Then why are Funhouse PF failing apart too

yeah, now the clear will just come off when you try to insert/remove posts

I'm not even sure how to react to Pinside post anymore and wonder why people even bother to serve our Toxic community lately A company spends a huge sum of money developing a decent product that solves a problem for the community. They ship a "large run of playfields" to a pinball manufacturer who does not properly QC every playfield for flaws. Second the pinball manufacturer may of not adequately designed the mechanics to work well with the product. Subcontractor gets thrown under the buss by the consumers for something that might be out of their control.

There are only so many options available to Pinball restoration community. I don't see many others else navigating the complex world of licensed playfield production today. I can only think of a hand full of people that can produce a playfield today at the 1000-700 dollar price point.

Throwing those people under the buss just doesn't make much sense. Especially if you restore games. I've owned several Mirco playfields over the years and for the most part the quality has been exceptional and if I wasn't satisfied I know they would step up to make it right . If your beef is with JJP you should look to JJP. If you don't like the "reproduction" you should see if you can do better. Love to see 10 of the biggest whiners try to reproduce artwork for playfield production, then figure out the process to print it, clear them and do 1000 of them flawlessly. Then take into consideration a dozen people assembling games under tight deadlines. Yep shit happens.

Given the choice between defective product and no product, I'll take no product.

Do it right or don't do it at all.

I have a stack of Williams Diamond Plate, Ballys and Gottliebs that will show you "no one did it right back then"

Thanks for proving my point.

How many plays are on them? 40, 50, 60k?

Micro is failing under 100 in some cases.

Big difference.

Mine had no issues. We beat on it for a couple years and I recently sold it.

?

Some people suck at doing playfield swaps?
Some people don't maintain correctly and don't check posts after a few hundred plays?

If it was just JJP games, that would be one thing. And maybe that solution does help.

However, I've seen a couple dozen photos of repro playfields that had serious issues too.

Compounding that problem is the reported unresponsiveness in many cases when the issue appears.

It's not an issue of "toxicity" or "making a better playfield yourself instead" but an issue of a defective product and it not being properly addressed/remedied by either the game manufacturer (for games) or the playfield supplier (for repro playfields).

I just saw a photo today of a chunk the size of a silver dollar that popped off the playfield next to a VUK hole, reportedly after less than 50 plays. There were no posts there.

And it's sad that I've seen the same issue so many times now that I can't even recall what the game title was.

Yikes... Clearly you have no idea the history behind this...

Jeff

My friend here who does professional PF swaps (about 5-10 a year) now charges extra for Mirco PFs and won’t guarantee the work. I’ve seen the email exchanges with Mirco. There’s just too much of gamble imo buying his products.

Alternatively, there's another playfield repro maker in Germany:

https://www.buthamburg.de/en/playfields

I don't think I've seen any reported issues with those yet. However, I think those are still being silkscreened, rather than printed.

Just finished a Space Invaders, and no issues.

I too do around 5-10 a year. No issues for me.

That's a nice hypothetical for the JJP situation... but doesn't excuse anything when it's Micro's own reproduction playfields that are also having issues.

So.. only part of the story.

The Mirco playfield issues are not limited to JJP games and are new compared to the PFs Mirco made in his early days.

I honestly cannot understand the argument that since only a few people are making playfields the customers should accept substandard work. If anything in a niche market with a niche manufacturer you would expect MORE personal customer service, not less.

I can thank Pinside for warning me about Mirco, haven’t ever given him a dime and will continue to not give him a dime until he gets his act together.

The last Mirco playfield I purchased personally was 2-3 years ago. I have 3 games with swapped PFs with 1000 games each. No issues.

Also if you were Mirco would you make an official comment on this issue at a Pinball event where content starved pinball podcasters, streamers and fans are hanging on your every word. Things in this hobby have changed considerably in the last decade. Lot of the oldschool folks just stopped bothering to comment here.

There are a handful of folks on here that have never swapped a PF, never owned a game over 10 years, never operated a space and completely new to the hobby who are just "part of an angry mob" . CPR's got issues to. I remember when playfields used to be graded by the quality. You could buy Playfield based on your preference for attention to detail. Perhaps that is the solution to Mircos problem.

This is how most felt the first few times Mirco said the problems were solved. There wouldn't be an outrage if Mirco showed any inkling of caring about the end user, and showed a real effort toward solving the issues. Saying there are no issues is insulting at this point.

Many have been burned time and time again over the years, told issues were fixed, then discover that wasn't true.

You challenge others to do better, but to understand the frustration of some, a challenge would be to do a full playfield swap, hit it with a sledgehammer, then take it all back apart and pay to send the playfield out to be restored and do it all over again whenever that comes back.

I can't imagine the amount of hours that have been stolen over persistent quality issues and false promises. Even harming other businesses that have relied on his products.

Eventually people start to question if they're just fueling a dumpster fire.

Everyone WANTS Mirco to stay in business and make awesome playfields, but staying silent and continuing to buy the products, hoping something has changed, hasn't worked thus far.

LOVE Mirco playfields!

I don't like CPR. The worst I have ever had was from CPR.

Maybe your "professional" isn't so professional? lol

I think maybe I have done 10-12 Mirco playfields so far, then I have Wonka and Dialed In and had a Hobbit. No issues for me with any.

?? Some new people into pinball don'y check for loose hardware until it's too late. Then go blame someone else. Or people do playfield swaps and drop tools on the playfield, or lean onto the playfield bowing it. I dunno?

For those not understanding why the anger amongst him, it’s that he refuses to acknowledge mistakes and use that customer service to make good on issues and correct. I do 4-8 swaps a year. Most are ok or have been redone by Ron. So far…

Early FH runs were too long on the front edge so they needed cut. A discount, a replacement, a future coupon, something!

Early CV runs had a hole in the back where the ball rolls. That one was bad. It is hidden so it could have been corrected by assembling a kit to fill the hole.

IJTPA vampire mouth. Again, tons of ways to handle this other than ignore.

I’m sure there’s other issues I’m forgetting. Many have offered helpful suggestions or offered to proof before release. The point is that if he would have went about it with the right attitude and be willing to make things right, he’d be worlds ahead.

Wait you can say you dislike CPR but if we say we dislike Mirco that’s being a crybaby?
What a hypocrite

Definition of a keyboard commando right here - keep stirring the pot turbo I’m sure your having a great time

If a big chunk comes off a playfield, I would consider that a product defect. I would expect that issue to be addressed since it's not caused by normal wear & tear. I would not be at all pleased with that after spending a substantial sum of money on a product only to be essentially told that I'm SOL.

That's what people are so upset about.

CPR's grading scale was typically based on visual appearance.

With the adhesion/clearcoat/material defects, none of that is visual until it actually rears its head, so there's no practical method to grade for something that hasn't happened until it actually does.

Yeah HEP and Brian Kelly and Kruzman probably suck at it and you're way better. Good call.

CPR would grade typically due to inaccuries in their screening process - it was a method to increase yield by being able to sell your seconds/thirds.

Not even in the same category as the kind of issues people are having with Micro fields.. where the entire finish and durability of the product are issues.

And you see both of them complaining about Mirco playfields on Pinside? I missed that. You are saying they both don't like Mirco? Why not let them speak for themselves eh?

I've never mentioned either one of them. Never compared myself to anyone else.
Have no idea what the fuck you are talking about jackhole

Has anyone tallied up the list of grievances they have with Mirco?

Would be interesting to see precisely what the single #1 issue is followed by the others.

Is it the Clear Coat used?
Is the Clear Coat to brittle?
Are the colors of?
Is the Artwork not even close to the original game?
Were the dimples incorrectly stamped?
Are you having a bad day, cause some negative podcaster said my PF sucked and I don't even know why?
Maybe since there are no instructions for installing your fixtures and components and O-shit this should be covered like some purchase protection plan?

Get a laundry list of grievances going and collate them.
Maybe set up a poll (#1 thing that sucks with PF reproductions ) and see if you can get some Herd consensus.

Here's HEP and Brian Kelly from a couple of days ago in this thread, talking to each other and "speaking for themselves."
https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/mirco-playfields-warning-for-potential-buyers/page/10#post-6848837

Wait, wait...
That Mirco TZ has a missing text on the door panel: PIANO AWARDS LIT VALUE. See the ipdb pics, and a screenshot from your video.

If I would be one of the biggest (if not the biggest) playfield manufacturer:

1. I would discuss with former colleagues from the playfield suppliers of Bally/Williams about clearcoat formulas, best practices:
CCC: Churchill Cabinet Company
ESC: Electronic Sound Corp
LS: Lenc-Smith
SP: Sun Process
TAG: Thomas A. Grant

We are talking about a huge experience here.
Clearcoat sprayed by few KUKA robots doesn't mean high end clearcoat quality at the end.

2. Before a release of reproduction playfield, I would show the design to a group of pinheads. The group will highlight all the issues (like missing texts, lazy autotraces) for FREE.

It's good that Mirco offers playfields (I also purchased White Water).
But there is a room for improvement, almost for free.

Screenshot_20220328-220816_Chrome (resized).jpgScreenshot_20220328-221013_YouTube (resized).jpg

Davi - that's a good start. Actionable issues.
BK and few others had some ideas they shared to.

I've got a PF swap coming up soon and will be inspecting the PF with a keen eye. I know Mirco has its own standards and I have
mine. Key is knowing how to handle them and what to inspect before you get a couple hours into your build and realizing that you
could of done x,y and z .

Keep in mind, that chemicals used in clearcoat and paints back then have likely been banned. So the chemicals and techniques used back then probably can't be used now.

On the other hand, Spooky, buthamburg, and (in most cases) CPR seem to know the secret sauce to producing playfields where the artwork/clearcoat doesn't seem to have failure issues. Or at least, they may address it before frustrated customers march over to Pinside or social media to share their negative experience.

With robots, you (should) have consistency. But I don't think it's the application process itself that is the issue. That's easy enough to adjust and modify. It seems like the materials just aren't bonding properly in some cases. But, this is far beyond my level of experience. I can just point out that something is happening that shouldn't be.

Odd that we hear so little about buthamburg on pinside - Positive or negative. Nor does he seem to promote his products here. Are his pf’s any good?

only repro ill install unmodified. Mirco and CPR get recleared

The old clear coats with methylethylbadshit in them are still available. Saying the EPA banned them is urban legend. But you also can't blame the operator for not wanting to be around them knowing what we know today if there are other options.

This is a picture of tx sector, thats an overlay, cleared done in my backyard garage, its not that difficult, you have to find the right people. Imagine what i could do if i had a couple hundred thousand in equipment.

A31B44A5-648E-4BE6-926D-E61369409358 (resized).png

True for the US but the playfields in question come from Canada (CPR) and Europe for Mirco. Maybe their laws are more strict? Either way it seems that there should be far better testing for durability if the art application or clearcoat formulas change.

I did a Gorgar swap from Mirco. All the holes were millimeters off from the main pop holes, etc. The entire hole pattern was off angle from the playfield. It was obvious. I had to redrill a lot. Then the clear coat at the scoop chipped off first ball. Not joking. First ball. It was my first swap and I’m not sure I’ll ever do one again after the frustration I felt. Feel free to tell me why it’s my fault. But even Mirco couldn’t do that. He just gave me a set of radcals to make it up. After a year (literally) of nagging him. He knew that playfield sucked.

> Mirco makes products under license from PPS.

> A trademark licensor can be held liable for defective goods produced by their licensees.

> Therefore, PPS shares in the responsibility for damages caused by products on which their trademark appears.

> PPS bares liability even if they are not the manufacturer or may not be the retailer of the products.

> All entities that take part in production or marketing are strictly liable for any injuries resulting from such entity placing a defective good in the stream of commerce.

> This reasoning is based on an always-moving cost-benefit analysis that holds entities which benefit from the sale of defective products are responsible for the costs.

> The Lanham Act permits a trademark owner to license its trademark to a licensee that is a related company.

> The act defines a related company as "any person whose use of a mark is controlled by the owner of the mark with respect to the nature and quality of the goods or services on or in connection with which the mark is used."

> Under the Lanham Act, a trademark licensor cannot be completely uninvolved in the manufacturing or they risk forfeiture of the mark.

> If PPS declares they have “nothing to do with the goods” other than placing their trademark on the products then they have failed to exercise the mandated control over nature or quality.

(See Lanham Act § 45, 15 U.S.C. § 1127)

The moment Mirco stepped off a plane in Texas he could be sued in a Texas court.

It’s also an urban legend in Germany. PPG sells the toxic “good stuff” over there too.

https://de.ppgrefinish.com/de/produkt-systeme/pkw-lackierung/klarlack/d8135-uhs-rapid-clear-d8135/#

This is about Mirco not having the will or the ability to properly test and apply the proper product and has little to do with government regulations (maybe he doesn’t want to invest in the required equipment to safely and correctly handle the chemicals that could improve performance of his very pretty looking product (shiny sells enough)).

They have. Many times. HEP even had a video talking about it and showing an example on an AFM that I think has since been removed. They aren't the only ones either. Many highly respected restorers have seen and dealt with these issues. My whole point is thinking that you're some restoration god and anyone else must suck if they've experienced these problems is a pretty ludicrous position to take.

Yep and in other threads too. Thank you for this.

Its clear that if you’re a game restorer and you install a mirco playfield you are now a third party vendor, he said he will not honor any third party use. So thats his out, if you install a mirco playfield he will deny warranty and tell you it was your installation practice not his products

Nah - his poor English was trying to separate between his pfs as oem verse buying mirco products.

The real tell was his thoughts on warranty- he was just assuming the statutory minimum for the region instead of having a warranty based on his standing behind the product. That’s why he didn’t know the warranty for totan 2.0 even though the product is announced. It’s not something he prioritizes

But he knew exactly what the warranty where he lives is, he can and will be held accountable where he lives. Would be nice if a US company made reproduction playfields with warranty. Its all on record now, if you’re willing to take a chance buy his products, if you’re picky or care about perfection everytime dont. Some games have such bad playfields that what mirco offers Is way better than whats in there. But if you play the game and the clear and art chip down to the wood why not leave the original. Ive wanted to put a new playfield in circus voltaire but i wont take the chance, mine is way better than reproduction with sunken inserts and wavy clear coat

What a motherload of bs

How is that bs? Why would you put undersized hardware through the holes and how is that MPFs responsibility?

Manufacturing speed and simplicity. A bolt/peg that goes in freely doesn't have to be hammered or screwed in and doesn't risk tearing up the PF when inserted. You are relying on the hardware to hold it in, rather than the PF holding the peg/bolt.

Guess people are blaming that extra wiggle potential as part of the root problem. I think that could be a contributor.. but we know even snug pegs/bolts move some.. especially as they get smashed.