First off, I'm thankful for the evaluations on what the machine is/does who are far more technically superior than I in the sheet-metal/engineering realm. I appreciate the insight as that was the point in asking my questions to begin with.

As stated before, this is not the first PE tool I've looked at and I own one of the "big two" and whether working with small or large pieces, I've always been frustrated by the fact that I had to use "something else" to actually make and complete the bend, whether a razor (to start the bend) or a pair of pliers afterwards (complete the bend) to smooth it all out and make it consistent (when needed, sometimes the "banged up" look is in defiance of straight-neat-consistent :-) ). I only use PE to build armor and there are some things that need to have a perfect angle bend on multiple surfaces to make it look right (especially since I don't solder, only CA). This tool, judging by the evaluations presented, adds an element of ease/consistency within its mechanics to both hold the piece in place and also perform the bend unaided by an "extra" tool, surface, force, etc. I'm looking forward to seeing the published reviews on this, if it had been planned by other manufacturers/vendors for bringing to market, that, in my mind at least, gives even more credibility to the concept behind it. Kind of like the kit manufacturers and competing kits released of same/similar vehicles, eh?

WOW-a Ken

Hold up there mate , all I said was that the H&F etc COULD do ALL of these folds ......and I think it was Jeff that said "problamatic" in his.post ....the "money" bit was lighthearted.

Cheers for your comments on the H&F earlier as well

Sorry if you felt personally commented on


Alasdair

Ken Never said that the the H&F / EM aren't capeable of making the bends. I Can say in MY experience that they're Difficult to keep consistant the longer & Thicker the Metal Is.... something that Supports the bend along the full Length is alot more consistant. I Have had the razor slip several times even with a groove (like on the EM)I machined into My Version.

Kan and I say that Both Versions WORK and Both have thier Advantages and Disadvantages.

BELOW is my Personal .02c

Good Ideas always get improved apon..... And the Patetent office (if it so Applies) really has the final Say in the matter

Honestly, I would like a handy little tool like this, I've avoided using photo-etch in the past because I have a terrible time bending the stuff. Now, I've decided to try some photo-etch railings on my little Arizona. My qiestion to those of you have used a tool like this, do they work well for bending railing for curves or half circles? If so, then I guess the next step for me is to decide which I would like best.

Thanks for any input.

Steve

it's going to be more of a segmented circle than round,
Rolling the PE is the best option to make it round.

So, I could do this with by just using a bit of wooden dowel, right?

Dowel, Aluminum Stainless or Brass rod... just about anything the correct diameter will work.....

Hi all!

I looked at the tutorial and it seems to be a very nice tool! Since the designer also post in this thread I have a question for him. It may be stupid but can you also bend thin plasticard with it? Like Evergreen? Well, I'm sure that technically it would work but would this give the same result as brass? I'm asking that because making long L shaped plasticard parts would be very interesting for my future projects! Is this something you have tried? If not could you make a test and tell me/us if the result is satisfying?

Thanks in advance!

Jean-Luc

The Plastic would probably need to be heated a bit first or it would most likely snap (depending on the angle) using wither a H&F / EM or the Fender Bender , As Plastic is a bit less durable than the Brass

For those interested in an independent review of the Fender Bender, Track Link has posted a review of the tool, 4.5 out of 5 stars.

http://www.track-link.net/reviews/k1667

So, If you do 1/350 ships and you need to bend items like a radar tower on a Nimiz(4 sided) or a WWII catapult, and tightly reversing S bends on railings, what folder would be best? Stuff like this(mast is not glued so dont give me crooked comments ) btw, the upper roof railing is actually one piece.




and long angled parts like stretches safety netting thats bent well over 120 degrees:

the long netting runs are the hardest to bend. The HnF does not look like you can bend lengths longer then a razor blade. Does anyone know how long a continuous bend it can make?

I can help you there well I would be able to I hope -----------------------------------edited

Anyway...some options.

H&F come in 2", 4", 5.5" , 8", and 14" inch lengths...This reflects our work in large scale Railways and Architectural models to the tiny 1/72nd aircraft and micro ship construction.

The HOLD & FOLD has evolved from a unique development into the range of tools it is today.
It has only done this as we have received 100s of design change ideas over the years, many implemented to the undying frustration of the factories both in the UK and the USA.....we can't resist Darwin:) and modellers, even if we at times have a slightly Luddite attitude:).

All H&Fs' CAN fold ANY fold you can give it, they fold THIN brass as well as THICK brass. Long parts, wide parts and tiny parts.
ALL edges, inside, outside top and the base unit are available for folding. ALL allow overfolds of 180deg as well.

The H&F will also do the same job on all thickness of brass (very thin in your ship masts), foil as well. (It CAN do this as there is no need for hinges at each end...which BTW, removing them was the original "eureka moment", so don't ask me why we are going back now )
This is the point of the "free-head" design, it removes the hinges that limmit the use of the tool so much

For very long parts (as you can reposition so well and ALL the sides of the tool are open with no hinge or guide pins are in the way.) you can shuffle the part along and do 1/4 folds till completed (if your tool is smaller than the fold you need)
To fold along the WHOLE lenght of the tool, use the outside edge and a hard surface, easy, quick and a better result as the pressure is even. You do not struggle with blades and you can apply more pressure as you are now using your wrists and not your fingers.
You can fold up and over the tool head or down against the base plate to get a true 90deg fold.
Use this method when folding thick brass as well, its just easier

When folding rails for flight decks, pass the part through the tool (again there is nothing to block your larger parts such as guide pins ect...)

For the large (and very thin) masts, well, the micro edges and the sheer quality of fit of the head unit to the base allow you to fold even the most complicated piece of brass the ship guys can throw at you. .

For Plastic card, use a soldering iron and after folding run the iron quickly down the inside edge to "seal" the fold, then use Mek or similar.
So, with size you takes your choice, but if you need a tool to do everything on the fret, and better than ANY other tool then the H&F is the way to go. For yo the 5.5 ich 5-SPEED would be just the job with its 59 folding surfaces

Hope it help you choose

Alasdair

PS
If I may note on comments above.

As for the H&F not being a break...well it is, its' just that it is reversed in its operation.

As with ALL good breaks it holds the metal, how you move that metal has no conaquence at all in the fold quality as long as the correct pressure is applied.
Also important is the distance betweed the "blade" and the head/bed. This has to be set for brass thickness if you have a standard break design. This is NOT the case with the "free-head" design as the "blade" is tremoved from the process.

As for "ease of fold", the longer the lever the better, "rolling" the tool on a hard surface allows a larger leaver as it is held as a whole unit in the hand, thus the fold is easier and tighter than using a blade type lever. I IS true that iIF you use a [box cutter type] blade for the large parts then this is more "problematic" but, why use the incorrect method ??

Blades are there to help folding small and awakward parts, parts that require no pressure but the highest level of control ...eg your finger tips

I'm hoping that someone here at Armorama will post a review of the Fender Bender, maybe even as a side-by-side ala PMMS reviews? Until then, here's my best case understanding of the two side-by-side.

Going off the "What's New" review of the tool here

https://armorama.kitmaker.net/review/1630

and the Small Shop product description'

http://www.thesmallshop.com/prod04.htm

and the one at Track Link for the Fender Bender

http://www.track-link.net/reviews/k1667

and the Ausfwerks product description

http://ausfwerks.com//store/ausfdesign/1604/T.html

this is what I've been able to determine if a comparison were done on the information publicly available:

Price (MSRP):

5-Speed 52.50 GBP or $99.27 USD (Small Shop link has it advertised at $70 USD plus shipping)
Fender Bender $80 USD + shipping

Max bending Length:

5-speed: 5 inches
Fender Bender: 7 inches

Stock Thickness capacity:
5-speed: N/A
Fender Bender: 0.20 inch sheet stock

Bending Method:

5-speed: Razor blade or other hard surface
Fender Bender: Hinged brake

Bending Surfaces:
5-Speed: Alternating uniform long bending faces and finger faces moved by adjusting two screws on the spring-loaded tool head.
Fender Bender: Reversible bending plate with one long side bending face and one variable finger bending face. Moved by adjusting 3 machined brass tension screws.

Max Bending Angle:

5-Speed: N/A
Fender Bender: 120 degrees

Constructed from and weight:

5-speed: Aircraft-grade aluminum, N/A
Fender Bender: Stainless steel, 18 ounces

Guarantee/Warranty:

5-speed: N/A
Fender Bender: 5 years

Vinnie,

Alasdair posted a long description of what the H&F can do, maybe he could fill in the N/A slots since the N/As are for the 5-speed (I couldn't readily find the information on either the Small Shop site, his posts, or any of the reviews, including the Armorama)? All the information in the comparison above came from independent reviews (one from this site) and the product site descriptions of both tools. In the sense that it lists what's known/stated by the manufacturers, I think it still serves a key function...anything over $50 in my opinion is a major purchase regardless of what it is I'm buying, so in the interest of being an informed consumer, I'm comparing the information available on both tools and trying to make the best decision for my needs...which may or may not be the same for other builders out there. I'm going to make a purchase decision one way or the other, but haven't yet, that's why I started the thread in the first place, and to that end it's been very helpful. I'm not sold, yet, on either tool.

If you have an impartial Armorama Staff member willing to do this, perhaps they should contact Ausfwerks directly if they haven't been already? I see that they advertise on the site here in the ads column to the left and have sent out samples as witnessed by the Track Link review, I'd be very interested in seeing the take of the staff on what this tool can and can't do. The review of the H&F 5-speed stated "The Hold and fold ‘5 Speed’ photo etch bending tool is the next generation of an already proven tool that should be considered as a must have for all modelers who work with aftermarket sets.
It is one of those items that until you have it, you don’t know what you have been missing." and I'd be interested in knowing if a similar evaluation would apply to the Fender Bender. The worst thing in the world, IMHO, is to spend money on something only to have it sit on the shelf and collect dust.

I guess I should've waited a few hours...PMMS has done a review as well. :-)

http://www.perthmilitarymodelling.com/reviews/misc/ausfwerks/ausfwerks16-04.htm

It's interesting to note, to me at least, that the Ausfwerks tool and the H&F "Bug" can be used together to compliment each other, especially with some of the smaller or more complex bends or if you get bent into a corner.

Now I just have to do some budgetary shuffling and decide what to do with my Etch Mate...

Ken,

Always fascinating to me to see how RL tools can be scaled down and made to serve the needs of the hobby!

In terms of the number of tension heads/screws, the Fender Bender has 3 with individual springs vs. the 5-speed 2 and the Etch-mate 1. At some point I'm guessing this has to do with the fact that the length in question requires more even pressure/tension to insure the clamped item doesn't slip out and provide a more even bend, but I'm only guessing since I'm neither a design engineer or a metal worker.

One of the frustrations I've always had with the Etch-mate is that, with only 1 head, some of the smaller fingers out towards the edge were more prone to slippage, sometimes even coming out of the clamp altogether. I know that the Etch-mate employs a single spring under the tightening knob and relys on posts to hold the plate in place once it's tensioned down. Would the three-head design on the Fender Bender eliminate this for both short and long bends since the bend is being performed with the brake hinge instead of a blade or other flat surface?

Ken,
First off Ken, please remove your frustrations mate...its Alasdair not Mr Johnston:), stop being so formal:) you even know me so there is no need mate.

Let me say a few things

The "thread" asked questions, indirectly (as some incorrect statements were made) but they were made and the needed answering.
The thread has asked questions as to "why" this and "why" that. Well, as a forum member I have the right to comment. Please understand that it is at times a hard road to follow without being attacked for "selling".

The thread is open and contained basic questions that were being ignored or not understood in their significance. These developed the thread into a discussion on one of the "basics" aspects of the design for "all" tools and NOT just on the Fenderbender. It has been these points that I have commented on and baring the quality question, relate to all tools of similar design and not just the H&F.
I to would rather not see any "diverting attention" by making it into a product vrs product fight. I know that you would not like this as well, so here is hoping the above point is clear and we both are still .

As a trader and modeller who has had more conversations, folded more brass in more sizes and from more complex disciplines that we in armour modelling will ever come across, I feel that I have gained a little knowledge on the subject over the years. Now, some may say that is bigheaded of me, well maybe, I know what I do however because of the conversations I have had with modellers and companies who use and make the product we bend and fold till we cry All I can do is ask you to look past that trader "stain" on my character and try to see the basic technical points I am making.

On the Fendebender, I still have NOT made any comment. What I HAVE said is "why" the H&F odes NOT have the lifting bed design. This is a VERY important aspect of the design for ALL tools of the type. I have explained why it is seen as a disadvantage by us and why we do not use it. I cannot give you reasons why others do use it and will leave that to them.

As for the pic, I can show you one the Romans used, for lead flashing on tile roofs, fingers and all !!, nothing is new Ken . What is important is how the tool is adapted for the jobs it is being asked to do.
The "trick" is to get it to do ALL of the jobs asked of it, which is exactly what it has developed into in our case. Pete Forrest was the guy who did this, not me, we ALL benefit from his "moment" in the bath.
All I have done is listen and to constantly add to/adapt the tools to the demands so can claim nothing, nor do I.

I hope you understand and if you would prefer me not to comment again in your thread, please just say so and I will of course comply.

Alasdair

My error Ken, sorry. I was thinking you were someone else, again sorry.

As of the other stuff, All agreed.

All the best

Alasdair

"No point in going fast if you can't stop"
Paddy Hopkirk"

I sent an email to the designers at Ausfwerks asking the same question above regarding the role of the tension screws and what that meant in terms of what the Fender Bender was capable of in regards to small parts/bends and the tension arrangement.

This is their response:

"To answer your question I can say that you can use 2 of the 3 screws even on the long bends and achieve the necessary tension required to make anything you want.

The Fender Bender can also form parts with the short flange out. This allows the main brass part to be captured in the holddown, making very small bend possible (down to .010" flanges in .005" thick brass). You can also remove the middle screw and slide very long pieces in that way if needed. The hold down is .125" (11ga) 304 stainless steel. So to span 6" and use only 2 of the hold down screws is well within the machines limitations."

This would indicate that the hinged bending arm can be used for even some of the more delicate bends with the same precision as bending larger pieces. This seems to match with the Aber hinge plate bend that Terry Ashley talked about in the PMMS review. I don't know what the dimensions/tolerances are on pieces that the shipbuilders use but this more than covers what would be required in 1/35 scale armor in my experience at least.

I'm glad to see the Armorama review of the tool has been posted and that the evaluation of the tool seems to match what PMMS had to say regarding it's capability. Now I just have to decide between it and the new Tristar and DML releases coming out this month as well.

https://armorama.kitmaker.net/review/1718&adsort=on