"New Perry cavalry castings" Topic

I have noticed in the last few Perry announcements of new cavalry, the AWI dragoon and Napoleonic Russian Hussars, that these are single castings.

I am not sure about this as I paint my horse and riders separate and then glue them together. Maybe I am in the minority here. Perhaps they figures will look nicer as one sculpture? I will be getting the AWI sets, so I will see how they paint up but I am a bit concerned about my painting ability to get the rider's front, belly section done without messing up the horse main or the other way round.

What do others think about single casting cavalry?

Matthew

My guess is it's a casting issue. A separate rider's axis runs from shoulder to shoulder, i.e. that's how he is placed flat in the mould , on his back or indeed front. The axis of the horse runs head to tail, so is placed on his side in the mould.

If the rider has a weapon in the right hand this cannot project forward (which would make the arm and weapon be at 90 degrees to the axis of the shoulders). Do do that would mean the arm and weapon project too deep into the mould and that's not going to cast well. If you look at most 28mm riders, they hold their weapon to the side, not forward.

So the solution to this is to make a sort of hybrid of man and horse, which has only one axis (from horse tail to head), and make the weapon arm separate. Horse, rider and weapon could all be separated, but that would give three rather than two parts.
The issue is that a 3D figure has to fit into a sort of 2D mould.

People might not like single piece horse/riders, but the poses the Perries do this way aren't achievable easily with separate horse and rider without separating the arm too.

As I say though, that's just a guess.

I don't like them. It is much easier to paint horse and rider separately. If I have a choice I'll buy figures that are not cast together.

Guess it can be a matter of economy as a single piece casting takes one mould space, although I confess to know nothing about mould spaces and casting sizes regarding that…

Their single piece castings combined with arm options make for enough difference for the riders from a squadron to look all different. Regarding the painting, it does not seem much of a complication…

I prefer one piece castings.

Relax people. painting a one piece casting is just as easy as painting two pieces and gluing them together.

As I glue the rider to the horse before painting anyway my major concern would be the lack of choice/variety of the horse poses.

I have a lot of the old Hinchliffe one piece castings and they were/are easy enough to paint. For Napoleonics I glue the models together so paint as one piece anyway. I used to do them separately but gave up a year or so ago.

My only experience with one piece castings was the old Hinchlffe OPC range. The definition between the rider's legs and the horse became rather … mushy as the molds crapped out.
I doubt that Perry will have that problem.
Since I almost invariably glue the rider to the horse before prming and painting, I have no problem with the concept, just the execution.

I'm happy with the one-piece castings. I'm often challenged getting a good fit between rider and horse (regardless of whether the saddle is cast on the rider or the horse), and like others have mentioned, I assemble the horse and rider before painting. So for me, one-piece casting is preferable.

I used to paint horses and riders separately until I bought some Perry Turcomen cavalry which were one piece castings. Much easier! Now I glue them together before painting. I found all the paint rubbed off when handling the riders as they didn't have a base.

I'm in the same camp as legatushedlius. In the past I found painting riders was difficult, I had to repaint boots and sometimes pants as they rubbed off with handling.

Now I glue them on and paint as one.

One piece, two piece doesn't matter. Years ago when we all used SAE'sh they were one piece castings.

The big deal will come if detail is lost