Long story short: I am not very impressed. As far as I can see, it offers no benefit over FUD.
It has been touted as being much tougher than FUD resin, but so far it seems to me to be almost equally as brittle and fragile, while at the same time being little cheaper — in fact, for multi-part models, it ends up quite a bit more expensive as they don't allow spruing.
The Austin-Kegresse model broke off the end of one of its 'horns', presumably in transit, but possibly during packing.
The need for support structures during printing means that under-surfaces end up badly pock-marked.
The print-lines are more clearly visible than in any of the FUD models I've received, and there's perceptible distortion in several areas on both models.
|Very visible print lines, and distortions where the model seems to have been shifted on the print-bed during printing.|
|Very visible pock-marking left behind by support structures.|
|More pock-marking — from what, I don't know — and pronounced definition of printing layers on the mud-guards.|
|Print line galore, and a broken-off roller. So much for the supposed 'toughness' of this material.|
|What that white smear is on the hull rear I don't know.|