>diecast >all this >$350 redpill me on buying this

Buy it or don't, no one cares

>>5823645
It'll probably be worth it if you're a big Iron Man fan and don't own the old plastic versions.

Looks to have some amazing engineering and features carried over from the recent 1/4 Mark 43, don't see how you can go wrong if you've got the cash to spare.

File: dense shit.jpg (31KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 640x480px

diecast is shit.
Horrible material that doesn't hold paint unless it's gloppy as fuck and even then it can and does chip off.
So it looks very dull, as in the paint is always overly thick looking and doesn't carry fine details. Which is why various companies use plastic on parts that are supposed to have fine details.

The only reason companies use diecast at all, is not only because it's cheaper to do than plastic, but because most consumers equate expensive with heavy. Thus, a lot of suckers will pay a premium for heavy shit.

>>5823836
>an entire industry is wrong, trust me, I'm an anonymous nobody with bullshit hyperbole opinions about things that I don't understand

>>5823850
well the OP does say redpill

>>5823850
look at this newfag who wasn't around the past three years when there were countless links to articles and manufacturers talking about the costs!
Sorry if i didn't save any of them, as I forget that newfags like yourself are completely ignorant and would need proofs

>>5823897
>an entire industry is wrong and my argument hinges on me calling someone a newfag twice, you can trust me I swear

File: then they're expensive PUT THEM BACK.png (267KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

267KB, 640x427px

>>5823836
>Thus, a lot of suckers will pay a premium for heavy shit.

File: finecast1.jpg (85KB, 884x882px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 884x882px

>>5823899
You're such a newfag.

Here's a link where people are discussing the trade off and costs
https://www.engineeringclicks.com/forum/threads/plastic-moulding-vs-aluminum-moulding.2700/

Want to read more?
http://www.fieldingmfg.com/frequently-asked-questions.asp
>Average tooling for a zinc die-casting part can run from $5,000 to over $20,000 depending upon complexity and additional cavities if we're trying to drive high volume.
>Average tooling costs for plastic molds range from $3,000 to over $50,000 depending upon complexity and cavitation.
Guess how much more expensive something that's really detailed will be in plastic?

Diecast is shit for toys and you're only paying for the weight like a good chump who doesn't care about fine details.
Everyone who's into modeling already has known the story for over a decade, if not a century.

>>5823929
>an entire industry is wrong because a material is less expensive to use in production than another, even though it has a large price overlap with plastic molds which I completely overlooked and which blows apart that segment of my argument, but I have claimed that you're a newfag so I win

File: TMNT-SH-Figuarts-Diecast-Feet.jpg (49KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 960x720px

>>5823942
>an entire industry is wrong
You don't even seem to understand what's wrong about it.
No company anywhere says diecast is better than plastic or that its paint is better.
Companies use it solely because they'll get a higher profit margin from using cheaper materials and easier production, and people like yourself will pay a premium for "dat weight"

You sure as shit will not see them use it on areas that require high detail and everyone here who owns diecast anything will tell you about it chipping or the paint looking overly thick.

So i don't get where you think I'm saying they're wrong for using it, because they're totally right in making money off of retards like yourself.

File: Finecast-Dante-Review-2.jpg (67KB, 800x616px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 800x616px

>>5823942
btw, that's funny that you think there is any overlap.

If you look at their prices, notice that while plastic is cheaper than diecast with simple pieces, it ends up being more expensive based on the complexity of the piece.
All things being equal, the same detailed piece will end up being more expensive with plastic than it does with diecast by over 2x.

Nevermind the fact that plastic is much easier to paint than diecast, thus giving you a better looking toy.
Nevermind that plastic will have better details as well.

you guys are forgetting one thing about diecast:
it is really, really nice to touch

>>5823955
OP pic doesn't look anything like that globby mess

>>5823645
Metal on metal isn't good for joints. It should be metal on nylon (constrained by metal).

>>5823955
Not him, but your die-cast mushy argument doesn't matter when it's things like solid plates and such at a 1/6 scale. it's not very fine detailing.

>>5823963
that's because it's a finished piece and not something left incomplete straight out of the molds like models

and the fact that any legitimate company who cares about quality will use plastic for pieces that are supposed to show fine detail, because diecast is shit.

>>5823972
Yeah, it's true, but that's exactly my point. Toy manufacturers know that diecast is shit for holding detail and they're only using it for DAT WEIGHT to make you pay more for cheapo metals that cost less than plastic pellets.
Nevermind the fact that using diecast and painting it over opens you up to getting it to chip and flaking, because of the poor hold the paint will have. No matter what paint or trick they use, that paint on diecast is still easier to chip or flake than on plastic.

what's the point of sperging about 'lost detail' when HT diecast figures clearly do not lack?

File: 1437370209875.gif (2MB, 350x150px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 350x150px

>>5824019
Because it's all a vast CONSPIRACY!!
They just WANT you to think you're getting a better product so they can RIP YOU OFF!
(((Hot Toys))) gets a major chub every time they gyp you out of plastic!!

>>5823645
I have most of the Iron Man die casts and they are great.
Added this one to the list too.
If you like Iron man/this suit and can afford it, then shoot it. It's good.

>>5823645
>not Mark III

>>5824048
those thunder thighs turned me off

>>5823992
Anon, you should learn not to repeat yourself.
You've already made your statements about paint chipping and what not. That's enough.

File: 1419381283199.jpg (103KB, 569x802px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 569x802px

>It's an "anon spurgs about what a toy is made of episode."

>>5823836
>its the die-cast hating anon

Still spreading your gospel, I see.

>>5823836
Is all this hatred for die-cast caused by the fact that your dad is a cylon who abandoned you?

Finally I can buy this and never have to buy another fucking movie Iron Man again. The movie designs peaked with this one, as far as I'm concerned.

>>5824641
Mark VI best waifu

Everyone else a shit

>>5824641
>>5824649

>inb4 contrarians who prefer Mk4 because circle chest and less silver

>>5824649
>>5824653
4 is my favorite and the best looking, but it's hard to argue with the enhancements 6 has in the LED and blasters.

Wouldn't buy. That Stark head is pretty blurry desu, senpai. Needs to thin his paints and shit.

>>5824932
also, nubs on the arms

why does he have gundam beam sabers?

File: IronManChemicalLaser2-IM2.png (2MB, 1920x816px)

2MB, 1920x816px

>>5825033
Mark VI has arm mounted lasers

>>5825042
huh, neat.

>>5823836
Not necessarily agree with you, but I always found annoying how much people are obsessed with how heavy a toy is.

>>5825064
Its the feel.

It's primeval instinct. A heavier baby is the sign of a healthy baby. A heavier apple contains more apple than a lighter one. A heavier beast has more meat to survive on than a light one.

File: HOT-12-10178-2.jpg (108KB, 450x600px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 450x600px

>>5824653
>>5824649
>>5824641
>There are anons IN THIS THREAD that don't think that Mk 33 is the best armor

>>5825095
It's as if people have different tastes.

>>5825095
I'm
>>5824641
and Mk33 is actually the only HT Iron Man I own so far. I love that design a lot, too, and it's probably my second or third favorite. It feels like a proper successor to VI; like if not for IM3's different route it would've been the next major suit. . The only thing that holds it back is that I think it needed one or two more revisions to really make it feel like a lead design.

>>5825113
Kind of sad that the Mk 42 was the lead design instead of Mk 33.
The Mk 42 is kind of boring, just all a flat-ish mustard gold.

>>5825118
42 is my favorite of all iron men. I prefer the non standard red iron men suit.

>>5823645
>diecast
There's hot wheel size cars that are diecast. big whoop, its fucking diecast, not plantinmum
>all this
all what? alt hands, battle damage parts, movable armor and a stand? uh... okay. cool accessories but I can't imagine those pieces are very expensive on their own.
>$350
so let's see. its a doll with a highly detailed face sculpt plus diecast and some accessories. hm. seems fair to me I guess. you could always get three and a half ounces of weed for that, or pay some hookers to do a really nice lap dance for you, or you could buy a diecast armored doll. ok.

anyone who buys high end toys is a moron.

File: 5599629234_4d022c2ff8_b.jpg (307KB, 816x1024px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 816x1024px

>>5825095
>silver not gold
>fat tony cheetoh mt dew belly

n-no thanks

they wouldnt mess with perfection (pic related) if they didnt have to sell toys constantly

File: watchout.jpg (36KB, 625x626px)

36KB, 625x626px

>>5825155

>>5825161
I'll be so happy when the value of the older plastic ones get slashed like the MK III's did. The collector tears will be delicious.

>>5825155
>I'm a poorfag : the post

>>5825170
to be fair $350 on a 12" doll is pretty insane. i say this as someone who has several 1/6

>>5825208
>they usually cost around $800 in my country
>i know as a fact i have more than you
>i even have the big ones and ones with thrones
>not a single feeling of money wasted
im not even a richfag

Well, if you are buying for "dat die cast" do be aware that the die cast hot toys figures are about 80%plastic to 20% diecast

geez, why do so many people get so butthurt when they find out that diecast is mostly about bilking people and is a pretty poor material for toys?

>>5825424
fuck, are you serious?

>>5825409
>yfw house fire/mass flood/sinkhole

>>5825409
that doesn't make it less insane. you will never be able to recoup what you spent on your collection for example, unlike western collectors, because you live somewhere with a terrible exchange rate.

as nice as figures are, they are useless luxuries. you've got to take care of yourself financially in the long term as well.

File: hotwheels_target.jpg (752KB, 1200x900px) Image search: [Google]

752KB, 1200x900px

>>5825523
diecast is a gimmick with these toys and it's only there to get customers to pay more money.
Any company worth their spit will make most of the detailed pieces in plastic, since metal a lot of detail can be lost from the type of thick paint needed to coat metal well.

At least when a company like Mattel makes diecast crap, they're not lying to you on how cheap it is to produce.

File: RobocopHD225_zps6f30d92b.jpg (64KB, 682x1024px)

64KB, 682x1024px

>>5825424
>>5825531
Pretty much. Take Robocop for example, here's an estimate of what his metal content is. Even though he looks like all his silver bits are made of metal, its just some areas.

Not that HT is exempt; plenty of companies just put diecast in choice areas to give it weight. I have the Max Gokin Big O, and his diecast is limited to just a handful of spots.

>>5823850
>companies are definitely not trying to milk people as much as they can, companies are your friend and will gladly point out your misconceptions about production costs so that you can get a cheaper deal

>>5825531
The Diecast MKIII is mostly all in the legs.
It's not an entire metal Iron Man like they make out.

>>5825643
i knew it's not all metal, but i'll sperg out pretty hard if the red armor bits are not diecast on top.

anyone have a diecast mark 3 on hand?

>>5825649
Yes

>>5825704
how much is diecast on it?

>>5825741
The legs, not the feet or the waist though.
Couple of metal pieces on the back flaps but everything else feels plastic to the touch.

>>5823929
>implying capital costs increase operational costs
>implying they can sell more metal than plastic

File: die cut 8bit vinyl limited edition.jpg (38KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 250x250px

>>5826128
>implying they actually are planning on doing mass releases and aren't just limited releases that go for tonnes of monies to a tiny minority who like "muh weight"
Is diecast the toy equivalent of nostalgiafags who like their music in vinyl?

>>5825531
He's being pretty disingenous. The lowest amount of Diecast to date was in the Robocop figure, but that was largely due to it having a load of electronic talking parts in the torso and to allow for an all-plastic battle damaged retool.

The Iron Man figure with the lowest amount is probably the III, the 42, 43, Iron Patriot and War Machine Mk II are stuffed with it. At least 50% of the figure is metal.

The Iron Man Mk III is the only truly bad Diecast release. All the others have features the regular releases don't, apart from the metal content, mostly in terms of engineering and articulation.

Just report and hide his posts, he has nothing constructive to say other than 'WAAAAHHH DIECAST'.

We get, you don't like it. You've made your point repeatedly and abstrusely derailing multiple threads in the process, and most people still disagree with you. Go outside and get some air.

File: Zinc tin lead image.jpg (60KB, 495x280px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 495x280px

>>5826181
>anyone speaking negatively about diecast is samefag
Is this really the only defense you can make?

I mean, you act like diecast isn't cheapo shit metal that is some of the lowest quality metals you can use and that including more of it somehow increases the quality, despite the fact its known paint and detail is negatively affected by using diecast.
Diecast isn't a precious metal, dude. It's not gold, silver, nor even aluminum. It's mostly zinc and tin, with maybe copper in it.

Adding more diecast crap only increases the problems the toy will have.

>>5826181
>abstrusely derailing multiple threads in the process
>thread is about "redpill" on diecast
>most people still disagree with you.
As this thread has proven, it's ignorant people who know shit about manufacturing and only care about "dat heft"

File: autism embodied.jpg (81KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 720x540px

>>5823949
>"dat weight"
>>5823992
>DAT WEIGHT
>>5826144
>"muh weight"
>>5827897
>"dat heft"

seriously kill yourself.

>>5827897
>Thread is about 'redpill' on diecast

>>5823645
>Redpill me on buying this
>BUYING THIS

No, it wasn't. Nobody asked you derail this thread with your crippling autism.

what is the best iron man and why is it figuarts?

>>5827929
>herp derp
point still stands.

Don't bother buying an overpriced toy just because they using substandard materials and charging a premium for it.

>>5827980
>gets called out on bs
>"here derp" as a rebuttal
>b-but muh point

Honestly, get a diecast dildo and fuck yourself hard tonight.

File: youmad.jpg (15KB, 200x297px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 200x297px

>>5828013
>>gets called out on bs
>prove point that diecast is less expensive than plastic
>prove point that there are more problems with diecast than plastic
>prove point that I directly responded to OP's question
>BS
am not bizzaro day today?

Or are you just being a little shit that thinks because you're made fun of that that invalidates everything that was said?

>>5828032
Look, man.
You'v been rallying behind your so called "reasons" why die cast is bad for ages now. You want us to understand why die cast is a bad material for toy construction, yet you're faliling to understand why its liked. You're labelling people as idiots or morons for buying something they think is worthwile. Why can't you just accept the fact that people will buy things that are made of die cast and pay the so called "premium" price? Why are you so hellbent on getting your point across when a lot of us already know it? We know die cast is shit. Most of us have suffered through die cast figuarts ankles. Most of us have suffered through paint scrathing off at so much as a breath falling on a figure.

Have you even handled a hot toys die cast figure? Have you ever touched a SIC? Are you just not aware that not all manufactors are brain-dead idiot and are able to apply die cast properly? Die cast can benefit a figure if place properly. Put zinc on the legs/feet area of a figure, it balances it. Put die cast in the internal frame of a figure, it strengthens it. Put it on the chest of a back heavy figure, it changes its center of gravity so that it can balance better. There are benefits to it and most companies that offer the so called "premium" figures with metal in them have had years of experience to perfect it.

I see all of your points about how bad die cast can be and I do agree with them. But you have to get your head out of your uptight ass and also see the benefits of it if you want any form of respect or warrant towards your point of view. You're just a hostile, insecure child hellbent on making everyone see the world like you do and you can't stand the fact that people have different points of view.

>>5825155
>3 and half Oz of weed for 350 dollars

You must be getting some dog shit.

>>5828069
Either this is covert SubjectAnon, or we've got another fuckwit who's intent on shitting up the board to a similar degree.

Autismo here seems to think he's some enlightened 'elite' collector who knows about the evils of zinc-based pot metals and must spread the gospel far and wide to the nonbelievers.

The reality is, we all know diecast is cheap metal. We don't care. Doing diecast well is an art unto itself, some people like the cold feel and weight of it, others don't.

One single post, once, was sufficient for this sperg to make their point. Instead they've taken it upon themselves to shit up thread after thread stating the obvious and acting like it's a crime against humanity.

File: fact_9fc646_4591155.png (161KB, 502x317px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 502x317px

>>5828092
No it's the real subjectanon. He's pulled this "diecast a shit" bait before. lots of people dislike diecast, but he gets extra niggery about it.
Just ignore him. There's nowhere this discussion will go, except in circles, like a floater turd getting flushed.

>>5828102
The mods deleted my earlier post calling him out, and gave me a 'low quality content' warning.

One day they'll learn.

File: metal-objects-cold-casting.png (341KB, 600x372px) Image search: [Google]

341KB, 600x372px

>>>5828069 muh feels about weight trumps all negatives about diecast, thus UR RONG!!!
Cool opinion, but that will never negate why diecast is used mostly as a gimmick to increase the price of an item despite being cheaper to produce and being a less quality material for toys.

>You're labelling people as idiots or morons for buying something they think is worthwile.
huehuehue
I've only called people idiots and morons for doubting the FACT that diecast is a shitty material.

>Are you just not aware that not all manufactors are brain-dead idiot and are able to apply die cast properly?
Here's the thing, if they actually cared about balance, why not insert it INTO the figure, and continue using quality plastic like they should? Instead, they continue just molding pieces from it, because consumers just like "dat feel." As shown in this thread, people actually seem to believe that diecast is a premium feature or even valuable metal.

If any company actually cared, they wouldn't be using diecast in the first place. Look at Mezco at how they're using a composite metal and even advertise it as "REAL METAL" instead of using diecast.
There are other alternatives, which don't even enter your brain because of how limited your knowledge is. They do not have to use diecast to do anything that you're speaking about, but that would cost more money, huh?

So nope, they continue to use cheap production methods, with cheap zinc/tin shit and call that a premium instead, because they know consumers will eat it up regardless, because as shown in this thread, most of oyu don't know any better.

And yes, I've held pretty much every line /toy/ talks about, because i actually go outside and see things in person.

>>5828286
Subjectanon your hateboner for diecast blinds you to reality.

You do realize that diecast is an alloy and not all diecast is of the same quality right?
So how can you assert that diecast is always cheap shit?
The only requirement for diecast metal is that it's able to be melted down and go through the injection molding process.

pls stop spreading your lies and false information.

File: one dollar diecast cars.jpg (22KB, 400x191px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 400x191px

>>5828909
Wow, you're really deluded as fuck.
It's like when i was saying it was too late for Figuarts Stormtrooper to have its helmet changed and you guys kept on crying that Bandai would TOTALLY change it even though it would take longer htan the 3 months it had to be released.

Let's get something straight.
Diecast is MEANT to be cheap. It's cost effective and very easy to do. It's not meant to handle the higher quality metals.
The better metals are meant for something else, like making cars. And you're really trying to argue (based on ignorance) that a toy factory is using tooling meant for automobiles (a much hotter process) instead of toys?

You might as well be arguing that McDonalds uses high quality prime beef for its hamburgers, because that's just as likely.

Everytime i argue with shits lke yourself, it's like you're always wishing and hoping for the slimmest chance that the opposite is possible. If i didn't know you guys were deluded, I'd swear yuo were just being contrarians.

If any company were actually using higher quality metals, they'd actually advertise it, because why else would you spend more and not make it known?
Just look at Mezco and how they advertise they're using a more expensive process.

>>5830145
What is it with you and retarded food analogies?

There's only 3 possibilities here subjectanon

1. You're lying
2. You're willfully ignorant
3. You know it's not true, but keep spouting it for (you)s

This is not debatable. I'm not here to argue with you, I'm just here to tell you that you're wrong.

File: coddled babby.jpg (243KB, 1051x1017px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 1051x1017px

>>5830190
>doesn't understand analogies
>can't refute anything
>just name call instead
Why get angry at me that diecast is a cheapshit process using inferior metals and that you're not getting your money's worth?

It's not my fault that the truth is a harsh reality that goes against your coddled beliefs. Get angry at the companies that are ripping you off.

>>5830231
>tl;dr ver: I'm wrong and I'm angry that I'm wrong
eat a dick

File: IMG_4089.jpg (957KB, 1496x2290px)

957KB, 1496x2290px

>>5830145
>It's like when i was saying it was too late for Figuarts Stormtrooper to have its helmet changed and you guys kept on crying that Bandai would TOTALLY change it even though it would take longer htan the 3 months it had to be released

If anyone still doubted, yep it's SubjectTranny. Abandon thread.