boston1832 wrote: ↑May 2nd, 2023, 7:58 am
Softscience wrote: ↑May 1st, 2023, 6:39 pm
boston1832 wrote: ↑April 28th, 2023, 5:41 pm
O h d e a r.
That'll teach me to ask open-ended questions! Better just get on with some modelling...
No oh Dearing necessary.
It's a fair question and is generating good discussion. This site needs more in depth discussion, and maybe even some challenges to preconceived notions, even if it makes a few folks uncomfortable. Nobody grows inside their comfort zone. So thanks for brining it up.
Thanks for that - without trying to stir up more controversy, the detail to my point was that there's a comparison on the video review at about the 1:50 point which shows the difference between Airfix and Tamiya gates and sprues. My
assumption was that current leading manufacturers probably use similar workflow and equipment to produce their moulds regardless of where they're produced and that these rely on very similar CAD to CAM die-sinking processes to take a 3D model and translate it into a negative mould. Hence my puzzlement as to why these should be very different. However I'm no authority on die-sinking beyond believing that it used to be done via spark erosion - there are probably all sorts of new techniques of which I'm not aware.
(Incidentally if anyone's got a link/video which describes how it's
actually done, I'd be quite interested in that).
I don't know much about the industrial process of model production, but the difference in tooling quality between something like Tamiya or Eduard, and Airfix, or even ICM is notable. The differences are most notable in the crispness of edges. Airfix parts, are getting better and better these days, but things like panel lines, canopy frames, and trailing edges still have a tendency for a bit of roundedness along the corners. Clear parts are the worst offenders, and pretty often, the frames sort of melt into the glass panels. I think this means the toolings just aren't as fine and precisely made.
And despite what others have said, there IS a greater probability of short-shot parts in an Airfix kit vs something like a Tamiya kit. This isn't me airfix bashing, its simply the trend I've observed among my own purchases. Since I've been keeping track of such things, I've had severe short-shots in six of my last 25 Airfix kits, one in the last 16 Eduard kits, and zero among 34 Tamiya kits. Dimples, or sinkage was noted on seven of the Airfix, two Eduard, and three Tamiya. I'm using these three companies, as they're the only 3 manufacturers that I own sufficiently comparable numbers. All kits considered have been released after 2000.
If people want to think saying this makes me an Airfix hater, then so be it. But I'm a hater who has sunk several hundreds of dollars into Airfix, and I'll continue to buy their products. Go figure.
)
