Disapointed with my ASM...

[Matthew]

Originally Posted by abby99

It seems to me that the split occurs at the seam, where the upper and lower portions of the mold meet. Perhaps this occurs when the density of the base clay is lower than the density of the edge spot, causing the base clay to creep along the seam before the edge spot clay gets pushed up against the seam. On other misshapen edge spots that I've seen, most of the distortion occurs where the seam is. So that's my guess, but what do I know?

I haven't necessarily formed an opinion to post in this thread yet, but I agree with abby's post. It's a good guess and based on my education and experience - right on. Under all that pressure the material is going to flow into the available space and remember the process is taking separate pieces (base and inserts) and fusing/bonding/welding them together to form a solid structure.

[jdunford]

Not the best picture of it, but check out the white chips (and some of the pink) in this shot:




Some of the edge spots are nearly non-existent when viewed from the edge. But they look full from the face. Does it bother me? No. Besides, these "1¢" white chips are used as prizes and card-covers, so they'll never be stacked anyway.

Notice I didn't have any problems with 414 or 614 DG spots; just the 414 and 614 pink (on white) and black (on pink).

[specksynder]

I think it would be great if after this thread we have a list of color combos/edgespot choices that tend to create this "PHENOMENON."

I find the split spot very unappealing. I find the irregular edge spot ("wavy" look of the edge) very appealing. If I custom ordered ASMs, I would be disappointed if a large portion of the order had split spots. I would change my color choices to colors that are less likely to split if I was aware of my options.

[AlbinoDragon]

Originally Posted by specksynder

I think it would be great if after this thread we have a list of color combos/edgespot choices that tend to create this "PHENOMENON."

That's basically what I'm working on. It'll take a little while (I've only got through the sticky "no replies" list so far. I'm sure most are there, but there are so many threads that there's got to be more.

[jldecarlo]

I haven't replied to this thread yet, either.

I have been a huge fan of the folks at PC.com, and in general have felt that most criticisms aimed at them are from overly anal CTers (and we know who we are, don't we?). That said, I wouldn't be happy with these chips, either. I understand that some of the uniqueness of clay chips is the fact that no two are exactly the same, but this "looks" like a defect.

I was warned when I ordered my 44mm chips that this might happen, especially with the 3U pattern. I thought it would be fine on these chips, but seeing these pics, I may be wrong. I'll just have to wait and see.

I don't know what the folks at ASM are going to do about this, but I have to agree with the OPer on this one.

L

[smitty007]

Originally Posted by Ligarius

But if you're going to offer a service and expect premium prices for it, then don't be half-assed about it and do it right.

You have no proof that this was "half-assed" or not done "right". This is my point, don't throw them under the bus. If it's not acceptable by normal standards, then you always have the right to contact them, and they will replace it. I don't think you should be labeling them as being "half-assed" or not doing things "right".

If these are not acceptable by their standards, then some slipped through the cracks, and you know what, that should be okay if they own up to it and take care of it. If it is something that is considered "normal variance" among the chip manufacturing/collecting community, then they did not "half-ass" it or do anything wrong.

If you're perfect at everything you do, then I commend you for it. Most of us are human, and there is error involved.

[Irish Se7en]

Originally Posted by smitty007

You have no proof that this was "half-assed" or not done "right".

At some point and time I'm going to do business with ASM. I am a fan of their chips and now with the additional edge spots, it has made my decision fairly simple.

That being said, I wouldn't be happy with these chips. I won't use the words "defect," "varience" or "PHENOMENON," when describing what I would term as an imperfection on these chips. In my opinion 25% of these chips are not acceptable and that would be "not done right." They shouldn't have left the building in that condition. I wouldn't be happy if I had a custom set of ASM's (or any other chip) that would probably be my last set of chips, if they arrived like the OP's. Also, these chips aren't cheap and because of that they shouldn't look like the OP's.

smitty I'm not try to attack you or anyone else, I am just agreeing with the OP about his chips.

[smitty007]

Originally Posted by Irish Se7en

smitty I'm not try to attack you or anyone else, I am just agreeing with the OP about his chips.

No offense taken what so ever Irish! I read ya

My whole point of posting was to point out that ASM is a great company with a great product and not to throw them under the bus because of this. There was an early post that seemed to not appreciate PCO/ASM and I wanted to point out that they were a stand up company.

Because of how OCD I am about my chips, I'm sure I would probably contact PCO about this as well and let them know about it and see if there is any explanation.

I was also trying to point out that it seems to be a normal variance according to some more experienced and long standing members here than I am. So, again, blaming PCO for doing something wrong did not seem to fit...

I don't disagree with the OPer that this type of thing would bother me, but I also have to understand that there is a normal variance in clay chip production.

Now, as for how much variance is acceptable, I have no clue. But, from the many responses here, it does not seem to be a so-called defect, so I don't know if you can approach as if PCO did something wrong or half-assed. Maybe more that PCO, and many others, do not see this variance as any kind of issue, so it did not hit their QC radar.

If the question is about the % of chips that show this variance, then I really don't have the answer for that. Again, contact PCO, and I'm sure they will take care of it. Who knows, maybe this will lead them to catching more of these in the future...

[PhilTheThrill14]

I'll ask the question again - and nobody has answered it yet.

At what point is this variation an actual defect? If 90% of the rolling edge edgespot is missing is that defect? What about 50%? You can't just use the fact that there is some amount of edgespot missing is a variance, and therefore any amount is fine. That is just silly - every case has to be looked at on it's own.

I have argued in the past that this variance is acceptable - and it is - but that was when there was not a full separation and it was on a smaller % of chips.

This is not a cry against ASM and their chips - it is a valid criticism against THESE chips and how they look. To blindly defend ASM because they are a great company (and they are) is wrong. If these were BC chips there would be a rallying cry to a protest in front of their office.

[panthershutch15]

Originally Posted by PhilTheThrill14

I'll ask the question again - and nobody has answered it yet.

At what point is this variation an actual defect? If 90% of the rolling edge edgespot is missing is that defect? What about 50%? You can't just use the fact that there is some amount of edgespot missing is a variance, and therefore any amount is fine. That is just silly - every case has to be looked at on it's own.

It's very difficult to measure this in a percentage.

It would have to be a 'look' type check....

IMO, these chips are perfectly fine for being a small percentage of an order. Much more separation would cause me to think the chip was no good, but I would say somewhere around what the chips in the OP look like or better is fine.