G
Guest
·The community that collects metal cars, in this case, 1-18 scale refers to them as "diecast". That's because the moldings are typically a zinc alloy cast in a die, thus, diecast. However, is the term "diecast" becoming less relevant in terms of collecting 1-18 scale, or other scale, metal cars? I think (and hope) this will become an interesting discussion.
If you look at some high end companies, the diecasting process is becoming a smaller portion of a model. Take CMC for example. They use pressed copper for most of their body panels, and honestly, even some of the glue on/screw on accessories (like a mirror) are actually pressed also - not diecast or even cast. Exoto is going towards this trend also, utilizing pressed panels. Think of it as a high tech way of making a tin plate car if you will, as an analogy.
Then, there are 1-12 scale models, like as an example, Corvettes, which have an accurate fiberglass body. How long will it be before 1:1 fiberglass bodied cars are accurately replicated in fiberglass in 1-18? It wouldn't be too difficult. AutoArt could do that with their Corvettes? Another example would be Exoto's 1902 Ford 999 racer. Original plans were to make the chassis out of actual wood. That didn't happen, but from what I understand, this simulated wood is not metal.
Do you gals and girls see where this is leading? It seems the term "diecast" is a generalization of a term used to describe metal cars, actually of all or most scales. But as we all know, new technologies start off expensive and as they become cheaper to make with new technologies, the results are cheaper...thus, it wouldn't neccesarily be more expensive for a budget model company to manufacturer in a new technology. Yes, pressed plates aren't new technology, but their somewhat new to mainstream diecast cars.
So, at least from my standpoint, I see a trend where diecast cars will no longer be "diecast"...what is everyone's thoughts? And in all honesty, is say, the CMC Audi Type C and CMC McLaren technically diecast or not? I'd say no...
I'm hoping this topic will generate some good discussions!
If you look at some high end companies, the diecasting process is becoming a smaller portion of a model. Take CMC for example. They use pressed copper for most of their body panels, and honestly, even some of the glue on/screw on accessories (like a mirror) are actually pressed also - not diecast or even cast. Exoto is going towards this trend also, utilizing pressed panels. Think of it as a high tech way of making a tin plate car if you will, as an analogy.
Then, there are 1-12 scale models, like as an example, Corvettes, which have an accurate fiberglass body. How long will it be before 1:1 fiberglass bodied cars are accurately replicated in fiberglass in 1-18? It wouldn't be too difficult. AutoArt could do that with their Corvettes? Another example would be Exoto's 1902 Ford 999 racer. Original plans were to make the chassis out of actual wood. That didn't happen, but from what I understand, this simulated wood is not metal.
Do you gals and girls see where this is leading? It seems the term "diecast" is a generalization of a term used to describe metal cars, actually of all or most scales. But as we all know, new technologies start off expensive and as they become cheaper to make with new technologies, the results are cheaper...thus, it wouldn't neccesarily be more expensive for a budget model company to manufacturer in a new technology. Yes, pressed plates aren't new technology, but their somewhat new to mainstream diecast cars.
So, at least from my standpoint, I see a trend where diecast cars will no longer be "diecast"...what is everyone's thoughts? And in all honesty, is say, the CMC Audi Type C and CMC McLaren technically diecast or not? I'd say no...
I'm hoping this topic will generate some good discussions!
