Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Olivier de St Raph

Ford Mustang 1964 1/2 Convertible 1/16 from the Coupe AMT kit: the Indy 500 Pace Car

Recommended Posts

Ok Roy, now I understand. It is impossible to know if they really want to hide some stuff to us or if they are just not concerned by this research. You seem to lean for the 1st assumption, I would personally rather bet for the 2nd... The result is the same anyway. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Olivier de St Raph said:

Ok Roy, now I understand. It is impossible to know if they really want to hide some stuff to us or if they are just not concerned by this research. You seem to lean for the 1st assumption, I would personally rather bet for the 2nd...

No I also think it's the 2nd. They just don't seem to be interested. They probably think, better be safe than sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Olivier de St Raph said:

I have asked Bernard to check the total width between the right and left flanges, because I am not sure such wide seats would come in my current interior:

co2qRp.jpg

 

Bernard kindly (happily for me, he is here, and pity, he hasn't got the same seats than the Indy 500...) made the measures. And, just as I feared, the width between side flanges is too low. Bernard measured 1280 mm (80 mm at 1/16 instead of 71 mm) at the front and 1260 mm (78,75 mm instead of 71 mm) at the rear (behind the front seats). As I don't intend to reconsider the car's width (what would send me too far), I will have to deal and find compromises, fe by decreasing a bit the tunnel width and by representing seats a bit too narrow (wider though than the AMT ones)...

The last printing trial  was a little better but, as I feared, the supports on the thin rods were not a good thing for them. Finally, for now, my first print remains the best. A good new in this ocean of bad ones: the cured resin is really great to work, and so it is possible to still improve this version by sanding it with care:

yIEXOJ.jpg

 

P.S: I have sent a message to Thomas Roussel, of Polysculpt, who made the tuto above testing the Creality LD-001 (I also followed his hints about the Resinaway - other great tuto - and the UV small room. He is french, speaks very well english, is used to work with resin 3D prints and is a modeler (figures). I hope he will be OK to bring me some help and improve my 3D resin printings. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Olivier,
Your tenacity attire the respect.
However, to my eyes, you ask to your printer something for which she is not made!

I don't know anything about this technic but the tutos I saw (figures etc) were not
as thin as your demand...
This work to me require etched method!
Just a view, I'm sorry!
Dan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem, Dan.

Though, I personally go on thinking such a machine will allow me to get nice inlet slots (as the photo above, post# 553, suggests imho), much better than crafted ones. The etched method, that I never used, is maybe a good way too.

The problem is that I was (and am still)  unexperienced in 3D resin printing.

To that matter, Thomas has ever replied and explained that the surfaces to print must never be parallel or perpendicular to the platform, what explains most of my failures.

He also said that choosing a very low layer height is the best way to fail. Here too, if I had known that before, I would have earned a lot of time.

To learn walking, you have to accept to fall...

Regards 

Olivier 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This day, begun with hopes, stayed on with disappointments and failures, ends with a big bag of sunshine:

first because I now know the reasons of my failures, thanks to Thomas. Then because I am sure the latter will be able to give me the keys to get the most out of this Anycubic printer. His experience could also be very useful for CAD...

And then BECAUSE FINALLY I COULD GET THESE DAMNED MEASURES OF THE SEATS :D!!!

I have thanked warmly machbill, from the Mustang forum, who just posted them on the latter. He will get, at the end of my build, a small and personal gift, as Bernard of course, for his contribution to my build.

So:

- Photo 1:

BEe3TI.png

 

1= 23 cm (14,37 mm)

2= 21 cm (13,12 mm)

3= 36 cm (22,5 mm)

4= 38 cm (23,75 mm)

5= 56 cm (35 mm)

6= 43 cm (26,9 mm)

7= 38 cm (23,75 mm)

8= 38 cm (23,75 mm)

9= 5 cm (3,12 mm)

10= 6,5 cm (4 mm)

11a (on the side)= 9 cm (5,6 mm)

11b (I made a mistake and used 2 times the number 11)= 18 cm (11,25 mm)

12= 20 cm (12,5 mm)

13= 37,5 cm (23,4 mm)

14= 3,5 cm (2,19 mm)

 

 

- Photo 2:

32y7RM.png

 

1= 48 cm (30 mm)

2= 50 cm (31,25 mm)

3= 55 cm (34,38 mm)

4= 9,5 cm (5,94 mm)

5= 30 cm (18,75 mm)

6= 45 cm (28,13 mm)

7= 29,5 cm (18,44 mm)

8= 54 cm (33,75 mm)

9= 6 cm (3,75 mm)

 

- Photo 3:

0cg5mL.jpg

 

1= 30 cm (18,75 mm)

2= 17 cm (10,62 mm)

3= 64 cm (40 mm)

4= 66 cm (41,25 mm)

5= 14 cm (8,75 mm)

 

Conclusion: tenacity ends up paying... Now the hardest is to come... 

 

Thanks for going on watching this totally mad thread of a totally crazy modeler...

 

Olivier 

 

P.S: it is interesting (and a good new for me) to see that the standards front seats are a bit narrower than the Pony ones.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks a lot for the updates regarding the Photon printer. I hope you can get the result you are looking for. If it is difficult to print very thin object maybe try the first file I sent you and see if that is any better? Or maybe even try a different object that is easier to print while you get to know all the different settings and what they do. Did any sample model come with the printer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dbostream said:

Did any sample model come with the printer?

Yes, Daniel, but I didn't print them. A 250 ml bottle of resin was provided and I worried about lacking of resin if I began to print objects with no particular interest. I now know that you can print several times (it also depends on the objects, of course) even with a small bottle like that.

I have ordered a 1l bottle of Anycubic white resin, I hope I will get it soon, as because of my many trials, I begin to lack with resin... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does it use up a lot of resin to print once piece of the inlet slots? I have a pretty good idea when it comes to filament but resin I have no clue and it would be interesting to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it doesn’t. Of course, it also depends on the quantity you use for the bottom and the supports. But definitely, we can’t say it consumes a lot. And you can refill the can of resin filtering the remaining resin staying in the vat after the print.

Now all in all, the resin consumables are certainly more expensive than FDM.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I decided I had spent enough time with the inlet slots. I have still improved the part, then cut it and then integrated it on my body, first removing (with a tear...) my previous crafted ones, that were far from being as good despite all my efforts.

Q3Syl1.jpg

 

PcijAd.jpg

 

 

After a delicate fitting job, I used Tamiya liquid cyano by capillarity first, and then the Vallejo Plastic Putty to fill the small gaps (just applied). After a complete drying of the latter, the final sanding job will end the step...

 

N.B:

1) I have completely removed any trace of Wimbledon White paint (Tamiya Paint Remover, alcohol) to avoid a thick coat of paint, that would decrease the slots width.

2) my last trial of printing was not bad, but not better than the all first one. As I had ever spent time in the post processing with the latter, I naturally used it. 

3) I have asked some more questions to the Anycubic support, especially regarding a problem I have with the slicing software. It is indeed (for me, at least) very difficult to put the object exactly as I want in the 3D space. A rotation, in particular, is so:

WVDUsq.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Olivier

 

I can understand if you got fed up with the inlet slots but honestly I still think the FDM version looks better and since you spent money on a resin printer I would have expected you to master it before moving on. But I am sure you will improve the glued in piece before you are done and it will turn out great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daniel,

honestly it is not at all the problem of the money I spent on a resin printer.

Maybe you don't have a good perception of the result because it is not yet painted. and because the integration job of this "graft" is not over.

I have a certain level of requirement, quite high I think (it is not a perfect world, though...) and this result I got with the resin printer (at least as good - if not better...- as the best one I got with the FDM printer imho) is really satisfying for me. 

As a painter or a sculptor who has to decide at a moment that such a detail is, if not perfect, satisfying to his eyes, I considered it was the case. I couldn't spend all my life on this detail that represents maybe 0,5% of the whole build, while I got such a so good result (to my eyes), much better than what I could get with traditional techniques (thanks to you, who opened my eyes on 3D printing and who provided me the inlet slots file!)

I am gonna do the sanding job around (I don't feel necessary to improve further the slots themselves) and when I will apply the Wimbledon White, then maybe you will understand better my decision (the transparent green doesn't do justice to that result).

Now if I compare (humbly, with my very small experience of both kind of printers) the advantages and weak points of each kind of 3D printing technology, I would say:

 

FDM :

adv:

- clean

- cheap

- printing simple and not requiring a lot of room, products, material and procedures 

w.p:

- quite bad state of surface of the PLA, hard material (difficult and random post processing) hardly compatible imho with our modelers requirements

- average level of accuracy

- Cura settings not simple imho 

 

Resin:

adv:

- good level of accuracy with a basic printer like the Anycubic, probably great with a high-end one like the Form 2 (Formlabs), much more expensive

- the post-processing is easy, allowing to get a neat state of surface (a very important parameter to my modelers eyes). So, from a just average result of the printing itself, I could get the expected result. 

w.p:

- quite messy, needs much material and products (UV lights, US vat, resin, filters, funnel, Resinaway etc.) and more room. I had to reorganize a bit my working space.

- requires more care (mask, gloves, protection glasses), a bit smelly (better to work in a well ventilated and large room)

- Anycubic slicing software to improve (see above)

- the cleaning procedures are quite tedious

 

Honestly, and despite the inconvenients, I don't regret the choice I made of a resin printer. Btw, these conclusions are not only mine, I share them with an experienced figures modeler, Thomas Roussel (and not only with him, see videos on YT), who experienced several printers of both technologies (he should try the Anycubic very soon, I will post the link on the thread then).

 

Conclusion: I am a beginner in 3D printing, and I have to practice and so improve my results, but I think the resin printers suits more for my model making hobby.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To84wt.jpg

 

euiwob.jpg

 

That said, honestly, by the naked eye, the result is really better than what this merciless photo suggests...

 

Edit a few hours later: I have applied a second coat of W.W, thinned this time with the Mr Hobby Aqueous thinner, that allows to get a much brighter surface. And what I see with this 2nd coat is that my slots are OK (imho), I just have a little tweak around them here or there. So I finally won't require the services of my technician for this time. On the other hand, the hood must be improved (middle rib more visible, state of surface)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×