Author Topic: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer  (Read 7198 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mino

  • Posts: 1123
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #30 on: March 30, 2022, 06:39 AM »
I haven't taken apart a TPC, but isn't the extra space some air duct?

Using the same mold again can bring some cost saving. Just like some 14.4V batteries just have an empty slot...
The point was that the body is rounded while the gearbox inside is cylindrical. Same for the motor. They could have shaved about 2-3 mm on each side with the same functionality. Possibly more. But form was preferred as that is what sells - even to pros these days.

The practical downside is that even though you can now use the UNI excentric chuck, it does no allow you a "straight" drill work absolutely near the edge/wall like the T/C18 does. The TPC is just too chunky for the excentric distance of the chuck so the closest you can get is about 20mm from the wall/panel. With a T18 you get as close as 10mm. Same would be if the PDC accepted that chuck ..
When The Machine has no brains, use yours.

Offline Spandex

  • Posts: 276
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #31 on: March 30, 2022, 08:20 AM »
I don't have to cherry pick.
All I’m saying is that people who keep their tools individually in their original systainers clearly don’t mind wasted space. If that’s not you, then the jokes not directed at you...

As for cramming accessories in with tools, surely with a larger sys3 you can cram even more in?  [wink]

Offline Coen

  • Posts: 1788
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #32 on: March 30, 2022, 08:43 AM »
I don't have to cherry pick.
All I’m saying is that people who keep their tools individually in their original systainers clearly don’t mind wasted space. If that’s not you, then the jokes not directed at you...

As for cramming accessories in with tools, surely with a larger sys3 you can cram even more in?  [wink]

I do keep most in their original Systainer. The PS300 being the exception... that one got boosted a size to fit the circle guide, rail guide, more blades, a sanding sponge etc.

But more air below the inlay doesn't give more space. The addition is also only in height. Stacking more accessoires in height is usually not a good idea.

They should also include photos of the inlay on the product pages. And be more clear what accesoires it's designed for. Sometimes something fits perfectly, is definitely thought about by some engineer, but never communicated to the (potential) customer.

Stacking bare tools on a shelf is more space efficient yes, but there is a tradeoff somewhere, but with how they are implementing Sys³ (everything in bigger box, not selling the rails in Europe) the tradeoff got worse.... and the relative step down in inefficiency to Bosch with it's L-Boxx'es and near-complete lineup a lot smaller.

Now... I might still get a Sys³ L for my Bosch 18V caulk gun. But I think the one Sys³ I have needs filing on the locking of the top handle.

Offline SRSemenza

  • Global Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 10030
  • Finger Lakes Region, NY State , USA
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #33 on: March 30, 2022, 09:49 AM »
Hopefully the OP has been able to gain something useful about the Sysport construction question that was asked?

    As to the space wasting created by the Sys3 ...................................................

        It really depends on the tool and storage situation. Yes, many (most?) Festool tools have ended up in a taller size unit. But Festool is not the only thing going into a Systainer. I have personally moved three tools and one accessory set up into Sys3 in order to  downsize (yes, as in put them into a shorter Systainer) than previously needed.

       Sawzall, D-handle drill, Heat Gun, power / extension cord unit.  None of these would fit into a T-Loc I. All of them needed at least a T-Loc II. I have them in Sys3 M137. A 137 is about 20mm shorter than a T-Loc II.

       If someone is sticking strictly to the Festool arrangements and sizing, then most things will be in a taller Sys. But if someone cares about the space used by systainers, and is rearranging tools, then there is a good chance that a Sys3 might actually save space in many situations.

      I am not saying that Sys3 is better than T-Loc or vice versa. I am saying that the idea that a Sys3 always wastes space is quite simply not true.


Seth
« Last Edit: March 30, 2022, 10:06 AM by SRSemenza »

Offline Coen

  • Posts: 1788
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #34 on: March 30, 2022, 09:58 AM »
Space wasting is not the only thing yeah as is also nixes the height system. Goodluck stacking Sys³ to same height with differently sized boxes. Goodluck also getting an MFT height stack.

Some of the space wasting is mitigated by the rails... but they don't sell those in Europe....

The M137 has it's uses yes. One of the new cleaning sets is in one of them and that is nice.

I really want something in between III and IV, like an M287, but nope...

Closest I can find is Auer's Eurobox 270mm;
https://www.auer-packaging.com/nl/nl/Euroboxen-met-scharnierdeksel/ED-4327-HG.html

Offline SRSemenza

  • Global Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 10030
  • Finger Lakes Region, NY State , USA
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #35 on: March 30, 2022, 10:16 AM »
Space wasting is not the only thing yeah as is also nixes the height system. Goodluck stacking Sys³ to same height with differently sized boxes. Goodluck also getting an MFT height stack.

Some of the space wasting is mitigated by the rails... but they don't sell those in Europe....

The M137 has it's uses yes. One of the new cleaning sets is in one of them and that is nice.

I really want something in between III and IV, like an M287, but nope...

Closest I can find is Auer's Eurobox 270mm;
https://www.auer-packaging.com/nl/nl/Euroboxen-met-scharnierdeksel/ED-4327-HG.html


I edited the last line of my post for better meaning. I did not mean that space wasting was the only problem. I meant that the idea that Sys3 always waste space is not true.   

As to the height stacking match up being a problem? Again it depends on the user. It is a problem for you because you use them in that manner. Lots of other people don't. And many of them are probably very happy with the added rail system instead of having to use drawers.

Yes, I would like a 287.  More height options is better if you want to keep things as compact as possible yet still have good organization.

              Organization, access, and space. Is a triangle of trades offs.

Seth
« Last Edit: March 30, 2022, 10:18 AM by SRSemenza »

Offline Coen

  • Posts: 1788
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #36 on: March 30, 2022, 10:38 AM »
YesI know you meant that, but I wanted to abuse the open wording  [tongue]

Well, rails are nice... IF you can get them. And in Europe Festool signed a contract with Bott to not sell the rails. Neither does Tanos and neither does Bott.... so drawers it still is unless you let Bott modify your van...

Yes, the stacking height is a problem. It's a feature that got dumped without one word of explanation. Lots of people don't... even more never buy Festool to begin with. For me it's a lost feature meaning the next tool might just as well come in an L-Boxx.. Note that all L-boxes are a multiple of 34;
102 is 3*34
136 is 4*34
238 is 7*34
374 is 11*34
Not as easy to make stacks, but still perfectly possible without having to have same number of boxes per stack. Also their top isn't flat...

The exact same multiple we had with Systainer Classic and T-Loc, but with more choices. Especially note that differently sized boxes are a multiple of a smaller box, which is not the case with the L-Boxx system.
I is 2*52.5
II is 3*52.5
III is 4*52.5
IV is 6*52.5
V is 8*52.5

And even the odd sized Sortainers still had multiples of 52.5 if I remember right.
But with Sys³... nope... they don't share a denominator, even though their sizes increases with 50mm steps... the base is not an integer multiple of 50. So to get same stack height you have to also match box count in each stack. Which makes it way less likely you happen to have the right boxes around.

I can make a whole bunch of stacks with the Sys-IV height, either from Classic and/or T-Loc Systainers, with different combinations... 2* II, I+III, IV, etc. But with Sys³ having a base dimension of 130 and then steps of 50mm... you can only achieve same-height stacks with equal numer of boxes per stack. And besides the 112... not compatible with stacks having Classic or T-Loc Systainers.

And the 112 is a joke in another way... with the handle sticking out when locked on top of another Sys³ or T-Loc.

Sys³;
112; 130 - 0,5*50
137; 130
187; 130 + 1*50
237; 130 + 2*50
337; 130 + 4*50
437; 130 + 6*50
You see how messy that is ..

Even the supermarkets have this system of equal stack height. The pre packaged lettuce might ship in size 11, which is exactly 2/3 of the crate labeled 17 and exactly half of the crate labeled 23.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2022, 11:17 AM by Coen »

Offline mino

  • Posts: 1123
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #37 on: March 30, 2022, 11:39 AM »
...
And many of them are probably very happy with the added rail system instead of having to use drawers.
...
You might not be aware, but the rails are pretty much an unobtainium in Europe. In theory, Bott sells them. In practice you cannot get them pretty much anywhere. Not unless you buy a whole van fitout from Bott ..

This results in the sole practical benefits of the SYS3 being the sturdier construction and the front handle/ability to pull it easily from a shelf. That is basically it.

Against this goes:
 - height non-system /potential show stopper for some/
 - space wastage from rails which are unusable for 99% users poer above /potential show stopper for some/
 - ugly as heck (compared to a T-Loc which one can even use at home when catch is replaced by same-color as the systainer body)
 - "locking" handles which forces one to waste time filing them /again, potential show-stopper on usability, why should I be *fixing* such an expensive box ?/
 - lack for label points (see below)
 - lack of mount-points for straps and other accessories /potential show stopper for some uses/

Overall, SYS3 is screaming "I am a vehicle accessory that can be used in a shop." In the same way the Classic and T-Loc are screaming "I am a shop animal that does not mind being transported around."

These use cases merge for some people, but for most these are products with different target markets that never should have been treated like two generations of the same product. They are none of it.

This is why all these discussions can lead only nowhere. It is like an argument that a specialist tool like an impact is better than a more generalist of a drill driver. Of course the impact is better. It is better for the specific tasks it focuses on. At same, it is worse for pretty much everything else.
With a SYS3 it is like with that impact who pretended to be a new generation of a drill driver ..


All that said, IMO on space the M137 is actually a good height for a lot of tools - if only Festool took advantage of this. Lots of tools just barely - a few mm - do not fit in SYS1 but do fit in an M137. I dare say that most tools shipped historically in SYS2s are like that.


EDIT: Apologies for the OT rant. Had the impact/drill metaphor come to my mind. IMO it is very fitting here.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2022, 11:49 AM by mino »
When The Machine has no brains, use yours.

Offline SRSemenza

  • Global Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 10030
  • Finger Lakes Region, NY State , USA
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #38 on: March 31, 2022, 11:11 AM »
Whether or not the rails are available is a different issue than whether or not some people want and like them.

The front handle is a non-issue. If it had not been added no one would be complaining that it sticks out. If someone doesn't like the front handle there is a two minute fix ..........................  remove it. Pretend it never existed. But for those that like the front handle it is now available for them to use.

The point is that not everything about the Sys3 is a negative compared to the T-Loc.  The things that matter to some are different than the things that matter to others.

Overall I prefer the T-Loc. But there are some situations that the Sys3 is better for me.


Seth

Offline Paul_HKI

  • Posts: 203
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #39 on: March 31, 2022, 01:09 PM »
Overall I prefer the T-Loc. But there are some situations that the Sys3 is better for me.

Seth


T-Loc's are an appreciating asset?   ;D
TKS 80 EBS-SET, KS 60 E-Set, TSC 55 REBI, TS 75, HKC 55,
DF 500 & DF 700, OF2020, OF1010 REBQ, OF1010 EBQ, OFK 500,
T18+3, C18, PDC 18/4, TID 18,
RO 150, RO 90, RAS 115, RTS 400, ETS 125, ETS 150/5,
EHL 65, HL 850 EB,
CTL 26 E, CTL MIDI I, CTL-SYS, CT-VA-20
VAC SYS w/ SE1 & SE2, MFT/3, SYS PowerHub, DUO SYSLITE, & KAL.

Offline mino

  • Posts: 1123
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #40 on: March 31, 2022, 02:27 PM »
Overall I prefer the T-Loc. But there are some situations that the Sys3 is better for me.

Seth
T-Loc's are an appreciating asset?   ;D
You sound strangely surprised. We are on Festool Owner's forum. Are we not?
When The Machine has no brains, use yours.

Offline Paul_HKI

  • Posts: 203
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #41 on: March 31, 2022, 04:36 PM »
Overall I prefer the T-Loc. But there are some situations that the Sys3 is better for me.

Seth
T-Loc's are an appreciating asset?   ;D
You sound strangely surprised. We are on Festool Owner's forum. Are we not?


Oh, I'm way past the point where I even think about what I pay for a T-Loc systainer these days.  I've stockpiled a whole load of them so I can dump the Sys3's on the local craigslist equivalent as soon as I buy a new Festool tool.  Some would say it's madness, but I dislike the Sys3's that much, I'll gladly sink some eurotokens into ensuring I'm not irritated every time I have to look at a Sys3 'feature' I don't like. 


And yeah, I know where I am.  So I know I'm not alone.   ;D
TKS 80 EBS-SET, KS 60 E-Set, TSC 55 REBI, TS 75, HKC 55,
DF 500 & DF 700, OF2020, OF1010 REBQ, OF1010 EBQ, OFK 500,
T18+3, C18, PDC 18/4, TID 18,
RO 150, RO 90, RAS 115, RTS 400, ETS 125, ETS 150/5,
EHL 65, HL 850 EB,
CTL 26 E, CTL MIDI I, CTL-SYS, CT-VA-20
VAC SYS w/ SE1 & SE2, MFT/3, SYS PowerHub, DUO SYSLITE, & KAL.

Offline Spandex

  • Posts: 276
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #42 on: April 01, 2022, 09:14 AM »
If anyone around Buckinghamshire, UK wants to exchange sys3s for equivalent t-locs (i.e. the sys3 coming my way), I'm more than happy to swap. Personally I don't care which I have, so if it cheers someone up then I don't mind doing it. I get a newer tool box, you get one less thing to make you sad.

Offline Coen

  • Posts: 1788
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #43 on: April 01, 2022, 11:36 AM »
If anyone around Buckinghamshire, UK wants to exchange sys3s for equivalent t-locs (i.e. the sys3 coming my way), I'm more than happy to swap. Personally I don't care which I have, so if it cheers someone up then I don't mind doing it. I get a newer tool box, you get one less thing to make you sad.

Inlays are different.

Offline Coen

  • Posts: 1788
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #44 on: April 01, 2022, 11:37 AM »
Whether or not the rails are available is a different issue than whether or not some people want and like them.

No, it ties in perfectly with the disbalance of advantages and disadvantages of Sys3. Without the rails, a big advantage disappears.

Offline Spandex

  • Posts: 276
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #45 on: April 01, 2022, 11:52 AM »
Inlays are different.
Well aren’t you a little black cloud of doom…

If we have the same tools, I’m happy to swap inlays too.  [wink]

Offline Coen

  • Posts: 1788
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #46 on: April 01, 2022, 01:42 PM »
Ah yes, I didn't even think of the latter.

Having had a job getting paid to find everything that is wrong creates a certain mindset  [tongue]

Offline Crazyraceguy

  • Posts: 1818
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #47 on: April 01, 2022, 08:05 PM »
Ah yes, I didn't even think of the latter.

Having had a job getting paid to find everything that is wrong creates a certain mindset  [tongue]

I do that too, never even having that job....  [unsure]
CSX
DF500 + assortment set
PS420 + Base kit
OF1010
OF1010F
OF1400
MFK700 (2)
TS55, FS1080, FS1400 holey, FS1900, FS3000
CT26E + Workshop cleaning set
RO90
RO125
ETS EC 125
RAS115
ETS 125 (2)
TS75
Shaper Origin/Workstation
MFT clamps set
Installers set
Centrotech organizer set

Offline Coen

  • Posts: 1788
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #48 on: April 01, 2022, 08:53 PM »
Ah yes, I didn't even think of the latter.

Having had a job getting paid to find everything that is wrong creates a certain mindset  [tongue]

I do that too, never even having that job....  [unsure]

Well ok. Having that mindset to begin with landed me the job, but it hasn't gotten less since hehe

Offline SRSemenza

  • Global Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 10030
  • Finger Lakes Region, NY State , USA
Re: SYS port construction and a question I can’t answer
« Reply #49 on: April 01, 2022, 09:08 PM »
Ah yes, I didn't even think of the latter.

Having had a job getting paid to find everything that is wrong creates a certain mindset  [tongue]

    "Always with the negative waves Moriarty, always with the negative waves."   [wink]  [big grin]


Seth