Forgeworld getting a finecast make-over?

[eldargal]

What's dubious is that no one has produced any kind of evidence beyond 'I think it feels like Finecast' to go against FWs explicit statement that they did not use Finecast resin. Nor has any evidence been presented that these tests were deemed unsuitable. No offense to those who think they have FW Finecast intended, but I have Finecast models showing half a dozen variations in rigidity and even more with FW. I have an Avatar I purchased back in 2007 (I think?) which is just like Finecast.

And before anyone accuses me of defending FW or GW or whatever other nonsense, I'll just say again is all I want is some actual evidence to back up the claims people have made. As I've twice now linked to comments from FW explicitly denying these claims. Evidence, not opinions.

[Torga_DW]

Pfft, facts. You can prove anything with facts.

[rev]

I recently recieved £300 + of marine stuff from FW, none of it was any different to the feel/colour/weight or any other characteristic of stuff i've bought in the past.

Niether does it appear to be anything like the FC minis I've bought (all 3 of them).

Rev

[spaint2k]

What's dubious is that no one has produced any kind of evidence beyond 'I think it feels like Finecast' to go against FWs explicit statement that they did not use Finecast resin. Nor has any evidence been presented that these tests were deemed unsuitable. No offense to those who think they have FW Finecast intended, but I have Finecast models showing half a dozen variations in rigidity and even more with FW. I have an Avatar I purchased back in 2007 (I think?) which is just like Finecast.

And before anyone accuses me of defending FW or GW or whatever other nonsense, I'll just say again is all I want is some actual evidence to back up the claims people have made. As I've twice now linked to comments from FW explicitly denying these claims. Evidence, not opinions.

Your standard of proof is unreasonably high and can only be met by chemical analysis of Finecast sprues and FW "not-Finecast-but-Finecast-process" sprues.

GW will officially tell you that they never cast 1980s miniatures in anything other than lead-based alloys, but collectors and ex-staff will tell you that in fact there was a brief period in which GW cast up old archive models in new lead-free alloys. If I told you that I had held these miniatures in my hand and could tell that they weren't lead-alloys, would you disbelieve me based on GW's statements? Or would you consider that perhaps I'm not a clueless imbecile and can in fact tell the difference between a leaded model and an unleaded casting of the same?

In the absence of other evidence to the contrary, accepting Forge World's statement at face-value is effectively saying is that the differentiating marker of Finecast is the process, and not the material. It is perfectly obvious that the miniatures I received last year were cast by the Finecast process - and Forge World backs that up. If the resin is "the same" as Forge World's regular resin (bearing in mind that Forge World changes recipe regularly) then it must mean that GW aren't using any kind of magic resin recipe, because the Finecast miniatures I have seen, handled and assembled were materially IDENTICAL to the Forge World "not-really-Finecasts" that I received.

In closing, I'd like to respond to your point that you said that no evidence has been presented showing that these "tests" (hurray, I received TESTS from Forge World) were unsuitable. The photos I posted show a clear size disparity between the Finecast and the non-Finecast versions. Is this shrinkage not a measure of unsuitability? I'm assuming, of course, that Forge World were not entirely incompetent and had created moulds without shrinkage in the first place.

[eldargal]

Really? Asking for evidence that what you claim is Finecast is resin is actually Finecast resin is unreasonable? I'm sorry but as I've dealt with both Finecast and FW kits with radical variations in feel, appearance and flexibility I want more than 'it looks like Finecast' before I believe it over FWs rather specific statement that they didn't use finecast resin. You also have no evidence that FW deemed these tests unsuitable and sold them anyway, you only have evidence of shrinkage. Given that both metal and resin shrink to some degree in the curing process I'm not sure what the issue is.

[spaint2k]

Really? Asking for evidence that what you claim is Finecast is resin is actually Finecast resin is unreasonable?

You make me sound like an uneducated buffoon instead of someone with a master's degree in engineering and 30 years of experience in model-making. If the only level of evidence you will accept is scientific prove of similarity by providing data such as Young's modulus, melting point, ductility etc then I hold that unreasonable - I don't have access to testing facilities and neither do you.

I can only tell you that the surface hardness is different. Unlike many other material characteristics, this is something that doesn't have a scientific measure and is in fact measured empirically. Empirically, the "finecast" FW pieces I received have similar surface hardness as other similar Finecast pieces I have handled, while they have little in common with the later FW resins. If this is a result of process alone, I would be extremely surprised.

Again, I want to repeat that FW's assertion implies that the Finecast "magic" is in the process alone, and has nothing to do with the resin recipe and yet at the same time, they mention the "flex" of Finecast resin being unsuitable for most FW kits.

I'm sorry but as I've dealt with both Finecast and FW kits with radical variations in feel, appearance and flexibility I want more than 'it looks like Finecast' before I believe it over FWs rather specific statement that they didn't use finecast resin. You also have no evidence that FW deemed these tests unsuitable and sold them anyway, you only have evidence of shrinkage. Given that both metal and resin shrink to some degree in the curing process I'm not sure what the issue is.

You must have missed the picture I posted. Ignoring the slipped-mould, one of these casts is objectively less acceptable than the other and regardless of whether the shrinkage is a result of process of material, it would be unnacceptable to me as a vendor and I expect Forge World would feel the same, given that they are in the business of faithfully reproducing castings.

Bringing up the issue of metal shrinkage is irrelevant and I never mentioned it.

Attachment 129984

I feel like you're playing a pedantry game with me. Anyway, I've posted another question on FW's Facebook page and written to them.

[eldargal]

I'm not trying to make you sound uneducated, don't misunderstand. My issue here is that if FW lied to their customers that is highly offensive to me, especially over such a minor issue. But I do want more than just opinion based on a few small pieces. As I said I have a FW Avatar from 2007 that I would have sworn was Finecast if we knew about Finecast then.

[spaint2k]

For what it's worth, FW answered my question with a brief paragraph about different resins being suitable for different purposes but answered my follow-up question ("would you be able to use your standard resins with the Finecast process, or do you need a specific type that has different properties?") as follows: "the Finecast process was originally tested on Forge World kits, the resin is just a slightly different mix".

I don't think GW wants to reveal too much about the composition of Finecast. Or "compositions", since it seems there's more than one mix out there.

[Legacy40k]

Why use a carcinogenic resin if you don't have to?

[spaint2k]

Is the resin actually carcinogenic to the end-user, or is its carcinogenic property derived from way resin dust gets lodged in your lungs due to its shape?

[Spectrar Ghost]

The second. Resin dust is very sharp, it's not far short of inhaling powdered glass. It's possible that the softness of FC avoids this by making the dust too flexible or too 'blunt' to be damaging to lung tissue.

[Torga_DW]

In fairness though, most things are bad when you inhale them. Concrete dust, wood dust, even water is bad in your lungs.

[johnnyrumour]

The second. Resin dust is very sharp, it's not far short of inhaling powdered glass. It's possible that the softness of FC avoids this by making the dust too flexible or too 'blunt' to be damaging to lung tissue.

Only when machined dude. You need to belt sand it to get particles small enough to entre the lung capilliaries. Otherwise it's no worse that walking through a city. And as others have noted, the same applies to chalk, custard paowder... all kinds of stuff.

Yeah, if you're asthmatic or have breathing issues a well-ventilated area and a dust mask will help, but otherwise... not a problem.

[luchog]

Only when machined dude. You need to belt sand it to get particles small enough to entre the lung capilliaries. Otherwise it's no worse that walking through a city. And as others have noted, the same applies to chalk, custard paowder... all kinds of stuff.

Yeah, if you're asthmatic or have breathing issues a well-ventilated area and a dust mask will help, but otherwise... not a problem.

Don't know about Finecast resin, but when working with resin garage kits, a dust mask is pretty much mandatory, since you're doing a lot of very fine 1000-4000 grit sanding, which can kick out a lot of dust. And chalk, custard powder, car exhaust, etc. particulates aren't nearly as sharp as resin particulate tends to be (similar to stuff like crystallized carbon and silica, which also tends to be very sharp; hence the "black lung" problem with coal miners, and the silicosis that results from inhaling sharp asbestos particles). Finecast may be softer and less sharp; but since good disposable dust masks cost something like fifteen cents each, why not use one?

[StraightSilver]

Yep, always, always wear a mask when working with resin.

It's just not worth the risk, it can be very harmful if inhaled, so best to err on the side of caution.

[simonr1978]

Bear in mind though that depending on the shape of your face some dust masks may be less than 100% effective. In my case most dust masks intended for normal people, like you'd buy in DIY/Hardware stores make no difference at all.

[luchog]

Bear in mind though that depending on the shape of your face some dust masks may be less than 100% effective. In my case most dust masks intended for normal people, like you'd buy in DIY/Hardware stores make no difference at all.

The stiffer style found in hardware stores can definitely leave serious gaps with some face shapes; but you can get softer medical-style masks online, they cost about a quarter each at most, and work with nearly all face shapes. Or you can break down and spend the $30 (less than the cost of some Finecast models) to get a full respirator-style mask like professional construction workers and painters wear, that will last for many years of modeling, and is far more adjustable to face shape. In either case, why take unnecessary risks that are so amazingly easy to avoid? Good idea when spraying/airbrushing as well.

[simonr1978]

The stiffer style found in hardware stores can definitely leave serious gaps with some face shapes; but you can get softer medical-style masks online, they cost about a quarter each at most, and work with nearly all face shapes

.

Those are both effectively useless in my case.

Or you can break down and spend the $30 (less than the cost of some Finecast models) to get a full respirator-style mask like professional construction workers and painters wear, that will last for many years of modeling, and is far more adjustable to face shape. In either case, why take unnecessary risks that are so amazingly easy to avoid? Good idea when spraying/airbrushing as well.

As even are most of those (I was tested recently at work, even most respirator type masks are about as effective is putting my hands over my mouth and breathing through the gaps in my fingers, they made no difference whatsoever, in my case it was down to the shape of my nose which apparently makes it quite difficult to properly fit a mask on.). My point was not to encourage taking unnecessary risks, but you can't simply assume that just because you're wearing a facemask/dustmask/respirator that it is necessarily offering you any protection at all.

[Bael]

The stiffer style found in hardware stores can definitely leave serious gaps with some face shapes; but you can get softer medical-style masks online, they cost about a quarter each at most, and work with nearly all face shapes. Or you can break down and spend the $30 (less than the cost of some Finecast models) to get a full respirator-style mask like professional construction workers and painters wear, that will last for many years of modeling, and is far more adjustable to face shape. In either case, why take unnecessary risks that are so amazingly easy to avoid? Good idea when spraying/airbrushing as well.

I use a respirator mask when priming, airbrushing, and when working with resin. I have had some bronchial issues in the past so don't want to take any risks. Some primers and spray varnishes are quite nasty. As you say, it is very easy for the majority of people to avoid potential problems, so why not make the small amount of effort needed to get proper protection.

[johnnyrumour]

Sorry, I wasn't trying to say that people shouldn't wear a dust mask, just that I don't