Author Topic: NEW TSO TPG-30 Parallel Guide (Read 54983 times)

tjbnwi · « **Reply #150 on:** February 03, 2019, 05:41 PM »

For cuts wider than the guide rail only one GRS or GRS-PE is required.

There needs to be enough purchase of the square on the reference edge of the piece being cut.

The square is accurate enough to use it along the edge and have the rail reach out 90º.

Tom

Oldwood · « **Reply #151 on:** February 03, 2019, 06:51 PM »

Quote from: tjbnwi on February 03, 2019, 05:41 PM

For cuts wider than the guide rail only one GRS or GRS-PE is required.

There needs to be enough purchase of the square on the reference edge of the piece being cut.

The square is accurate enough to use it along the edge and have the rail reach out 90º.

Tom

I can see in some situations where that would work but I use parallel guides mostly for cutting 8' sheets into strips and I would not rely on the square for that.

Thanks

tjbnwi · « **Reply #152 on:** February 03, 2019, 06:53 PM »

Quote from: Oldwood on February 03, 2019, 06:51 PM

Quote from: tjbnwi on February 03, 2019, 05:41 PM
For cuts wider than the guide rail only one GRS or GRS-PE is required.

There needs to be enough purchase of the square on the reference edge of the piece being cut.

The square is accurate enough to use it along the edge and have the rail reach out 90º.

Tom

I can see in some situations where that would work but I use parallel guides mostly for cutting 8' sheets into strips and I would not rely on the square for that.

Thanks

If they're less than 7-1/2" I recommend two PG's

We rip 8-24" wide strips daily with a single GRS-16. I do have a PE.

Tom

manuc · « **Reply #153 on:** February 03, 2019, 07:09 PM »

I have a general question about the GRS-16 and GRS-16 PE. I didn’t want to start a new thread.

I’m planning on purchasing both. I got to thinking, would it be better to purchase two GRS-16 PE’s? Is there any advantage of the GRS-16 over the GRS-16 PE? I know the PE can be used on both sides of the rail with no issues. Just wondering what the advantage/disadvantage is.

Thanks!

Peter Halle · « **Reply #154 on:** February 03, 2019, 08:22 PM »

I have both. If I was purchasing them today I would go for 2 of the PE. Only for the reason that they are more versatile.

Peter

Sanderxpander · « **Reply #155 on:** February 04, 2019, 04:44 AM »

The PE is more expensive. There is no other drawback that I can think of. 95 percent of the time you can use the regular one because you will be able to reference from the starting cut side. But if money is no object the PE is more versatile.

Mike Goetzke · « **Reply #156 on:** February 04, 2019, 09:23 AM »

@manuc

I now have a TSO square - a GRS-16 PE. I had a square with my previous track saw system and it had a top handle. Many times it is easier to use the square on the far end of the board and pull it tight toward you. This requires the PE. If I thought I need two I would buy two PE's, just so I could use both the same way.

Mike

SRSemenza · « **Reply #157 on:** February 04, 2019, 10:01 AM »

One reason for the non-PE ............ I chose it because I didn't want the other point sticking out from the table edge. I think I would be bumping it or hooking something on it often. In my case the way my cutting set up is situated it would be right where I move while cutting.

But it would certainly be good to be able to put the square on the opposite end.

Seth

Cheese · « **Reply #158 on:** February 04, 2019, 11:00 AM »

Quote from: manuc on February 03, 2019, 07:09 PM

I got to thinking, would it be better to purchase two GRS-16 PE’s? Is there any advantage of the GRS-16 over the GRS-16 PE? I know the PE can be used on both sides of the rail with no issues. Just wondering what the advantage/disadvantage is.

I think a lot of us have both versions because the non-PE version was the first one offered. Then about 9-12 months later, Hans offered the PE version for a few shekels more.

The PE version is more versatile while the non-PE version is also 5/8" longer.

I store the PE with the TSC vertically & the non-PE with the HKC horizontally.

Koamolly · « **Reply #159 on:** February 04, 2019, 11:25 AM »

Quote from: Cheese on February 04, 2019, 11:00 AM

Quote from: manuc on February 03, 2019, 07:09 PM
I got to thinking, would it be better to purchase two GRS-16 PE’s? Is there any advantage of the GRS-16 over the GRS-16 PE? I know the PE can be used on both sides of the rail with no issues. Just wondering what the advantage/disadvantage is.

I think a lot of us have both versions because the non-PE version was the first one offered. Then about 9-12 months later, Hans offered the PE version for a few shekels more.

The PE version is more versatile while the non-PE version is also 5/8" longer.

I store the PE with the TSC vertically & the non-PE with the HKC horizontally.

I just purchased the pair. The current PE and non-PE are the same length.

Sanderxpander · « **Reply #160 on:** February 04, 2019, 12:21 PM »

Quote from: Mike Goetzke on February 04, 2019, 09:23 AM

@manuc

I now have a TSO square - a GRS-16 PE. I had a square with my previous track saw system and it had a top handle. Many times it is easier to use the square on the far end of the board and pull it tight toward you. This requires the PE. If I thought I need two I would buy two PE's, just so I could use both the same way.

Mike

You can still do this with the regular GRS 16 by walking around your workpiece.
But I still agree the PE is slightly more versatile.

Cheese · « **Reply #161 on:** February 04, 2019, 11:43 PM »

Quote from: Cheese on February 04, 2019, 11:00 AM

The PE version is more versatile while the non-PE version is also 5/8" longer.

After I posted the above response today, Hans from TSO contacted me and added this insight to the discussion. I feel this is an easy way to determine early product from later product..and that's good.

"Nick, last year we made minor dimensional changes making the overall length of GRS-16 and GRS-16 PE identical so they would both fit straight rather than angled into the SYSTAINER 1 flat, one on top of the other as well as fitting behind the saw in the taller SYSTAINER.

We made that change in part because field experience had shown there is no discernible accuracy difference by slightly reducing the overall length of these tools. There also was never any customer question whether that 15+inches (almost 16 inches) length was sufficient. We went for that length because that was the "proven" length of the BIESEMEYER tablesaw fence and figured it would be hard for anyone to argue with that success."

So this explains why, as I noted in my response above, the new PE version stores vertically while the early non-PE version will only store horizontally.

manuc · « **Reply #162 on:** February 09, 2019, 10:15 AM »

Just a heads up, unless you already knew..., I talked with Eric at TSO and he said that the advantage of the GRS-16 over the GRS-16PE is that it will cut a 45 degree angle. He said that it was shortened a while back so that a 45 could be cut. The response that @Cheese posted explains the shortened length and accuracy.

I didn’t see anything on the TSO website about cutting a 45. That should probably be mentioned so people like me don’t pester them.

So I’ll be purchasing one of each instead of 2 PE’s.

tazprime38 · « **Reply #163 on:** February 09, 2019, 02:59 PM »

Quote from: manuc on February 09, 2019, 10:15 AM

Just a heads up, unless you already knew..., I talked with Eric at TSO and he said that the advantage of the GRS-16 over the GRS-16PE is that it will cut a 45 degree angle. He said that it was shortened a while back so that a 45 could be cut. The response that @Cheese posted explains the shortened length and accuracy.

I didn’t see anything on the TSO website about cutting a 45. That should probably be mentioned so people like me don’t pester them.

So I’ll be purchasing one of each instead of 2 PE’s.

That is interesting. Hans mentioned in the past either here or in an email that they had originally looked into this but decided against declaring that a 45° could becut due to accuracy issues.

The Canadian knock off of the TSO GRS -16 is sold with this feature.

Hopefully Hans or Eric @TSO_Products wil update us on this.

TSO Products · « **Reply #164 on:** February 09, 2019, 09:59 PM »

Quote from: tazprime38 on February 09, 2019, 02:59 PM

Quote from: manuc on February 09, 2019, 10:15 AM
Just a heads up, unless you already knew..., I talked with Eric at TSO and he said that the advantage of the GRS-16 over the GRS-16PE is that it will cut a 45 degree angle. He said that it was shortened a while back so that a 45 could be cut. The response that @Cheese posted explains the shortened length and accuracy.

I didn’t see anything on the TSO website about cutting a 45. That should probably be mentioned so people like me don’t pester them.

So I’ll be purchasing one of each instead of 2 PE’s.

That is interesting. Hans mentioned in the past either here or in an email that they had originally looked into this but decided against declaring that a 45° could becut due to accuracy issues.

The Canadian knock off of the TSO GRS -16 is sold with this feature.

Hopefully Hans or Eric @TSO_Products wil update us on this.

@manuc @tazprime about cutting 45 degree angles with The GRS-16:

As TSO’s Eric explained to @manuc, the GRS-16 will definitely cut a 45 degree angle, BUT the practicality of that for every day woodworking does not come up to our standards. For that reason we have not publicized this capability, leaving that claim to the “other folks”.

Look at the pictures and do some mental gymnastics with the two different positions of the GRS-16 and perhaps you’ll understand that it will work in certain circumstances, especially when used with our 15 inch precision Clamping Angle attached.But it’s easy to run out of reference edge contact with your workpiece. Quite limited.

On the other hand the MTR-18 Triangle offers some real choices. But that's another thread on another day.

Hans

tomp · « **Reply #165 on:** February 10, 2019, 06:18 AM »

Hans,

My early model GRS does not have the tapped holes on the hypotenuse leg - can these be added using the same drill jig for adding the holes for the TPG?

Thanks,

Tom

TSO Products · « **Reply #166 on:** February 10, 2019, 09:40 AM »

Quote from: tomp on February 10, 2019, 06:18 AM

Hans,

My early model GRS does not have the tapped holes on the hypotenuse leg - can these be added using the same drill jig for adding the holes for the TPG?

Thanks,

Tom

@tomp - thanks for the question. YES, using our Drill Fixture for adding the M6 hole pattern to the hypotenuse of an earlier GRS-16 will work. We will include that in the instructions with the Drill Fixture.
Our 15" Angle Accessory will be helpful when making 45 degree cuts.
https://tsoproducts.com/tso-products-guide-rail-squares/angle-accessory/

But do some dry runs and lay out examples of cuts you want to make to see how the guide rail and the GRS-16 are placed relative to your particular work piece shape and size. We want you to understand the limitations of such a set-up before spending time and money.
We just need to get the fixture on our website while packaging the first batch of fixtures which are already done.

Hans

tomp · « **Reply #167 on:** February 10, 2019, 12:47 PM »

Hans,

Thanks for the information. I can see how the set-up would have some significant limitations, fortunately I have another method that's a little more user friendly.

Tom

glass1 · « **Reply #168 on:** February 10, 2019, 03:25 PM »

From here it looks like the tso parallel guide suffers from the same clumsy ness as the Festool. That the guide stops have to be at the ends of the material being cut. What makes the Seneca and woodpecker easier to handle is that the guide rails that connect to the cutting rails can be at at any distance as they rest on top of what they are cutting as opposed to be at the ends.

TSO Products · « **Reply #169 on:** February 10, 2019, 03:54 PM »

Quote from: glass1 on February 10, 2019, 03:25 PM

From here it looks like the tso parallel guide suffers from the same clumsy ness as the Festool. That the guide stops have to be at the ends of the material being cut. What makes the Seneca and woodpecker easier to handle is that the guide rails that connect to the cutting rails can be at at any distance as they rest on top of what they are cutting as opposed to be at the ends.

@glass1 - please help us understand what makes for "clumsiness" in the FESTOOL parallel guide (- and what you have so far seen of the TSO TPG System) ?

Your feedback may help us decide to speed up the availability of our optional TPG Rail Adapter (p/n 610-409) which accomplishes exactly what you are referring to.

Hans

duburban · « **Reply #170 on:** February 10, 2019, 04:24 PM »

Quote from: glass1 on February 10, 2019, 03:25 PM

From here it looks like the tso parallel guide suffers from the same clumsy ness as the Festool. That the guide stops have to be at the ends of the material being cut. What makes the Seneca and woodpecker easier to handle is that the guide rails that connect to the cutting rails can be at at any distance as they rest on top of what they are cutting as opposed to be at the ends.

I'm a little confused here as from what I see the parallel guide (part that stop slides in) is sitting on top of the material unlike the festool.

Take a close look at the image i attached and let me know if i'm not understanding you.

glass1 · « **Reply #171 on:** February 10, 2019, 06:02 PM »

Yes, stop is on top but the right angle pieces(blue) need to be at the end of the material to be ripped. It’s easier to just flop the woodpecker and Seneca on top of the material while the Festool and I presume the tso has to be placed at the ends and fitted onto the material to be ripped. I found it clumsy to maneuver the Festool parallel guides to fit at the ends of the material. Not impossible just clumsy. But I have not seen the tso in person so maybe it’s easier. There is a certain ease if everything is on top as opposed to at “the ends”.

glass1 · « **Reply #172 on:** February 10, 2019, 06:05 PM »

Just to follow up the tso looks quite easy to use when using just one stop. I cannot see how on 8 ‘ rips one would be enough. Usually one parallels up a sheet goo first than crosscuts ?

TSO Products · « **Reply #173 on:** February 10, 2019, 07:27 PM »

@glass1 - to clarify: the TPG T-tracks rest on top of the work piece unlike the FESTOOL guide.
as to the ability to get parallel cuts with just ONE single TPG-track:

look at REPLY # 65 and # 33 and # 17.

Tom is not on our payroll - his involvement is that of a FOG member going out of his way to help another - what makes this forum such a great environment and an incentive for TSO to pay it forward.

Hans

Richard/RMW · « **Reply #174 on:** February 10, 2019, 07:40 PM »

I think we're reaching the far end of viability when you start looking at narrow 8' long rips using the TSO squares and PG's. Not that it cannot be done but from experience that a lot of hardware hanging on the extreme ends of a flexible rail. It'll work but be cumbersome, at least in my situation. This is no different from the Festool PG's, I owned them before the advent of the aftermarket versions.

I say this as an owner & frequent user of both TSO squares, they are awesome for dead-nuts square cross-cutting where you rely on the square always being square without thinking about it. From what I can see the square will also work great w/ the TPG addon in a lot of situations including 8' rips of wider stock. Where I'd expect things to start breaking down is with narrow rips where the function of the square itself is diminished to being mostly a bracket to hold the PG at each end. That gets away from the excellent design and engineering that makes the original product so great to use without stopping to wonder if the resulting cut will be square. It can be done but the compromises are stacking up to the point that I'd want a dedicated tool. The aftermarket PG's are light and easy to install/remove/handle.

Just my

and loaded with personal preferences.

RMW

TSO Products · « **Reply #175 on:** February 10, 2019, 08:11 PM »

Richard,
I think you and I see things pretty much along the same lines. It is quite natural in a forum like this that members will probe the limits of what a tool "can" do. This does not mean anyone suggests buying and using a tool for the express purpose of using it at the limit of its specified capability.

We do not think ANY parallel guide is well suited for cutting narrow stock. Possible, yes, but for everyday use, get a tablesaw (portable). In January I had occasion to cut six strips 5"wide and 96" long with the TPG-20 set, the work around required to deal with narrow cuts reaffirmed our belief that this is not the strong suit of any parallel guide.

We developed this tool to be most capable to produce sheet goods cabinet parts of identical dimensions in a repeatable manner quickly and accurately.

Hans

tjbnwi · « **Reply #176 on:** February 10, 2019, 08:24 PM »

Quote from: Richard/RMW on February 10, 2019, 07:40 PM

I think we're reaching the far end of viability when you start looking at narrow 8' long rips using the TSO squares and PG's. Not that it cannot be done but from experience that a lot of hardware hanging on the extreme ends of a flexible rail. It'll work but be cumbersome, at least in my situation. This is no different from the Festool PG's, I owned them before the advent of the aftermarket versions.

I say this as an owner & frequent user of both TSO squares, they are awesome for dead-nuts square cross-cutting where you rely on the square always being square without thinking about it. From what I can see the square will also work great w/ the TPG addon in a lot of situations including 8' rips of wider stock. Where I'd expect things to start breaking down is with narrow rips where the function of the square itself is diminished to being mostly a bracket to hold the PG at each end. That gets away from the excellent design and engineering that makes the original product so great to use without stopping to wonder if the resulting cut will be square. It can be done but the compromises are stacking up to the point that I'd want a dedicated tool. The aftermarket PG's are light and easy to install/remove/handle.

Just my and loaded with personal preferences.

RMW

You can cut narrows, but you MUST use 2 set ups, 1 right side, 1 left side. The left side must be a PE.

I mentioned previously if you plan on narrows get another set of stops, calibrate them with the narrow rip rods.

Tom

glass1 · « **Reply #177 on:** February 10, 2019, 09:12 PM »

And when you use right side and left side they are at the ends of the material being cut not on top correct? That’s the cumbersome part. The space between the 2 blue squares is the length of the material being cut.

glass1 · « **Reply #178 on:** February 10, 2019, 09:14 PM »

It’s clear as day on the tso website in the picture that is $325. The stops are at either end. Just saying that it’s harder to put on and take off when it’s not just place on top like the Seneca set up.

tjbnwi · « **Reply #179 on:** February 10, 2019, 09:14 PM »

I'll start this post by making things clear-----I do not work for TSO, I am privileged enough to get to test their products prior to public release. I run them through their paces and make recommendations based my use of them. I do get to keep the majority of the items I test. I believe I've been testing the TPG's for about a year.

I do not do this just for TSO. I have shot and shared how to videos for members here and elsewhere. These videos are not public, they're to assist that person. I field on average 50 PM's per week from people looking for some insight for a project they're doing. I feel doing what I do for TSO is just an extension of helping others.

This link is to a video I shot today of the GRS & TPG set up as a single arm on one of my 3000 rails. In it I tried to address some of the question asked on this forum.

A question I get a lot after a video like this---yes, I have over 40 rails....

Tom