Plastic or Metal?

[Captain Blood]

Some plastics still have mould lines to clean up.

They all do to some extent

The difference is that a quick scrape with a scalpel gets rid of the mould lines on a plastic figure within 30 seconds. Yes, you have to stick their arms and heads on – Personally I enjoy putting them together, but I understand others see it as a chore.
But if I compare it to, for instance, the Footsore Dark Ages metals I'm working on now… Well, they're lovely figures, and generally clean castings compared to some other brands. But they still require laborious cutting and scraping with a scalpel to get the worst of the extraneous casting clag and mould lines off. Then finishing off with a wire brush on the Dremel to remove the residue. Then I have to drill out the hands to take the wire spears (which I first have to cut to the right length). Then clean up their shields - which are not well cast and require careful work to keep the curved edges in shape. Then I have to stick the shields onto the figures using two-part epoxy glue... I'd estimate, on average, it works out at 15 minutes per figure to properly clean and prep it ready for priming.
I can clean up and put together a plastic figure in under five minutes.

I'm not a plastic zealot - I like plastic figures. I like metal figures too. But I get weary of hearing arguments that don't stand up to scrutiny used to diss plastic figures. Like 'they take far too much time and trouble to prepare compared to metal figures'. It's a myth.
Unless you're lucky enough to get a batch of super-clean, one-piece metal castings which don't require any clean up or prep at all, (or I suppose, if you don't care about mould lines and flash on your finished miniatures), then in my experience there's no difference in the time and faff required to clean and assemble a plastic figure, versus the time and faff required to clean and assemble a metal one. And on balance, having done several hundred of each over the last few years, I'd actually say plastic is a quicker, easier and more enjoyable job. But then I'm sure there are people who enjoy the process of cleaning up metal figures too.

[westwaller]

One thing I have noticed about metal miniatures is that often they are cast to order which can mean that you can make an order from a company and receive beautiful casts and then you can order the same again a few weeks later because the company has a promotion or similar on, and receive miniatures that require a lot of work because the mould has effectively been over used due to a higher volume of customer orders.
This doesn't really apply to plastics as they are often ready to go...

And some companies seem to just carry on using knackered moulds to produce their miniatures.

[petercooman123]

I'm not a plastic zealot - I like plastic figures. I like metal figures too. But I get weary of hearing arguments that don't stand up to scrutiny used to diss plastic figures. Like 'they take far too much time and trouble to prepare compared to metal figures'. It's a myth.

This!!

I have plastic miniatures, metal miniatures and resin miniatures. All have their pro's and con's.

I can understand people having a preferance, but to just outright say for example "plastic sucks" is a bit shortsighted.

I don't buy them for the material, i buy them for the sculpt. If i like them i will buy them!

Of course, this is my opinion on the matter, if someone thinks otherwise, it's a free world!

[Antonio J Carrasco]

Regarding the fragility of plastics: it is not so. Plastic figures are not fragile. Quite the opposite. Hard plastic figures can take a lot of rough handling without any noticeable damage, neither to the figure nor to the paint job. Metals, on the other hand, are more prone to suffer damage: broken spears/swords, unglued shields, chipped paint -even when varnished-.

As I said, some plastics are nice while others are so-so. To me Victrix plastics are a joy to paint; their Macedonians are heads and shoulders above Foundry's -I have a soft spot for Aventine Miniatures, though-, but if I must choose between Prussian plastics, -Perry's or Warlord's-, and metals -Front Rank, Calpe Miniatures- metals win hands down.

[aphillathehun]

Regarding the fragility of plastics: it is not so. Plastic figures are not fragile. Quite the opposite. Hard plastic figures can take a lot of rough handling without any noticeable damage, neither to the figure nor to the paint job. Metals, on the other hand, are more prone to suffer damage: broken spears/swords, unglued shields, chipped paint -even when varnished-.
 

It must depend on the plastics.  I've had plastics break during assembly and preparation.  And I've had parts break during handling on games.  (Most of my experience here is with Perry WotR plastics.  I once had a box of Warlord WW2 plastics and those were breaking before I got them off the sprues so just gave up early in that enterprise.)  On the upside, they are much easier to repair than metals.  Plastic cement is some kind of wonder product.

I do agree that paint on plastics seems more durable.  I thought that was because of the primer I use but maybe it's just that way....

[petercooman123]

I am assembling a lot of bolt action stuff, and never had that problem.they are the newer sprues though with arms with molded on weapons. I heard the earlier stuff with separate weapons was a lot more fragile.

Don't. Know if it's true though!

[Antonio J Carrasco]

It must depend on the plastics.  I've had plastics break during assembly and preparation.  And I've had parts break during handling on games.  (Most of my experience here is with Perry WotR plastics.  I once had a box of Warlord WW2 plastics and those were breaking before I got them off the sprues so just gave up early in that enterprise.)  On the upside, they are much easier to repair than metals.  Plastic cement is some kind of wonder product.

I do agree that paint on plastics seems more durable.  I thought that was because of the primer I use but maybe it's just that way....

I also have had plastics broken during assembly or -still worse- while in transport for a game. I am not saying they are unbreakable. What I am saying is that, in my experience, plastics are more durable than metals. Weakests points in metals are bayonets, spears and shields. It is relatively easy and frequent -again, for what I have observed in my own miniatures- that a metal shield becomes unglued, while plastic shields must be deliberately forced from the miniature in order to become unglued (actually, I am using plastic shields with metal miniatures in some of my figures, and I have found the results satisfying). It happens the same with spears and, my very particular hate, bayonets. If there is something in this hobby that I really, really hate is to repair broken bayonets.

Mind that I am a huge fan of metals. My Late Romans are all Footsore and Gripping Beast metals; I have a GB plastic Late Roman plastic set that I use for customize my metal figures, spare parts, ecc. It is not like I am fascinated by all plastics (Victrix is the only producer I really like, although some Perry sets are not half bad either), but for durability plastics beat metals... maybe  not in 3,000 years from now, but then I doubt we will be around to discuss it, won't we?  

[AdamPHayes]

As I said, some plastics are nice while others are so-so. To me Victrix plastics are a joy to paint; their Macedonians are heads and shoulders above Foundry's

And there is the classic “it’s all in the eye of the beholder” example. I have both makes of Macedonians and it blows my mind that anything could be preferred to the Foundry offerings. That doesn’t mean Antonio is mad, bad or even wrong. It’s a complex combination of aesthetic tastes and craft techniques employed and these feed into a very wide range of preferences and practicalities.

When people ask for advice a little less black and white in our opinions might be more helpful and lead to less of these threads turning into factional disagreements based on something as banal as the material our toy soldiers are moulded from. The choices in many historical periods in 28mm is pretty amazing right now but what each figure weighs shouldn’t be the overwhelming factor in making a recommendation.

[Antonio J Carrasco]

And there is the classic “it’s all in the eye of the beholder” example. I have both makes of Macedonians and it blows my mind that anything could be preferred to the Foundry offerings. That doesn’t mean Antonio is mad, bad or even wrong. It’s a complex combination of aesthetic tastes and craft techniques employed and these feed into a very wide range of preferences and practicalities.

When people ask for advice a little less black and white in our opinions might be more helpful and lead to less of these threads turning into factional disagreements based on something as banal as the material our toy soldiers are moulded from. The choices in many historical periods in 28mm is pretty amazing right now but what each figure weighs shouldn’t be the overwhelming factor in making a recommendation.

My children would beg to differ. Particularly, the "wrong" part! 

On a more serious note, I agree with you that it is on the eye of the beholder. I like Foundry and actually have a couple of taxeis made up with Foundry miniatures. It is that I like Victrix most. We are living in an age, wargaming-wise, when we are spoiled for choices. It is a golden age indeed. One thing I like of LAF is that even the "heated" debates are very polite, though.

[vodkafan]

Metal is forever, not just for Christmas 

[N.C.S.E]

I must add my support to the metals camp. I like plastics for their ease of conversion but I have serious issues getting a satisfying paintjob on plastics. Metals by contrast I always find, with a bit of effort, to be satisfying when complete. Plastics I work hard on and still find the finished product dissatisfying. Your mileage may (and I've seen stunning paintjobs irrespective of the medium) vary, but that's my experience.

[JamesValentine]

I find plastics are great for getting a force put together quickly and relatively cheap. and the quality is always improving and would likely always make up the majority of forces I do from any period.
but I still love metals.

for me metals just paint better, the details are usually 'chunky' and so more obvious than on plastics so its just allot easier to paint them up. I find they are better for units you really want to stand out and be proud of.
its no problem if the 94th Lancashire militia stuck at the back are plastics and not as well painted. so long as the 1st royal kings corp of flying Pegasus knights are gleaming and and splendid

[Cubs]

I am assembling a lot of bolt action stuff, and never had that problem.they are the newer sprues though with arms with molded on weapons. I heard the earlier stuff with separate weapons was a lot more fragile.

Don't. Know if it's true though!

Yeah, there was an odd situation with Warlord's early Bolt Action plastics where the models were sculpted in a 'cartoonish' style with exaggerated extremities (as a few ranges do) whereas the separate weapons were sculpted as exactly scaled versions of their real-life counterparts. It made the weapons very fragile and delicate and they looked like toys in the comparatively swollen hands of the soldiers.

If the newer Airborne models are anything to go by, it looks like Warlord no longer do this and the problem has been sorted.

[petercooman123]

I hink they look ok now:

[wrgmr1]

Congratulations on your Christmas present Lord Z!

As some have stated the sculpt is what matters to me. I agree with A.J. Carrasco in that Calpe and Front Rank make the best Prussians.
I have a box of Perry dragoon’s, the faces are flat, especially the noses, which look like a boxer has had it flattened and broaden out.
My style of painting does not work well with that.