I addressed most of the concerns and suggestions and I’d love to hear any feedback!

Thanks
Mike Koury
designer and mechanical engineer
Woodpeckers, INC.

 

[grbmds]

From my perspective, without the capability to square with integrated holes for dogs, it really is just another accurate square. For that, the framing square or your triangle serve the same purpose; less expensive also.  Peter Halle has a video out which shows a process to square up the guide rail, then the fence without any squares; just dogs. Not integrating the capability to anchor the square using the MFT holes seems to ignore how many of us square the fence and guide up using the holes because that makes the MFT much more useful and flexible. I can understand not fixing the dogs in the square, but not integrating some capability to use dogs really substitutes the square for a process which doesn't even need the square. If it were the same price as the framing square I'd probably consider it because that is the main reason I'd use it, but $100 more? Not sure that makes any sense.

 

[Greg M]

Cool tool but it's fairly limited for such an expensive square. 

I used my 1281 to verify that a piece of plywood was square and then used it to square my guide rail to the stop profile after I used some dogs to square the stop profile with the holes.  When I get my 26" square in 5 months it will be used to make sure that piece of plywood is square before it's used to check my MFT.

You know what would be cool, a shim that had a cylinder on it's top to fit into the hole(s) on the 18" and 26" Woodpecker squares that would allow the square to sit flat on the table.  Also would be nice to have a handle that could screw into the cylinder to hold the shim in place.  That would add more flexibility to the square and allow it to be easily used to square the MFT.

I like my festool and woodpecker tools.  Obviously I'm willing to spend money for quality but this square is too expensive given it's limited usability especially when there are other woodpecker tools that can do the same job (or even a square piece of wood).  I'll take that $270 plus shipping and put it towards some other future woodpecker tool!

Mike, keep the tools coming!

 

[wow]

I helped in the design of the MFT Square from Woodpeckers and would love to join in and answer some questions and hear your feedback. Reading through, all of your posts are valid and I hope to address most of them, as many of these thoughts were considered during our design and prototyping process of the Woodpecker MFT Square.

Mike Koury
designer and mechanical engineer
Woodpeckers, INC.

Mike:

[welcome] to the FOG! Always good to see a vendor have a presence here.

While I have stated here that I have a problem with your 'One-Time Tool' model, I also have to admit that I just ordered both the 26" and 660mm precision squares on Monday. So much for holding out based my scruples, huh?

[big grin]

 

[Grasshopper]

Mike,

It is way cool to see you on this thread.  I too am a HUGE fan of Woodpeckers tools. 

I'm always looking for an excuse to grow my collection.  Thanks for your hard work and willingness to speak on behalf of your product.

The question that I have is why did it come out as a triangle design that can be re-calibrated as opposed to a single milled piece of aluminum?  The fact that it can be re-calibrated insinuates that it can come out of square.