Good reasoning, this looks like a simple explanation: they have the tools and the experience when working with metal, probably they didn't even consider that this would happen.
you are assuming they didnt test the new product... Probably 6 months to a year before they did the announce, was practice and testing
Unless tin prices go into frefall it's more likely we'll see gradual improvement as they get more familiar with the process, "traditional" resin isn't suited to the volumes CB produce (and is awful to work with) whereas conversely they probably don't make enough for HIPS to be economical without completely overhauling their release schedule. Spin cast metal fills that sweet spot of cheap moulds and relative fast manufacture, Siocast promises to also fill that niche but it appears switching from one to the other isn't as easy as we'd like.
Sculpts are good, details are good. I dont think it is poor result. That wheelie thing can split too if made in metal (i received in the past some broken swords...)
I'm simply wondering why they appear to be behind on the technology when other companies seem to have picked it up quickly. If they did test the product then the issues arising from its production need to be addressed. I’m also concerned as to why an issue such as a weak point in a miniature appears to not have been addressed in product design, this is something that surely would have been talked about. I really hope they get to grips with the new resin and we see some truly wonderful miniatures however, the material used is of no real issue with me, I simply want the high standard I have come to expect from CB minis.
They do not seem to be doing that. All the talk about "same" seems to be about being vulcanized rubber. IOW, same general process, but not the same details. Same: cut holes in rubber, apply registration nuts, do not use masters that melt with moderate heat, etc. But different: feed point (one is for gravity + spin, the other is for injection), positioning for proper material flow, and so on. Just poiting that it is painfully obvious by now. "New flexible plastic!!! It bends and gets back to.... oops" Now I see why they did not dare to perform the "throw against wall" test. I am not very happy about tactical rocks (have they gone triple rock already?), or tiny ankles, or silly resizes (weapons or full models), or add more skullspouches for the pouches god, etc for years. TTCombat seems to cast a lot in resin. Recently they even announced a workflow improvement. Hahaha... Explain the issues with the remote then. Including shipping all those faulty ones. Edit: typo.
Well, lets not forget the chickenbots and their ankles of extreme weakness (causing me much sadness). CB has a bit of a history making models that look cool, but suffer from structural defects.
Yes... I will agree with you on this point. The old Maghariba Guard was an issue too. Damn thing fell apart when I looked at it wrong. I just would have thought they’d have clued in by now as to how to assemble minis that aren’t so fragile. They seemed to be doing well, especially with some of the newest releases. It’s entirely possible that the resin mixed for the batch was done incorrectly and that’s why it’s breaking so easily (though it does appear to be a stress point on the model and so would likely break under any duress). I will reserve final judgement until later models are released.
There is no mix. It is pellets of plastic that get melted, then injected into the mold while still liquid. OK, maybe a bad batch of polyamide, but I doubt. Parts are breaking in the same place, while big ones do not show problems.
We had a guy in this thread where legs of his REM broke very easily. Those are not that thin at the break point.
Try the same with the metal ones. Oh, look! They break the same! You all are complainig that the grass is green even if it is syntetic.
I have a broken metal piece from a Hellcat with spitfire, in a similar fashion. The spitfire itself is in two pieces. It has broken so cleanly, that initially I wasn't sure if some sadistic guy didn't design it that way. Apart the break we see up there, all other reports about the jackbots seem to show no issues, especially comparable to the FUBAR that's the vostok. In your opinion, does it have something to do with the fact that they are smaller in volume and thus less susceptible to issues with temperature and flow speed?
Yesterday I accidentally broke the pipe of a Forgeworld tank. Said pipe had a weak point the thickness of a Mowang's thigh. Things break, but if they break consistently it's possible CB needs to adapt the miniature design and CB has been playing breakpoint-chicken with some of their designs for years - I'm not sure we can properly attribute this to the material just yet. We simply need to see what quality improvements there are as CB gets more familiar with the process and if there's trends across several different designs. That said, I'm glad these "first gen" siocast miniatures aren't miniatures I want to buy.
Since we are all apporting circumstantial evidence based on our experiences, I'm going to provide my own: I've assembled through the years probably close to 150 Infinity models, and I've never had a single instance of some piece of miniature breaking where it isn't supposed to break.
