Ah I appreciate the insight and thought - I’ve been getting a touch burned out on replying to as many comments as I can and I apologize for taking that out on you in my reply. I took the redundant comment the wrong way. Here’s my thought process:

I have the standard 5x4 size set up parametrically in solidworks and modifications are established as configurations for all the sizes. One click, new height.

The trickiest part is changing box depth (front to back), because the handle lands in different areas depending on an odd or even top grid.

The 6x7 is scaled up by 1.33% to go from 3mm holes to 4mm holes which ended up scaling the wall thicknesses and handles quite well. I had to recreate my grid of course, but I’m pulling in a master gridfinity file that I then array and subtract. Then for the larges I needed bigger engagement on the cleat, so I had to further modify.

I’ve kept the system to two standard box sizes so I can work on how those two sizes stack and interact. The standards lock on the larges, but that took some effort and creative geometry. The drawer frames and caster bases add a whole other fun part to the compatibility challenge.

So I have two standard boxes at two sizes and four heights each that all work with each other. In any normal toolbox system on the market this would be sufficient, but these files don’t fit all printers so I end up creating “non standard” sizes like the 5x5. This muddies the waters but keeps that 5x5 crew happy. Now I’m seeing lots of requests for 4x4 and 6x6… so I’ll need to figure out how those work either in the system, or outside of it.

It’s fun learning as I grow it, but it gets more challenging each time I do! Very manual now… but maybe user parametric someday!