Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

It would be quite fun to do a timelapse photo sequence of a Finecast model in a hot car.

But possible not £15.50 worth of fun.

To my untrained eye, the models look very similar, with possibly a little bit better detail on the resin. However, the one thing you can't see in a photo is weight. My metal models always piss me off with how much work it takes to get their parts on. I prefer a quick spot of glue, not pinning. And trying to put metal parts onto plastic models is a nightmare. I for one welcome the new resin minis. I just hope they fix the "parts falling off the sprue" problem soon.

Has the resin one been identified?

Kilkrazy wrote:It would be quite fun to do a timelapse photo sequence of a Finecast model in a hot car.

But possible not £15.50 worth of fun.

Someone should put the sprue in a hot car, that way you are not losing money but still see a similar effect.

Kilkrazy wrote:Has the resin one been identified?

Yes. The resin one is the one on the right in each of the photos. Of course I am basing this off of the OPs photos. I took his original pics and combined them into side by side comparisons.

Thanks.

Kilkrazy wrote:Thanks.

No problem. Speaking of the photos, did anyone see stuff that you liked on both models? I liked the back torso of the metal one better, but the cloak on the resin.

Lord Scythican wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Has the resin one been identified?

Yes. The resin one is the one on the right in each of the photos. Of course I am basing this off of the OPs photos. I took his original pics and combined them into side by side comparisons.

That would be correct. I originally just posted them seperately and it was a little awkward to look at.

Lord Scythican wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Thanks.

No problem. Speaking of the photos, did anyone see stuff that you liked on both models? I liked the back torso of the metal one better, but the cloak on the resin.

This is the first metal mini I have seen with such terrible bubbling in a large flat surface (ie. cloak).

This is also very suspicious as that sculpt is relatively new when compared to Njal and others I have on me in metal.

I've seen it before on metal and Finecast models.

It strikes me as a bug that is fairly easy to fix with Milliput, but arguably you shouldn't have to at the prices of these models.

Kilkrazy wrote:I've seen it before on metal and Finecast models.

It strikes me as a bug that is fairly easy to fix with Milliput, but arguably you shouldn't have to at the prices of these models.

Yes, price is another reason these defects should not be apparent.

Again, the fact that this is a new mould (Draigo) this should not be happening.

I don't think it's a problem in the mould, it's a problem with the casting -- low temperature metal or something.

Kilkrazy wrote:I don't think it's a problem in the mould, it's a problem with the casting -- low temperature metal or something.

Dont know if thats the case and dont wanna assume too much, just saying, its a newer mould/sculpt and it seem to have more issues than the older stuff.

That's hilarious! That really covers it.

Also thanks for adding the images of the primered side by sides, I haven't gotten to mine yet, but they are on the painting table, got a little derailed this week.

AvatarForm wrote:

Again, the fact that this is a new mould (Draigo) this should not be happening.

It's actually Brother-Captain Stern. If I recall correctly, Stern in metal was first released way back when Codex: Daemonhunters came out, and reissued with the 2011 Codex release. (I do not know for sure as I am a recent GK bandwagon hopper)

Kilkrazy wrote:I don't think it's a problem in the mould, it's a problem with the casting -- low temperature metal or something.

That's an organic flow powder(talc) that was put on thick possibly with a powder hammer and should have burned off. If it is spray released and not let to dry completely. The powder in the mold cavity traps or absorbs the liquid of the mold release spray, making a positive formation in the mold cavity. When the mold is injected, the metal will flow over and around these formations of wet powder instead of burning it off, resulting in a pitted surface. In extreme cases, it can have an appearance that is similar to investment erosion or spalling.

Sloppy and fast casting.

The skulls look much crisper on the resin.

Looks like Wayland Games have got the issue sussed:

http://www.waylandgames.co.uk/games-workshop/finecast-resin-models/cat_955.html

"Wayland Games" wrote:We regret that we are not presently retailing the Citadel Finecast range.

Unfortunately, a randomly sampled assessment revealed what we feel to be an excessive level of actual and potential flaws that, if reflected across our entire stock of Finecast, could have resulted in unacceptable inconvenience to our customers. Although we will be returning our present stockholding to the manufacturer, please be assured that we remain committed to carrying the Finecast line and will be restocking in due course.

For your information, we sampled and then assessed 60 sealed blisters with 30 taken at random from each of two deliveries of stock. Failures were 17 (57%) of 30 and 16 (53%) of 30, making 33 (55%) of 60 in total. While failure doesn’t necessarily denote the blister content as being of less than merchantable quality, for our purposes it does categorise it as having a visible flaw that might be of sufficient concern to a customer such that the item might be returned. Details and images were provided to the manufacturer, with redacted copies of the images appearing below.

Please note, the blisters remain sealed and so images were taken through the product packaging.

And as the sample was taken from closed blisters, the actual failure rate will have been >55%!

Buying Failcast is like playing Russian roullette with a loaded crossbow!

Ouch.

I await the wave of excuses...

Most of the flaws shown in the pictures are very small... metal would likely have that level of flaws, imho.

Doesn't make it OK- just not earth shattering...

If that were the case, wouldn't we be returning metals 50% of the time for these same flaws? I know I haven't been and, in fact, have received only one metal model that I ever considered returning (but a friend used a lot of greenstuff to resculpt the missing parts for me).

So no, I don't think these are something that metal would 'likely' have.

Osbad wrote:Looks like Wayland Games have got the issue sussed:

http://www.waylandgames.co.uk/games-workshop/finecast-resin-models/cat_955.html

"Wayland Games" wrote:We regret that we are not presently retailing the Citadel Finecast range.

Unfortunately, a randomly sampled assessment revealed what we feel to be an excessive level of actual and potential flaws that, if reflected across our entire stock of Finecast, could have resulted in unacceptable inconvenience to our customers. Although we will be returning our present stockholding to the manufacturer, please be assured that we remain committed to carrying the Finecast line and will be restocking in due course.

For your information, we sampled and then assessed 60 sealed blisters with 30 taken at random from each of two deliveries of stock. Failures were 17 (57%) of 30 and 16 (53%) of 30, making 33 (55%) of 60 in total. While failure doesn’t necessarily denote the blister content as being of less than merchantable quality, for our purposes it does categorise it as having a visible flaw that might be of sufficient concern to a customer such that the item might be returned. Details and images were provided to the manufacturer, with redacted copies of the images appearing below.

Please note, the blisters remain sealed and so images were taken through the product packaging.

And as the sample was taken from closed blisters, the actual failure rate will have been >55%!

Buying Failcast is like playing Russian roullette with a loaded crossbow!

BOOM! Headshot...

I have never heard of a metal model with bubbles untilk the pic of Brother Capt Stern. I could only presume it is due to improper casting or impurities in the batch.

I once had a metal sculpt that was mis-cast half a millimeter off centre, but it was returned for a replacement.

I have also experienced mis-packs where a Ravenwing Landspeeder (old metal, 2nd ed) was packed without frontal armour. GW promptly sent me out a replacement. I was 12 and told the Troll straight that I was not paying postage to return the parts to them.

Sure miscasts happen with metal. And a lot of those Wayland miscasts were pretty minor. But those are both irrelevant issues now. As GW are charging absolute top dollar prices it isn't reasonable to expect their customers to accept even minor problems. If I am expected to pay £15 for a model that another manufacturer might charge a fiver for, I damn well expect three times the quality!

However, even that isn't the issue. Wayland recognise that these are minor miscasts. The problem for them, and the justification for them returning them is that at this level of imperfection they are not prepared to handle the level of customer complaints and problems that will arise . It is irrelevant whether the complaints are valid or not, it is just their volume that is the problem for Wayland.

Also, bare in mind this is a 55% failure rate of the VISIBLE product. As all the models in boxes and the back half of models in the blisters are actually not visible, then it is ntirely reasonable to assume that there is a similar failure rate in the parts of the models that are NOT visible which would make a large proportion of sample - perhaps even 75% or so, in a condition that Wayland are not prepared to sell to their customers.

As Wayland are their biggest single UK independent account, that is a heck of an own goal.

It would be interesting to see what The Warstore and Maelstrom's experiences are! I guess calling Wayland a "freeloader" wasn't such a good idea for the Evil Empire after all... I hate to think what they'll be calling them behind their back after this move!

I appreciate Wayland taking a stand regarding this. With a name like Finecast and touted as the most detailed minis on the market these defects shouldn't be there... especially following a price raise to change over to the new line. If smaller companies like Scibor can quality control resin blisters to produce a much lower defect rate at the point of sale then GW can too. I did a quick spot check of the five finecast blisters in my FLGS last week and found 2 of them had similar problems on the top sprue (which was the only one I could see without opening the pack so more of them probably had defects as I could only examine about half each blister). The store also had Scibor blisters and I took a look at the half dozen they had and found *ZERO* defects.