Unless CB state otherwise then it’s just going to be a repack of the metal mini. I wouldn’t mind if it was eventually redone in siocast as long as the detail was still good. Larger minis that are heavy enough to crush smaller minis have a tendency to do so and to break themselves in the attempt too.
I'm still waiting for a siocast Infinity release that's relevant to factions I play, but I did pick up some siocast models from Yedharo (their main sculptor is Fausto, who is the one who did the new Morat / Chaksa sculpts). It's definitely a weird material, where it's kind of soft/rubbery like PVC but holds shockingly small details. Those two do combine to make cleanup a bit more involved, since even minor mold lines are relatively visible, but any sort of filing or scraping causes the material to fuzz up. I'm not aiming for Crystal Brush competition models, so I can get it to a usable state without too much bother, but it's definitely taking some getting used to. The biggest issue I've been having is that superglue doesn't seem to want to bond it very well. I've had several times I have to put on one or two elements of the model and then let it cure for a couple hours before I can resume. With most metal/plastic/resin models I work with, I'm used to my superglue bonding quickly enough that I can build the entire model in a single sitting.
That is weird, on all sculpts I glued superglue bonds so well and refuses to give away that gluing is the thing that I try to do fast and with no mistake. Assuming we talk about Siocast to Siocast, model to base is not that instant...
I too found it a little rubbery for my Vostok but not that soft. I used a very sharp blade and had little issue removing flash but I will agree that it will be a trial if it’s in a more delicate area (I’m eagerly awaiting my bearpode who’s still stuck in transit). Out of interest, what super glue did you use? I had a slight issue with my army painter one but after another quick bath in soapy water and a scrub with the old toothbrush, the glue seemed to work fine. A thicker super glue such as the one sold by Wayland games may also be better and I’ll be trying this on my bearpode.
How old is the superglue? I found that it makes a huge difference with Siocast. I quickly switched to fresh ultra gel superglue and had decent results albeit with a bit slower set time than I am accustomed to. I have several Bones USA minis from Reaper which are Siocast. No Infinity Siocast at the moment and right now my feeling is not in the future either. It’s not pleasant to clean since all sorts of residual stuff clings to the mini, even with very sharp tools. It primes well enough. My oh my but it is very bendy. It’s better than PVC, but that’s damning with faint praise. Overall I dislike it. It reminds me of pencil eraser material, only its gray not pink.
It's a relatively fresh bottle, but not brand new. Lately I've been mostly using the Gorilla Glue brand.
There seems to be different print runs with different characteristics. One of our group has broken off the hammer of the Bearpode, two others Bearpode were so soft, that that couldn’t happen. Don’t know exactly what CB is doing, but there are definitely differences.
What this sounds like is either a huge variance in the process or improvements being introduced batch by batch. They shouldn't be shipping the worse batches though, especially since one of the pros of the Siocast is that the material can be reused and recast again.
Very interesting… from a gaming standpoint as well as a scientific one. I wonder what they’re doing per batch for these differences to arise?
I should have detailed a bit more : - moving from on material to another imply creating new molds because of the different technic - creating new molds require time and testing thus have significant costs implied Based on those two facts, it is easy to understand that creating mold for new sculpt only is more cost effective than for existing sculpt. It is obviously always an option to create new mold without updating the sculpt but it would imply missing re-sculpt opportunity. At least that's my reasoning and it may differ from CB's.
Wasn't one of the Siocast pros also listed as CB being able to use the old metal spincasting soft moulds for Siocast?
No, they said they can use the knowledge and expertise they have from metal casting to Siocast casting.
So why does this early casting of the Vostok use the classic concentric layout and pegs for securing it of a normal spincast mould with an axial hole in the middle? It looks like they didn't bother to produce the mould in a round shape for spinning and instead made it larger and with more pegs for better retention, but that's all the difference I can see. It absolutely looks like that a spincast master mould was used to shape the actual slots and vents. All Siocast moulds online use a rectangular layout, just google "Siocast mould". Only Corvus Belli siocast moulds are concentric, like the spincast masters. Which means they can use the metal spincast masters to produce Siocast moulds. QED.
I’ve had several issues with the gorilla glue range so I’d steer clear of them. If there are still problems with assembly, you can use a very very small amount of green stuff and super glue at the joints.
I've been using it consistently for years with very good results, but I'll keep an eye on various options. Adding some greenstuff to joints is what I've been doing. The result is very strong and won't break, but it definitely contributes to needing to let the model sit before I resume handling it.
Because they thought they could use the radial layout (as for spin casting) instead of a tree of tubes (which seems to be the norm for this injected process)? We are talking about a company that repeats poses over and over, as if they feared deviating from a set of recipes... so repeating layouts looks plausible. Even if supplier told you to use something else because it was tested and works. Some staff interviews mention that people that did moulds years ago do not do it anymore.
I don't have experience casting parts, so I can't speak to the circular vs. rectangular arrangement. But one thing that's interesting to note is that CB's mold has only a single part, whereas the other molds shown create a complete model. Generally, single-part molds are preferred for higher volume casting so that if there's a production issue, it's easier to cast more of only the part that's needed, rather than having to cast an entire model just because one piece was defective For example, changing the Vostok head/body layout, vs. having to throw out the entire thing if that orc's axe starts tearing the mold. On the other hand, it's easier to make sure all the pieces of the orc kit end up in the same box/blister, without the added potential for error from having people pick parts from bins.
I guess, reason for that is habit they have. Or maybe they had some backup plan, in case siocast will totally fail, so they would just use this design in spinning mold. But on your photoes i found that your examples have higher connection metal pins (or what are they?) number near model and in center of mold. Their proximity to all sides of model can explain some of quality concerns.
