In my custom machine I use multiple smaller driver boards, with some mounted under the playfield. There are several advantages, setting aside cost savings by having a lot less wire, I think one of the big ones is troubleshooting and repair. In my case each board has two banks of eight solenoids (one board is configured as a lamp matrix, so that is al little different) If a failure occurs to a driver board it is quicker to identify the cause, since it likely only 8 or 16 of the solenoids that would be impacted, not the whole machine. It is much easier to then swap a board to do quick trouble shooting. Doing something stupid (e.g. dropping a screw driver with high power on), would likely damage only one board or half of one board vs an entire driver board controlling all powered items. The cost of replacing a board is significantly less (< $100) which can let you get back up and running quickly before dealing with repairing a board.

One downside to mounting the boards under the playfield is the increased risk of the board being damaged by something coming lose under the game or from the increased vibrations, etc. from game play. Boards in the backbox are far more protected in that sense. My game has only seen several hundred plays, so too early to assess the risk of being under the playfield. However, there are plenty of games with boards mounted under the game (opto boards, motor boards, eddy boards, etc.), and I am not really aware of that being a big issue relative to damage and failures.

While ultimately it is the same amount of heat, the smaller boards are spreading that, so while the total is the same, with it not being so concentrated, I would expect that heat inducing failures would be reduced. Having said that, we have already seen over time efforts done to reduce this (e.g. bridge rectifiers being replaced by discreet diodes).

Only time will tell if this design is more reliable.

No such critter.

You have a ball running around in there at 3 or 4 miles an hour. Sooner or later, something will break.

LTG : )

But Stern's "The Pin" was supposed to be maintenance free, you can't even open to fix it.

Did you hear?? Jersey jack is releasing WOZ in miniature version! Here is my 12 year old brother playing!

oz pin mini.jpg

I was going to post this exact same thing. Zizzle version of WoZ.

Just unscrew the bottom panel, it opens right up.

Oh my. Let me guess ...his name is Tim.....Tiny Tim!

Great minds. Hey!....it could be a Wozzle !

It's my long-lost brother!

Given the shorts/sandles/size - looks like Todd MacCulloch - http://www.ifpapinball.com/player.php?p=442

I was actually considering taking "modular" even a step further, placing every coil/transistor/resistor/and diode on it's own unique coil "pcb" along with a fuse for each one (gottlieb system 80 anyone?). If one of the ~15-20 coils in the game locks on, all that fails is the .50 cent fuse. I realize you still need a way for effective power distribution going this route but it seems it would greatly reduce the all-too-common transistor/coil/diode failures that have plagued those servicing pinball machines for decades.

How much can 25,000 fuses+holders cost for an 8 million dollar pinball machine remake? It's almost like the designers WANT things to fail and burn up expensive stuff (instead of just fuses) to keep the "parts" market alive.

I think it's too easy as well, but if you'd own one, couldn't you just set the settings way harder (more shots for lock, more bumpers needed, more ramps needed, etc) so there's not that easy to get to the end and some things aren't almost 'automaticly' completed (i.e. pop-bumpers after a multiball). I think that'd make the game less easy and more fun in the long run.

Back on topic: hope we'll see some detailed pics of the MMR soon.