BQ23-7 Build Thread

[ljudice]

David,

It's hard for me to disagree with you, and I feel somewhat badly for always cheering on the latest Shapeways stuff...  First
of all, I'm not nearly in the league of some of the designers out there and I take no offense at all with respect to the stuff
I've tried to do.  My only interest was to fill in the gaps until Willmodels and Showcase came along with better stuff - which
they are doing. 

I was encouraged early on by Shapeways, but frankly, since production was moved to the US it has been all downhill in terms
of the samples I've had made.  I took most of my models out of the store leaving only the ones I knew could be easily fixed.
A bunch of stuff was sold, my profits maybe $30 or so - and my expenses for test models over $200.

But still, I hope people keep trying because there are some good things being made - and who knows, maybe one day they
will have a process that is consistent and inexpensive....??

- Lou

[DKS]

I'm not trying to discourage anyone from experimenting with Shapeways either. If someone enjoys what's being done on Shapeways, more power to them; just don't try to pass it off as an alternative to injection--because it's not. Not yet.

[Philip H]

Back to the loco cab that started all this - despite knowing all the issues with Shapeways and FUD, I'm still buying one for my kit bash.  The reason is simple - I"m not a draftsman, so I can't easily render plans of this particular cab.  I've wanted to do one of these science i was 11 or 12 when I saw one in the wild, and Shapeways gives me the opportunity to do so far more easily then I could if I followed John's nifty example and went the styrene route.  Given that no one has ever done one of these Q cabs s a foldable etched brass product (Which I totally would if I could raw the art) and that N scale doesn't have a Conon & Company to make all the one and two-off cabs parts that HO has, I think this is an elegant solution.

Could the designer go to resin casting after drawing this up?  Probably, and even for relatively low cost.  But we'd still be waiting for the cab, as opposed to assembling the shells.

[HuskerN]

while you guys are having this debate, I'll go design another model that doesn't exist in N scale....   

seriously, we are all on the same team here.  I never intended to go public with my designs, but Shapeways makes it easy to do, and I hope others benefit from my work.  I really have no expectation of selling 1 or 1000 models and  I feel like my own layout will benefit greatly from the work I am doing.  I greatly appreciate everyone that is pursuing new technologies and methods to bring us more models.  Because that is what it is all about.... making more models available in N scale regardless of how they are made.  If an existing model isn't good enough, then the alternative is to wait, and wait, and wait some more.  I agree that Shapeways is not the holy grail, and don't take offence to criticism about the models.  I do like what I see so far, and will keep pursuing more models for myself, and share with anyone that wishes. 

HuskerN

[delamaize]

I have a few shapeway products, Mainly half of a London underground 1997 stock and a N scale HEMMTT, and Although it's not the end all be all soultion, it is A soultion for now. and I'm pretty happy with what I got out of them

[mmyers05]

while you guys are having this debate, I'll go design another model that doesn't exist in N scale....   

seriously, we are all on the same team here.  I never intended to go public with my designs, but Shapeways makes it easy to do, and I hope others benefit from my work.  I really have no expectation of selling 1 or 1000 models and  I feel like my own layout will benefit greatly from the work I am doing.  I greatly appreciate everyone that is pursuing new technologies and methods to bring us more models.  Because that is what it is all about.... making more models available in N scale regardless of how they are made.  If an existing model isn't good enough, then the alternative is to wait, and wait, and wait some more.  I agree that Shapeways is not the holy grail, and don't take offence to criticism about the models.  I do like what I see so far, and will keep pursuing more models for myself, and share with anyone that wishes. 

HuskerN

Couldn't agree more...

[peteski]

HuskerN, I'm curious: the photos of your printed models look pretty decent. Have you ever ended up with a printed surface of your models looking like the one shown on the hopper car?

[Chris333]

That Nn3 hopper in my first photo is the worst thing I have ever received from Shapeways. I have a few other items that are much better. I have some small wooden N scale 4 wheel hoppers that look pretty good.

Just sayin' wait till you get your stuff and judge for yourself. And that brings up another thing. Some of the models only show you a 3D drawing of what you are buying and of course the drawings are nice and flat.

[robert3985]

Depends on how you define "useful." IMO, Jason is not being harsh--I have likewise not seen much of anything other than concrete culverts from Shapeways that I'd use on my layout.

Methinks the strong point of RP using FUD is small parts. Large surfaces are difficult and such things as cars would benefit from being laid out and printed as kits.  I've got a couple of projects I've been working on that will take advantage of Shapeways rough surfaces (I hope!).

However, as opposed to DKS, I have found at least one part that I am extremely happy with.  I love the CB&Q 5' passenger trucks (otherwise known on the UP as "Q" trucks) which are available from Eric Cox (Panamint Models) and although the surfaces on these are not as smooth as is available on injection molded trucks, these include much detail on top and the brake hangars on the fronts and backs, which wouldn't be possible with injection molded one-piece trucks.  I use these under my MTL "Wooden" cabooses (Harriman era UP CA's), my kitbashed CA-1's and my Golden West kit CA-3's & 4's.  I have no idea how long I wished somebody would produce these, and I've $hit-canned all of my Bachmann Old-Timer trucks that I used before, which made my cabooses look they were on their tippy-toes cause the journal boxes were at the bottom of their brackets, like they were suspended in air with no weight on them. 

Here's a photo of one of my kit-bashed CA-1's with the Panamint CB&Q 5' Passenger Trucks (Q trucks) under it...WOW...thank goodness for Shapeways and Eric!!

[3rdboxcar]

hi all

Chris33 - If Shapeways delivered that to to me or anybody that bought one of my models it would be straight back, It does not look like FUD to me.

David K Smith - just about sums it up, and I do not try to pass any of the models I have done as an alternative to injection moulding as I have stated in a previous reply.

Huskern and  delamaize - totally agree, on with modelling and I am not getting drawn any more into which company produces the better what and at what price etc. etc. I want to do modelling.

As my final word on the subject of  any 3D printing companies quality etc, etc - when I designed the models I have done so far they were originally for my self and some close friends but was persuaded to put them up for sale, sometimes I think it has not been worth it, I certainly will never recoup what I have spent on test prints and design time but hopefully somebody out there in N scale land will get something that they can work on.

Below is the quality I expect from Shapeways using FUD, this is an Amtrak California car, cleaned with non acetone nail varnish remover and sprayed with Tamiya fine grey primer, there has been no other work done to the model, the model is zoomed in to over 4 times real life size.


Alexander

[3rdboxcar]

Here's a photo of one of my kit-bashed CA-1's with the Panamint CB&Q 5' Passenger Trucks (Q trucks) under it...WOW...thank goodness for Shapeways and Eric!!

That is one nice caboose, take that as a compliment from somebody who has not much interest in UP.   

Alexander

[jmlaboda]

Quite nice!!!  While some clean-up will still be necessary it still looks a lot better than what some have expected.  Gotta ask, though, how the roof looks since there is ribbing as well as varying curves to it.  How does it look?

[HuskerN]

A friend of mine came up with a brilliant way to remove the "fuzzy" texture on these models that the solvent just wont remove.  Take an old toothbrush and a dab of toothpaste and lightly scrub.  I am guessing that the flat sides of that hopper would clean up well using this method, where a file or sand paper would risk taking off the detail.   It's not that the model itself is rough necessarily, it just needs to be cleaned.  I used a toothbrush and toothpaste on a couple truck frames and it works really well.  I still have a little cleaning to do around the nooks and crannies, but this is after about 60 seconds of light scrubbing.  I agree with several of you guys in the hope that 3d printing will continue to evolve.  It's not perfect now, but the current quality is such that I am not hesitating at all making more models. 





HuskerN

[Philip H]

Interesting.

So you toss it in the Bestine to remove the wax, and then you polish it with toothpaste.  Have you tried the toothpaste by itself?  I would think the BQ23-7 cab would polish easily since it's mostly flat surfaces.

[HuskerN]

the waxy residue from printing really needs a solvent to loosen and remove it.  I think it would take too much scrubbing and pressure to get it to come off with just toothpaste.  And with the solvent step, you just throw them in and let them soak.  No effort at all.

I have been using files, sanding sticks, and soft microbrushes to remove the fuzz until my friend told me about the toothpaste.  I was in a hurry to try it, so I think with a smaller brush with shorter bristles, the fuzz around the details would be easy to remove too using toothpaste, or you could really us just about any type of brush.  The main point here is the toothpaste which acts as the polisher agent.

HuskerN