Castings

[Peter J.Heizmann]

Folks...

There were some openings for additional seminars at the Annual Meeting and thought I would take advantage. There have been many numerous posts with casting questions over the years on this Forum. I think it is time to bring it to the forefront considering so many small foundries that had catered to small quantities of castings have fallen by the wayside.

I will be giving the seminar from 11:30 - 12:45 on Friday, 2/11/05. For the first 45 minutes +/-, will be a discussion on sources, what you the consumer should do when having a part quoted, and, foundry practice to include reverse engineering of a part. Too much to discuss here.

Of utmost importance and a goal is to use this seminar to act as a springboard for the future by way of your input, experiences on this subject, and, so on, to create future dialogue. Somehow, I want to develop a way of communicating all of our discussions on the forum, and, the upcoming seminar to the majority of the AACA membership, of whom, are not into computers and this AACA Forum.

Collectively, let's give it a shot to assist eachother with the growing problem of replacement castings.

Regards,

Peter J. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[HarryJ]

Peter/everybody.....Unfortunately, I will be unable to attend the National meeting; as I had volunteered to host a tech meet for the New South Region of the CCCA that weekend. I would have really loved to have heard the comments and suggestions and been part of it. Please post some of the comments and suggestions on this site. PS Thanks, Packin31 for your referal to the 3D web info.

[Peter J.Heizmann]

Sorry that you cannot make the meeting, Harry.

I'll post highlights here upon my return. Should generate some interesting comments from participants.

Regards,

Peter J.

[Tom M]

The rep for this 3D Modeling Software called me yesterday. I asked him once a model is created can it be sent out to a CNC machine and he stated it sure can.

I thought I purchase it for home to use but when he quoted me a price of $4k per seat. That is a bit high for my home use. But there is a group here at work that may be interested in purchasing it.

[Guest Indiana_Truck]

There are a lot of people restoring old tractors and what ever that would give someone the job of casting parts if anyone decides to and finds a way to do this at a reasonable cost. My problem is I am the only one looking for the part I need or at least if someone else is looking there wont be more than 3 to 5 ever needed of this part. I would take the first 3 myself so I have one for each truck and a spare just in case depending on how much it costs to cast them. I see a market here but don't have a clue how this is done. How many manifolds would it take to make it worth the effort and how hard is it to change patterns and cast a different part? I would like to see someone set up a shop and do this if it is possible.

Bob

[Restorer32]

We have castings done locally in silicon bronze, aluminum, and cast iron on a regular basis. Most of what we've done has been pieces not requiring a core pattern or at most simply a straight passage. Pattern work is very time consuming and therefore expensive. On a tractor manifold you could likely figure on $3000-5000 for the pattern work and core box. The good news is that once you have the patterns the actual parts might each cost several hundred at most. We were quoted $1000 for the core box and pattern work for a '32 Packard taillight post, and this from a local Amish pattern shop. These numbers are educated guesses only. The point is, don't underestimate the cost involved in such an undertaking. Machining costs also need to be considered. Parts which can be sand cast using the original as the pattern are no problem. We'd be happy to assist anyone needing this type parts reproduction. We recently made a pattern and cast an entire cowl in aluminum for an early speedster project. The part was about 3' square and 1" thick with a 4" flange around the top. This presented no problem for our local Amish foundry.

[Guest Ken G]

It has just occurred to me that some of this might be relevant to one of my problems. I'm sorry that this is a bit of a tangent to the main topic.

My Rover has, or rather alas had, a cast aluminum fan (no, it's a Rover, so it's aluminium), which I broke. The only remaining foundry in San Francisco (making bells for the cable cars among other things), said they could not reproduce it except in three pieces which would need to be welded together, an unacceptable solution in my view. I am sure the original (and I have the broken pieces) was in one. Do you think your Amish foundry would be able to do the job, and if so, how would I contact them? Alternatively, does anyone know of a foundry in the San Francisco Bay Area capable and willing to do small jobs in aluminum?

Ken G, 1925 Rover 16/50 (San Francisco)

[Restorer32]

If the part is bilaterally symetrical in any plane it likely can be cast using a sand mold. If you could post a pic I could likely tell you if it is a candidate for sandcasting. We prepare the originals for use as the pattern and handle delivery and retrieval from the foundry. Obviously we try to make a bit of a profit but we aren't greedy about it. Being Amish my foundry man doesn't understand automotive parts. What you receive is an as-cast piece ready for final finishing and machining, though we can do some of that work as well. Important to remember that some shrinkage occurs when using an original as a pattern. The exact amout escapes me at the moment. I'm thinking 3/16" per foot?

[Peter J.Heizmann]

Hi, Ken.

Restorer32 has some good points. Should a casting be utilized as a pattern, the "shrink rule is .125 (1/8")per-foot".

Grey Iron castings (ferritic micro-structure/flake graphite) will shrink by .125 when the casting is cooling. This "shrink" is factored into a pattern's dimensions.

So, when utilizing an "existing" casting as a pattern, obviously, the casting is net-shape, and, the fluid iron when cooling will shrink another .125 per foot.

Of note: If the part is Ductile Iron (pearlitic micro-structure) ductile does not have much, if any, shrink.

IMPORTANT: I have found that the average person when it comes to castings, believes a casting is grey iron just because the part looks like a casting. A steel forging can resemble a grey iron casting. Well, it is a steel forging for a reason - critical strength! When in doubt, request that a foundry analyze the material just for safety reasons.

Should not mean a hill of beans with the average replacement casting, however, will mean a lot if the part is a critically dimensioned internal engine part like a piston, rocker arm, or, whatever.

If an existing casting is going to be used as a working pattern, always emphasize to the foundry machined surfaces as they will have to add roughly .120-.125 machine stock, say, on a flange surface. If they do not, your machinist will have "air" to machine, and, then a manifold type casting will not work.

Restorer32: Are you going to the Philly Meeting? Would be great to meet you. I plan to go over the above and a lot more during the Friday Sand Casting Seminar.

Regards,

Peter J. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Guest Ken G]

Restorer32 and Peter,

Many thanks for your responses. Just as an indication, I attach a picture I took after I had the pieces welded together. Notice the damage to the left blade tip! I then took fright, having calculated the tension in the welds, and so the blades were cut off and the hub filed smooth to use as a spacer for a sheet-metal fan that I made myself. That works but is not very elegant and obviously not authentic. The dimensions are not critical, in that the center (about 3 inches diameter if I remember rightly) and four bolt holes would obviously be cut or at least cleaned up after casting, and the precise shape of the hub is not of significance, so I doubt that any allowance would be necessary for shrinkage The overall ?wingspan? is between 16 and 17 inches. On the other hand, ultimately the whole would have to be reasonably balanced; I suspect static balancing would suffice. What is not totally apparent from the picture is that the blades stand out in front of the hub; they have to clear a protruding part of the engine.

I am not quite sure what you mean by bilaterally symmetrical. Looking at the front of the fan, it is apparently symmetrical, but obviously the blades twist. I suppose if you imagine sectioning it into two pieces through a diameter, the pieces would be identical

Incidentally it used to be said that you could not overheat this car, and certainly the Motometer that I have installed has only once got hot enough for the spirit to appear, and then only by a tiny bit. I suspect that the car would be quite happy without a fan at all, except perhaps idling for a long period.

Ken G, 1925 Rover 16/50 (San Francisco)

[Peter J.Heizmann]

Ken, thanks for the photo. Know this has been a your nemisis for some time.

Up front with you. Your "welded" blade will be out of balance simply by the welds throwing the weight distribution out of kilter. What I cannot see in the photo, is, how "true" is the "round" of the bolt holes. If they are oval shaped from wear, coupled with the weld in-balance, could spell a totally spent part you are trying to salvage.

Fan blades, Pump impellor blades, Ship/boat props are probably the most difficult to cast. The "balance" from the raw casting-through-finished part has to be taken into consideration.

Good case example I can share: Though the Flywheels were in Class 30 grey iron, it is irrelevant to your fan blade. We were the sole producer (foundry within the U.S. of A.) for Honda's high end $$$ "Harmony Lawnmower" for about 5 years. We would take the "raw" casting, spin balance it, the CNC balancer would indicate the out-of-round areas, the CNC controlled drill press would drill areas on the casting face that were throwing it out of balance, and, then finished product. (I said "were" only because after receiving the President's Award from Honda for over 1-M to-print parts, the Japanese economy soured, and, that's where the Flywheels are now. The Mother Country needed work.)

How I see it, and, it is getting late here, is, be certain the blades are aligned as close as possible and as best you can from whomever welded it. The welds can be ground down to "blend" into the contour as best you can, have it spin balanced, then, approach a non-ferrous supplier.

Enough tonight...will table your problem and get back.

Regards,

Peter.

[Restorer32]

I'll be in Philly if the creeks don't rise. We actually set up a small time foundry operation at the shop years ago. Built the furnace, crucible tongs, etc ourselves and were reasonably successful at producing useable castings in brass and aluminum. Learned a lot and finally realized that the economics just wern't there. We've subsequently had hundreds, if not thousands, of castings made for various projects. It's good technology to be familiar with, especially if you restore oddball early vehicles. We even made a set of 32 antique grey iron shutter hinges for a car customer of mine who was also restoring a Civil War era home in North Carolina. Unfortunately, finding a foundry that will use original pieces as patterns and hand cut the parting lines is near impossible. Fortunately we have a good relationship with the local Amish foundry. In fact, I'll be stopping by on my way to Philly to pick up a pair of side light frames they are reproducing for us in bronze for a 1937 Packard hearse. Each technology has its place. Look forward to meeting you.

[Guest Ken G]

Peter,

Thanks for the further comments; yes, I have worried about the fan for a while, but as you will have seen in the thread about oil pressure woes, I have more immediate concerns. Meanwhile, I think I have to reiterate something. What you saw in that photo doesn't exist any more, because the blades were cut off and the hub filed smooth to perform as a spacer for an improvised sheet-metal fan. I think you are implying (and this makes perfect sense) that in order to make a new casting, we have to start with an intact model. I posted the photo mainly to discover whether that counted as "bilaterally symmetrical" and therefore capable of sand-casting. As I think I said before, the man at the San Francisco foundry, given what you saw in the photo, declared that he could not cast it in one piece, even though clearly it had originally been cast in one piece.

If the verdict is that casting is possible, I think given time and effort I could make up a model using fiberglass for the hub with the old blades set into it (with damage filled). It is not critical that the pitch be exact, so if the blades were mounted at slightly different angles from the original, that would do no harm. By the way, the centering is provided by the large center hole that fits over a large cast-iron "shaft", and there is no wear (nor any mechanism for it). The bolts merely hold the fan in place. Incidentally I could balance the final result by grinding the surface of the appropriate blade.

Ken G, 1925 Rover 16/50 (San Francisco)

[Restorer32]

Looks like it could be done nicely with sandcasting. Balancing and centering of the mounting holes might be a tad difficult. Might have to make a slight modification to the area where the blades intersect the hub to facilitate pulling the pattern from the mold. How fast does this fan rotate at highway speed?

[HarryJ]

Ken G......Some years back I personally cast some small, what had originally been die cast parts for my "L" Lincoln using the sand casting technique; obviously, the die cast detail was not carried through in the sand castings. These parts were mounting fixtures that were out of sight on the back side of the dash panel, so detail was not crucial. I coated the original crumbling zinc die casting with epoxy to use as a pattern. By making it slightly larger than the original, I was able to somewhat compensate for cooling shrinkage. It required some machining to bolt on and add holes that were origanally die cast in it. After making this pattern, I went out to a local "art foundry" and with a little instruction from the owner I rammed up the molds, melted the aluminum and poured the parts. I know very little about balancing cast parts so casting these youself may not work as it did in my case; however, balance on these early fans may not be that critical. Fiber glass resin may work as well as epoxy to fill in for missing areas and compensate for cooling shrinkage when using the original part as a pattern. Some machining and hand work may produce a very acceptable copy for your needs.

[Guest Ken G]

Restorer32 and Harry,

Thank you for the further encouragement. Yes, having talked to a friend who knows more about sand-casting than I, it sounds as if the fitting of the blades to the hub might have to be a bit different from the original in order to allow the pattern to slide out of the sand mold, but I don?t think that would present any difficulty. There must be nothing re-entrant. Frankly I am not worried about shrinkage. Indeed it might actually be helpful. The overall size of the blades is totally uncritical so if the ?wingspan? ends up 1 or 2% smaller, so what? If the central hole in the pattern fits the shaft, then with shrinkage the casting will be tight and need easing ? but it would have needed machining anyway, so this merely means that the amount of material to be removed is small. I would not even drill the four bolt holes in the pattern, so the casting could be drilled in the right places. The biggest difficulty may be to machine a flat surface where the fan fits on to the belt pulley, because if that were done on a lathe, you would need enough clearance for the blades, but I suspect there are other ways. I now know a tame retired machinist with a well-equipped machine shop.

The engine runs up to perhaps 3000 rpm at absolute maximum. I don't get near that. From the wheel/tire size and the back axle ratio, I calculated that at 57 mph in 4th gear the engine is running at 3000 rpm (I'm not even sure the car will reach 57 mph). However I very rarely run above 45 mph, and have only once or twice touched 50. Similarly in 3rd and 2nd gears, 3000 rpm corresponds to 37 and 28 mph respectively, and I never get anywhere near those speeds. The lower pulley is somewhat larger than the upper, so there is a step up. So I estimate that the maximum speed of the fan is somewhere in the region of 4000 rpm but I am never likely in fact to reach that.

But all of this is castles in the sand (seems appropriate) at present. I have to solve my oil pressure and possibly bearing problems first.

Ken G, 1925 Rover 16/50 (San Francisco)

[Peter J.Heizmann]

Hi, Ken...

Restorer32 and Harry pretty well covered the casting scenario.

Have 2 points to add:

1. The fan blade is what is considered "off-set" parting. This means it is not a flat piece with a straight horizontal parting line. In other words, one half of the part is made in the drag (bottom section of the mold) and the top half in the cope (top section of the mold).

2. Aluminum, like ductile iron, does not shrink, so, you should have a fairly near net shaped part. The foundry will probably have to make a "follow board" to create the exact parting line, but, not your worry as a foundry person knows this facit.

Good comments from all of you guys. Interesting to say the least.

Regards,

Peter J. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Guest Kestas]

Aluminum shrinks quite a bit!... more than ductile iron. Aluminum has the highest shrink rate of all the common casting alloys.

[HarryJ]

I got the last info for the quote packages.......The block weighs 87 lbs.

[Peter J.Heizmann]

Hi, Kestas...

You are correct about aluminum shrinking (typed before thinking). At one time many years ago, we poured the ZA alloys which shrink, however, not as much as, say, 319 aluminum sand castings that do shrink.

As for ductile, the majority of what we pour is 65-45-12 and has no shrink. We actually use a 1/1 ratio when building patterns for ductile castings and factor in "no" shrink.

Regards,

Peter J. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Peter J.Heizmann]

Thank you, Harry. I made note of the weight.

Peter J. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[HarryJ]

Peter/everybody.... I just sent out the packages to Soligen and Decatur Foundry. For everyone's information I sent the package to Donsco last week. Peter has received it and is working up a response. I would have loved to have attended the seminar at the national meeting, I understand it was quite a good one!

[HarryJ]

Everybody....Today I talked to both Soligen and Decatur Foundry. Decatur Foundry has passed on the option to quote, the job is too small. Soligen on the other hand has an interest in pursuing the subject to the next level. The gentlemen (conference call) I spoke to at Soligen are interested if it is economically feasible. Several options were discussed including only making digital patterns, to actually producing the part on a one off basis to a production run of 100+; and every thing in between. An interesting option was posed by Soligen; they suggested I consider casting the blocks out of aluminum! The blocks were origanlly painted a gray/green color. If manufactured to duplicate the exact shape of the originals and painted they could be indistinguisable from the cast iron. Soligen is quite precise with aluminum. More Anon.

[Guest Kestas]

I just can't see replacing gray cast iron one-for-one with aluminum. Redesigning a part by changing the alloy without checking all the pros and cons is a recipe for disaster.

I assume the caster knows enough to use a hypereutectic silicon-aluminum alloy with other alloy additions to solution-treat and age for strength. It would be folly to use any aluminum alloy in the as-cast condition. Perhaps the casting would be designed for cylinder liner insertion, which would preclude the need for hypereutectic silicon.

Aluminum would need a lot of enhanced risering when compared with cast iron because of the shrink characteristics during solidification, or else on can end up with aluminum that looks like swiss cheese.

Aluminum simply doesn't have the strength in the web area to keep the crankshaft in place. Any engine designer that decides to go with an aluminum block usually has to get very creative on designing a strong bottom end.

The thermal expansion and thermal cycling characteristics can be a serious problem for the engine's performance and life.

I would urge the caster to stay with gray iron. It's just a wonderful material when compared with cast aluminum.

Peter, actually it's the gray iron that has almost no shrink. Ductile iron still has some appreciable shrink. For gray iron I think the patternmakers allow 1/8" shrink per foot.

[Peter J.Heizmann]

Hi, Kestas...

I totally agree with staying with cast iron over aluminum. Mentioned this to Harry.

As for shrink, we utilize pattern maker's rule of 1/8" per foot and have done so forever with grey iron only. Our 65-45-12 ductile we allow for 1:1, no shrink. 80-55-06 we allow only 1/16" per foot and that is subjective depending upon the "section size".

Regards,

Peter. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[HarryJ]

Kestas......I agree with you 100%, replacing the cast iron with aluminum would require a substantial engineering effort (for this application); however, it was an interesting suggestion. I am looking for ideas on how to improve the availablilty of replacement castings for the restorer/collector. Remember me mentioning earlier that Bluetaxi was looking for replacement heads for early twenties "light six" Studebakers? These cars were originally equiped with aluminum heads; from the results of my short conversation with Soligen, these units might be cost effective given their experience with aluminum.

[Restorer32]

Finally found it! I have in my possession a foundry pattern, with core box, for high compression heads for the Overland 4. Years ago I bought a 1920 Overland 4 which an old gentleman had taken apart in 1938 with the intentions of "restoring and improving its performance". He never finished the project (sound familiar?) but he did have a beautiful wooden pattern made of the head, modifying the piston clearances to increase the compression. If there is a groundswell of interest(legions of Overland 4 owners beating down my door)I may cast a few. Anyone interested? Not sure of the interchangeability of these heads.

[bluetaxi]

Sign me up for a Studebaker Light-Six, Model EJ, replacement aluminum head, Harry!

(Please advise price before casting...)

[HarryJ]

Restorer32......This is great! Patterns are 80% of the battle. I wonder if anyone else is sitting on some old patterns that may be of value to restorers.

[Peter J.Heizmann]

Bringing the "original" Castings thread back to the top.

Harry started another identical Castings thread. I do not want to lose the original contributing information/questions.

The following 3 posts were from the 2nd "Castings" topic, of which, I deleted.

Regards,

Peter J.

__________________________________________________

Member

Reged: 08/08/04

Posts: 248

Loc: Atlanta, Ga. Castings

#287389 - 03/31/05 11:21 PM (68.158.194.48) Edit Reply Quote

I received a quote from Donsco a couple of weeks ago (3/18) on my E-mail from Peter Heizmann refering to my post regarding casting blocks for "L" Lincolns. These would be raw castings without machining. I thought Peter would post; however , he has not. To fill in those of you who were following the casting discussion here are the prices he fowarded to me: 5 pieces-$1912.79@, 25 pieces-$712.79@, and 100 pieces $487.79@. He thinks the quote can be fine tuned beyond these figures if they can see a block up close. The grade of iron and the machining cost have yet to be determined. I spoke with Soligen this week and they are still working on their figures. Their quote will include machining. These figures are not outside the range of cost I had in mind; however, I need to know what the machined ready to install reproductions would cost. I need Peter to get back into this disscussion to improve and refine these figures.

Post Extras: Manage this thread

Restorer32

Member

Reged: 07/25/02

Posts: 658

Loc: South Central Pa. Re: Castings [Re: Harry J.]

#287433 - 04/01/05 07:02 AM (152.163.100.12) Edit Reply Quote

Does this cost include the pattern work?

--------------------

1932 Packard 900 Conv Cpe

1932 Packard 900 Coupe Sdn 1955 Jaguar XK 140 DHC 1909 ONLY

Post Extras: Manage this thread

Peter J Heizmann

Member

Reged: 10/19/01

Posts: 1442

Loc: Reading, PA Re: Castings [Re: Restorer32]

#287489 - 04/01/05 11:15 AM (12.29.188.14) Edit Reply Quote

Hi, Jeff and Harry...

Yes, Jeff, the pattern costs are in the casting. The reason I have not posted recently, Harry, is, I am not totally ready to make a complete synopsis of the projects I have been working on for quite awhile. We are looking at investing $30,000 in equipment to make patterns out of liquid urethane and driven by a CAD model. In short, the only cost with this method would be the CAD modeling time. When I am ready, I will post.

Regards,

Peter J.

--------------------

Peter J. Heizmann

1972 Triumph TR-6

[Guest Indiana_Truck]

Sounds interesting so far. Maybe after working on it some more the prices might come down a little? I would be interested to see how much to cast a manifold for my two trucks and if I had to buy 5 to keep the cost down, I would have a spare and two to sell if I ever found someone needing one. I am still following this thread Peter.

Bob

[Peter J.Heizmann]

Hi, Bob...

Nice to hear from you.

Stay tuned.

Regards,

Peter. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[KRK Sr.]

Hello Peter, Glad to see the thread updated. Question: with liquid urethane, and an orig part as the "pattern", do you end up with the same smooth finish as a wood pattern of old, do you have to fill the first mold with clay? or does the final cad pattern create this finish for production runs? Thanks, Karl

[HarryJ]

Peter....Thanks for re-upping the castings discussion. Solving the problem of reproducing cast parts for the hobby is going to take some time and thought.

[Guest Indiana_Truck]

I thought it was about time to bring this back to the top and see if any new progress has been made in the past few months. I have had some good luck and found an engine with all the missing/broken cast parts I was in need of for the last 3 years but this still is something that needs to be worked on for others out there that don't have the time or luck to find replacements.

Bob

[HarryJ]

Indiana_Truck....To update you and other people following this project...Since my last post I have: taken a sample block to Donsco for their perusal, toured the Sloss Sheffield furnace and inquired about their casting program, sent drawings to Oscar Merrow out at Prime Pattern (see his post in the commercial section) for a quote, and talked to several people about this issue. The cost issue for small runs still stands as an obstacle. Oscar Merrow sent me a quote to produce the 1 pattern and eight core boxes necessary to produce a block for the "L" Lincoln. The quote was $12,500. This is quite reasonable for the job. By the way he sent me pictures of some of his work; he is quite a craftsman. From the talk with foundries I have had, 50 or so units could probably be cast for somewhere in the neighborhood of $4,500. This leaves the machining to be accomplished. I have not fully explored cost for this step; however I estimate it may be in the neighborhood of $10,000; bringing the total cost of the project into the vicinity of $30,000, or $600/block. This a very resonable cost if all 50 of the blocks could be liqudated within a year or two. On future runs the costs would be somewhat lower per unit due to amortization of the pattern costs and more rapid machining time due to experience gained from the first run. I am seriously considering persuing this production; however the initial cost are a load for a average guy like myself. For cars that have survived in large enough numbers this avenue is somewhat feasible; however for automobiles of which there are only a few left the cost would be unworkable unless the car was worth a substantial amount of money when restored. To answer your question I am still persuing this goal.

[HarryJ]

Alright folks............We are back on an interesting subject. I have been busy since the last posts that I made on this subject; but, I am still pursuing the subject. This is something the membership can help with. I have been slowly accumlating knowledge on laser reading, CAD design and leading edge casting technologies. As a matter of fact I am scheduled to attend the Design 2 Parts show here in Atlanta coming up on the 28th to 30th of this month.

[HarryJ]

We're getting close.............here is an insight..............note.......once we we read it into a computer and correct it then........

[Lee Stohr]

Hi,

I have worked with ProMetal and can tell you about the process. I drew a CAD model for a custom aluminum bellhousing adapter and ProMetal printed the sand mold and had the part cast in about 7 weeks. I am a believer in this new technology.

[Restorer32]

Very interesting video. What did your bell housing adapter end up costing? How much time did the CAD model take to produce? Producing cores has always been the most expensive part of short run casting projects. Is the total price doable for say 2 or 3 piece runs?