[lanslide]

I have taken part in a discussion on the Hobby Master section of this forum that disturbs me. It appears that HM will be drastically reducing the metal content of their 1/72 scale armour models according to Hawk1. I hope this is not the beginning of a trend for the other manufacturers to do the same. Does die-cast mean metal or not? Can die-cast mean plastic? I agree that plastic can afford better detail than metal but what are we collecting - the most accurate models possible regardless of the material they are made of or the most accurate models possible that are made out of mostly die-cast metal? I collect some plastic but mostly metal military models and I object to plastic models being considered or mis-labeled as die-cast. There is an art to creating metal die-cast models and sometimes a little detail must be sacrificed because of this medium's limitations and that's okay with me. Would you still want Century Wing's Tomcat if it were made of plastic even if it had more detail? CW has set the standard pretty high and succeeded in meeting most of our expectations for an accurate model regardless of what it is made of. If they can do it why can't the others? Somebody out there must agree with me - where are you my brothers?

[Cruver Collecter]

Well Webster's defines Die-cast as 1. The process of making a casting by forcing molten metal into a metallic mold or die under great pressure. Of course you could call the mixed medium models as a Cast model. Casting is a process by which a liquid material such as a suspension of minerals as used in ceramics or molten metal or plastic is introduced into a mold, allowed to solidify within the mold, and then ejected or broken out to make a fabricated part. So if it is such an issue, I guess you could request they call them cast models, but in the end you are really just dealing with semantics. Shoot by the definition that Webster's has for die-cast, Corgi, Dragon, IXO, FOV an HM products are not purely die-cast either. They are not 100% entirely die-cast in that they do have plastic parts, and does that require the rethinking of calling them die-cast?

[lanslide]

Come on Cruver. You know what I am getting at. Die-cast is understood to be mostly metal by the industry. Did you understand my concerns with my post? Did I join the right forum. LOL

[skydriver]

My feeling in short is that the less metal in the model, the lighter it weights. The lighter it weighs the less impact it will have when holding it. The less I want to hold it, the less I want it. Stick with the metal.

[Cruver Collecter]

Originally Posted by lanslide

Come on Cruver. You know what I am getting at. Die-cast is understood to be mostly metal by the industry. Did you understand my concerns with my post? Did I join the right forum. LOL

Of course I know what your shooting for, but what is your opinion would be an exceptable level of metal content to retain diecast status? My personal choice would be for all major compontents (Armor Vehicle: body and turret if applies. Aircraft: Fuselage, wings and tail assembly). Hard to say what total consensus would be in general though. Some might look at composition change keeping cost down is a good thing, many collectors out there do not have bottomless pockets (I am one). I would like to see standards maintained, but this in turn might price some people out and that would be a bad thing.

[lanslide]

I agree with everything you just stated. The model should simply be more metal than any other material if they are going to be called die-cast (51% metal if made out of metal and plastic ?). Maybe the manufacturer should list the ingredients with their percentages like a box of cereal! LOL

[Cruver Collecter]

Originally Posted by lanslide

I agree with everything you just stated. The model should simply be more metal than any other material (51% metal if made out of metal and plastic ?). Maybe the manufacturer should list the ingredients with their percentages like a box of cereal! LOL

Ok, now I have to admit I am going to sound like the prude. I was thinking more along the lines of 80%-90% to be a diecast model. Still think calling other models a Cast model not such a bad idea though. ( What the heck is LOL anyhow?)

[lanslide]

Oh - LOL means laugh out loud. If manufacturers listed the metal content by percentage we could make a more informed purchase and decide whether or not the extra cost is worth it. These models better be mostly metal for me to continue to buy them. The more metal the better - for me!

[Copland]

It appears that this will be the direction manufacturers take. Admiral Toys had to go this way due to manufacturing costs. It disappoints, but does not surprise me that Hobby Master is following suit. Dragon is already there. Even with less metal content, Dragon and Hobby Master make a great tank. Howeve, I hope that they do not go the way of MRC. MRC does make a nice plastic model, but it is the weight of a rice cake!

[lanslide]

True - but it's not just the weight that is important since you could get around that by adding lead inside. It is about the "art" of casting in metal a fine replica that I admire about this hobby of ours.