3D printed road vehicles

[grahame]

Only you can say if they live up to your standards. I think they look excellent, and they're undoubtedly better than I'd manage. That's irrelevant though, as they're yours!

 

For more modern offerings these guys have a decent range, bit of a US slant, and a shame they're 'solid' though. Things like the 1:148 Focus would be very useful for present day layouts.

Thanks. Ideally I'd like to achieve high standards but like all of us I have limitations. They're probably as good as they will get, but I'm happy to hear comments and suggestions of how to do better and improve. Some of the 2mm finescale modellers have very high standards that they achieve.

 

The Ford Focus is rather too modern for me - some 80s Fiestas, Escorts and early Sierras would be good tho. Perhaps I'll have a bash at the RailNscale 1:148 club of four truck. I could just use the cab and chassis and scratch build a skip pick up body. I've plenty of nice etched skips.

 

G.

Edited February 22, 2017 by grahame

[steam-driven boy]

Hi,

For more modern offerings these guys have a decent range, bit of a US slant, and a shame they're 'solid' though. Things like the 1:148 Focus would be very useful for present day layouts.

I posted on the initial 'British' batch almost 18 months ago with some photo's, after a good wash but prior to attempts at smoothing and painting:

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/102514-british-n-cars-on-shapeways/

Sadly, precious little progress on these since but hopefully photo's theree more useful to the potentially interested than the cg images on Shapeways.

 

I do agree that the difference between the 1/148 and 1/160 scales is too much of a stretch for me, I have quite a collection of Tomytec vehicles at 1/150 which are fine if only as acceptable equivalents/placeholders for a modern era layout, some of which at least do relate to those running in the UK although sometimes under different model names.

It would certainly be far better to have much more representative UK makes/models covering the different timescales we individually would like of course, but surely that would need a very robust market to underpin the investment that would be needed to even scratch the surface I think, a very difficult ask for someone like ODC or anyone else joining in as a supplier to commit finance to with any confidence.

 

Regards, Gerry.

[Scottish Modeller]

Back to the subject of this thread - 3D printed cars (in N gauge).

 

I'd hoped I'd completed the painting of details like lights and things but upon taking a pic (below) it just cruely showed up all the faults and inadequacies in my efforts. Now I'm not sure what to do - try and deal with and correct them, or continue with glazing?  Certainly the actual models look fine in real life but the pic shows how revealing the camera is.

 

 

G.

Hi Grahame,

 

Those are exactly the sort of vehicles that are needed.

 

ie - the common, run of the mill, makes and models.

 

OK - so these are more 80's range of models, but they are some of the things that are missing for British N Scale modelling.

 

Thanks

[Gloucester Road]

Back to the subject of this thread - 3D printed cars (in N gauge).

 

I'd hoped I'd completed the painting of details like lights and things but upon taking a pic (below) it just cruely showed up all the faults and inadequacies in my efforts. Now I'm not sure what to do - try and deal with and correct them, or continue with glazing?  Certainly the actual models look fine in real life but the pic shows how revealing the camera is.

 

 

G.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with what youve done.  I felt the same way after looking at my pictures, was ready to toss the whole lot; put them on the layout and they sort of blend in. If you sit and stare at them you can pick up the issues, but in reality they will blend in and compliment a scene. 

[mikeharvey22]

I think you are missing the point and obfuscating the issue with matters of different prototypes and different scales.

 

The fact remains that anything accurately made to 1:160 and 1:148 scales will be different sizes and the difference is visible. Something 4 metres tall (less than the average height of a double decker bus) will be 25mm in 1:160 and a tad over 27mm in 1:148. And those sort of differences, when placed side by side, are very obvious (at least to me if not to others) as well as that difference getting bigger and becoming more obvious for increasing prototypical dimensions.

 

G.

Grahame , I honestly do not know what your problem is now. Everyone is agreeing with you on the principle of not mixing 1/148 and 1/160 side by side, just maybe not agreeing with your way of illustrating the point. If you look at post #20 you can see that I have not missed the point at all. In fact my first sentence in post #20 says just that. I get the point and illustrate it with two vehicles which are of the same prototype, in the height dimension are 1/160 and 1/148, and look quite wrong together.

 

The issue was really with you trying to prove the size discrepancy with models which were not 1/148 and 1/160, or of completely different vehicle types. That observation still stands. And in post #19 my illustration of two real vehicles demonstrates how much smaller tractor units were when the Wiking Mercedes was new on the road. I would rather not undermine the case we all seem to agree on by using vehicles for comparison which in the real world are of quite different sizes. I think I will leave it there.

 

Mike

Edited February 22, 2017 by mikeharvey22

[grahame]

Grahame , I honestly do not know what your problem is now.

I don't have a problem. I simply stated that the size difference between 1:160 and 1:148 was obvious. But then people started saying that the difference was due to the models not being exact same prototypes or were not exactly the manufacturers claimed scale, which rather implied the difference wasn't important or didn't matter. But to me, and people like Gerry, the use of 1:160 scale models on a British 1:148 layout isn't acceptable. The size difference is obvious and visible. That's the way I feel about it, it's not a problem.

 

G.

[rue_d_etropal]

If carefully painted the solidness is less visible obvious. Getting them printed in a tranparent(?) plastic might be worth a try.

Big advantage of 3D printing is that it is possible to create them to different scales.

[njee20]

But then people started saying that the difference was due to the models not being exact same prototypes or were not exactly the manufacturers claimed scale, which rather implied the difference wasn't important or didn't matter. But to me, and people like Gerry, the use of 1:160 scale models on a British 1:148 layout isn't acceptable.

 

I don't think anyone has said that, I just think (as does Mike, clearly) that your point could have better illustrated by using models which actually stood up to comparison. It's a bit like trying to illustrate the difference between OO and HO using some Hornby Dublo as the example of the former, it just accentuates the difference hugely and somewhat unfairly. I get this is 'your' thread, but people may stumble upon it who have different standards to you, and Mike's is a better example IMO. That's not undermining your point, or suggesting you're wrong or anything like that.

 

If carefully painted the solidness is less visible obvious. Getting them printed in a tranparent(?) plastic might be worth a try. Big advantage of 3D printing is that it is possible to create them to different scales

 

FUD and FXD both go very white when cleaned IME, not sure what would be better, and those are the only options the seller lists. I'm not about to start trying to draw a 1:148 Focus, I could probably whittle one out of stone (in 1:148 obviously!) quicker.

Edited February 22, 2017 by njee20

[grahame]

your point could have better illustrated by using models which actually stood up to comparison. It's a bit like trying to illustrate the difference between OO and HO using some Hornby Dublo as the example of the former, it just accentuates the difference hugely and somewhat unfairly.

 

 

I think we are potentially going around in circles. I provided a range of examples in different scales to illustrate an obvious effect on size, not to ‘prove’ anything as has been claimed. IMO it matters little that the scales were not exactly 1:160 and 1:148 as in all examples as they were acceptably close in the overall scale of things (and basically within the N family); the tanks were 1:144 and 1:150 (or 1:152) and the containers 1:148 and 1:150 and yet there was still an obvious difference in size despite them being the same prototype. And it also didn’t matter that some of the examples were not exactly the same prototypes (although they were similar – the lorries all being articulated with separate cabs and trailers and the buses all being rear engined double deckers) as they still illustrated a difference in size due to scale. If the smaller 1:160 models had been made to 1:148 scale they would have been larger and closer to the same size as the 1:148 ones even if not exactly the same size. However, they were examples I had to hand. I don’t think I was deliberately exaggerating the differences or using ‘unfair’ inappropriate examples.

 

If carefully painted the solidness is less visible obvious. Getting them printed in a tranparent(?) plastic might be worth a try.

Big advantage of 3D printing is that it is possible to create them to different scales.

 

Maybe, but I've never been taken with 'solid' windows from cast white metal, through resin and now 3D printed materials. Applying paint doesn't really make the solidity less obvious. The paint and the material behind is not transparent.  I think we'd all be a little surprised if the model railway manufacturers starting making coaches with solid windows and locomotives with painted on windscreens. Perhaps the development of a good transparent 3D print material will be a solution.

 

But yes, an advantage of 3D printing is the ease of printing in different scales - just a shame that those options aren't offered when ordering.

 

G.

[BernardTPM]

They look pretty good, Grahame, but I think you ought to enlarge the headlight area on the Cavalier. They were unframed, quite wide and extended practically to the bumper (a chrome trim line gave the effect that they actually did). There's a good picture at the start of this article. The rear panel between the lights was finished in either aluminium or black (sports models).

[Steadfast]

You've done a good job on those especially the two builders lorries (club-of-four type). I was considering getting a few of those but couldn't see the skip version that I quite fancied as being available in 1:148 scale.

 

G.

 

Grahame, nice work on the cars, I've got a couple of Mercs that need finishing.

 

A couple of general points on 3D prints, first, if the model you want isn't available in 1:148, try sending a message to the creator, more often than not they're happy to rescale. Especially those with a 1:148 range already, like RailNscale.

 

Second, if you receive a print that you feel is sub standard, contact Shapeways and they'll look into it. If they agree, they'll replace it. I've had five or six prints replaced like that. One was a complex shape that they couldn't be sure that they could reliably improve the quality of, so they credited me the value of it to my account. A little extra cleaning up, but at that price...

 

Jo

[grahame]

Having found a few pics (although not many) of 2-axle skip lorries from the 1980s with club-of-four cabs, I've ordered a couple (and a Range Rover) in 1:148 scale from RainNscale to see what they are like. Apparently they are supplied with front panel inserts to represent each of the four manufacturers.

 

My plan is to bash/convert one into a skip lorry.

 

G.

[grahame]

I've now purchased a couple of smallish trucks from RailNScale/Shapeways:

 

 

With Club-of-Four cabs they are pretty redolent of the 1980s. These prints have just been cleaned and the parts simply placed together for this snap.

 

G.

[Scottish Modeller]

Hi Grahame,

 

I notice on Shapeways that RailNScale offer the same models in 1:160, 1:148 and 1:144?

 

Which scale did you decide to get?

 

Thanks

[grahame]

N gauge (1:148) ; they're for a British based layout and are appropriately right hand drive.

 

G.

[Gloucester Road]

I've now purchased a couple of smallish trucks from RailNScale/Shapeways:

 

 

With Club-of-Four cabs they are pretty redolent of the 1980s. These prints have just been cleaned and the parts simply placed together for this snap.

 

G.

Think you saw mine, they do paint up nicely

[grahame]

Think you saw mine, they do paint up nicely

Yep, seeing yours made me check them out and get some.

 

My plan is to make and finish the shorter wheelbase one with hiab as supplied, and try to bash and adapt the other in to a skip lorry.

 

G.

[grahame]

I've cleaned, primed, smoothed out obvious ridges as best as possible, and got the main base colours on to the various parts of the hiab flat back:

 

 

Next for the detailing painting. And then assembly.

 

G.

[grahame]

At the same time as ordering the two trucks I added in a Range Rover to try to spread the rather heavy P&P charge (£9) over three models rather than just two:

 

 

Again, I've had to file the ridges down, mainly concentrating on the roof and bonnet, as well as the lower sides which had the worst rendering, to get to this stage. It's not perfect but starting to get acceptable. However, the steering wheel does look rather large and obvious. Hopefully once behind windscreen glazing it wont look so obvious.

 

G

Edited March 3, 2017 by grahame

[BernardTPM]

Probably bets to replace it; steering wheels in the '70s didn't have particularly thick rims. Perhaps modify an etched brake wheel?

Real thing.

[grahame]

Probably bets to replace it; steering wheels in the '70s didn't have particularly thick rims. Perhaps modify an etched brake wheel?

Real thing.

 

S'funny you mention that. I'd already snipped the 3D printed one off and was contemplating whether to use an etched brake wheel or thin disc of plastic. It already looks better with nothing.

 

G. 

[grahame]

Here's the steeringwheelless Range Rover:

 

 

Enlarged close up photos are always very cruel on modelling and this one shows up my painting efforts, but it does indicate some adjustments that I need to try and make to improve it.

 

G. 

[quicksilvercoaches]

This thread made me browse the vehicle models category on Shapeways and I was really disappointed at how little is available in 1/76. Everything seems to be made in HO, N or Z but hardly anything in OO. There's Paul Burkitt-Gray's Maestros, a chap with a range of 70s/80s Fords and some Irish buses but that's about it. I wonder if RailNScale would be amenable to scaling their excellent range up to OO?

[grahame]

Everything seems to be made in HO, N or Z but hardly anything in OO. 

 

Actually there is very little in N gauge (British 1:148) for bog standard saloon type vehicles from the 1970s, 80s and 90s. And particularly so for RTR/RTP.

 

Although there may not be a big choice of 3D printed vehicles in OO/4mm there is a huge range of RTR/RTP in OO/4mm scale and it is possible to ask RailNScale to produce their models in other scales. Check out their website.

 

G

[grahame]

I​'ve undertaken a little work on the flat-back hiab truck. There is a lot more print stratification and some is still very obvious which I need to re-address but here is an interim stage - some paint applied and the parts simply placed in position (not fixed). I thought the front indicators were too small so added new ones from plasticard. They're probably a little big but they do look better than the tiny printed ones:

 

 

Also the latest on the RR:

 

 

G.