CollectA: New for 2018

[Joey]

Numaan fromSTS forum had this to say

A friend at CollectA has sent me some information some of which I enclose below for your reference.  It just talks about the decision to revamp the catalogue and adjust some of the lines.  Given the wildlife range has expanded so much it makes sense to me.  See below:

You will notice when you see the list of novelties that CollectA has re-grouped the animal categories. In the past 3 years our line has changed so much in regard to what kind of species we have worked on and the release of our AR line (Augmented Reality) so as the development of the "Minis" that the whole concept as well as our catalgoue were in need of a make-over.
Catalogue and price list now have the following groups and sub-groups:

1) Prehistoric World with the following sub-categories
a) Collecta AR (Augmented Reality)
b) The Age of Dinosaurs Deluxe
c) The Age of Dinosaurs 1:40
d) The Age of Dinosaurs Popular
e) Other Prehistoric Animals

Hopefully the 1:40 catagory will ACTAULLY HAVE 1:40 Scale Dinosaurs in it.

So i'm guessing that the Sciurumimus is part of the 'The Age of Dinosaurs Deluxe' line and the Mantellisaurus is part of the 'The Age of Dinosaurs 1:40' line.

[Jose S.M.]

I think the deluxe model are going to be like the Styracosaurus that are on a way bigger scale than everything else, and maybe the supremes will fall into that category too. I don't know the size of Mantellisaurus so it could be 1:40. I wonder if popular is the new designation for what we call standard range, if that's it, I think both of these figures are in the Popular category.

[Takama]

I personally want to see them Redo some of there older Dinosaurs from there dark ages. like instead of Matelisaurus, WHY COULD THEY NOT HAVE MADE AN UPDATED IGUANODON?

[suspsy]

I personally want to see them Redo some of there older Dinosaurs from there dark ages. like instead of Matelisaurus, WHY COULD THEY NOT HAVE MADE AN UPDATED IGUANODON?

Since Mantellisaurus was up until recently considered a species of Iguanodon, there's really no point in complaining.

I'm pretty sure we'll see at least one updated dinosaur in the mix. Perhaps Allosaurus.

[Stuckasaurus (Dino Dad Reviews)]

WOW do I ever like that Mantellisaurus! That's one of the best ornithopod figures I've seen in a while. And to go for an iguanodont that's NOT obviously different like Ouranosaurus or Lurdosaurus but still have it be clearly distinguishable from Iguanodon? Brilliant. Collecta comes through again on their reputation for obscure species. And to think when I first started following the Dino Toy Blog Collecta was considered as dumpy as Schleich!

I love that Sciurumimus too!

[John]

I personally want to see them Redo some of there older Dinosaurs from there dark ages. like instead of Matelisaurus, WHY COULD THEY NOT HAVE MADE AN UPDATED IGUANODON?

I have no idea whats coming,but close relatives do not exactly cancel each out when it comes to CollectA,so the presence of Mantellisaurus does not necessarily rule out any other member of it's family like Iguanodon itself.I guess it depends on what the general theme is this time around.In 2016 it was ornithomimosaurs and European theropods,and this year it was ceratopsians.

[Jose S.M.]

I guess it depends on what the general theme is this time around.In 2016 it was ornithomimosaurs and European theropods,and this year it was ceratopsians.

Imagine if this time the theme was ornithopods! that would make me very happy, specially since it seems that we are not getting ornithopods from Safari this year.

[ZoPteryx]

And so it begins! 

Really impressed with these two.  The Mantellisaurus is darn near perfect as far as I can tell and I think the colors actually work quite well for a change!  If I was feeling nit-picky I could argue that the thigh muscles should extend onto the tail base more, but that's a pretty minor issue.

Leave it to CollectA to make a dinosaur only known from a baby!  Looks very faithful to the actual skeletal proportions too.  Colors are little bland, but not too bad.  With baby dinos now on the table, maybe we'll get a Scipionyx in the future! 

Overall, both are really good and really unique, I'll definitely be buying them!

[Joey]

I personally want to see them Redo some of there older Dinosaurs from there dark ages. like instead of Matelisaurus, WHY COULD THEY NOT HAVE MADE AN UPDATED IGUANODON?

I really want them to remake the Megalosaurus, but not all of the figures where revealed yet so maybe they will remake an Iguanodon or a Megalosaurus.

[Shonisaurus]

I prefer an iguanodon and a deluxe megalosaurus. The iguanodon except Safari by Doug Watson is an unjustly undervalued figure in the toy market, perhaps because of its lack of appeal.

On the other hand both the iguanodon and the megalosaurus were the first dinosaurs discovered. They are important dinosaurs for that reason and deserve a decent position in the toy market.

[Joey]

I prefer an iguanodon and a deluxe megalosaurus. The iguanodon except Safari by Doug Watson is an unjustly undervalued figure in the toy market, perhaps because of its lack of appeal.

On the other hand both the iguanodon and the megalosaurus were the first dinosaurs discovered. They are important dinosaurs for that reason and deserve a decent position in the toy market.

Well said Shonisaurus, they were the first dinosaurs discovered and are very important to dinosaur/fossil history and therefor need more models of them (especially Megalosaurus).

[Concavenator]

The Mantellisaurus is a nice model indeed,and the colors,as has been already pointed out work well.

The Sciurumimus is a daring,however it looks rather bland and looks like it will be too small.Sciurumimus would be the kind of dinosaur that looks better in a bigger size figure.

[A. fragilis]

Both Mantellisaurus and Sciurumimus can now go onto the USL.

[Zhuchengotyrant]

CollectA is better than Safari this year

[Sim]

I prefer an iguanodon and a deluxe megalosaurus. The iguanodon except Safari by Doug Watson is an unjustly undervalued figure in the toy market, perhaps because of its lack of appeal.

On the other hand both the iguanodon and the megalosaurus were the first dinosaurs discovered. They are important dinosaurs for that reason and deserve a decent position in the toy market.

Well said Shonisaurus, they were the first dinosaurs discovered and are very important to dinosaur/fossil history and therefor need more models of them (especially Megalosaurus).

Not quite.  My understanding is Megalosaurus is indeed the first dinosaur named, but while Iguanodon would be the second, the name "Iguanodon" is now used for a different type of animal than the ones that were originally called Iguanodon.  So the current Iguanodon species are not among the first dinosaurs named, Plateosaurus engelhardti for example was named before them.  I think Dinoguy2 summed up well how the revision of Iguanodon was handled (from this thread):

The Iguanodon thing was just bad from every angle. There's no way the "new" Iguanodon would even be considered the same genus as the original, let alone species. It's from a different time and place and country!

Anyway, Iguanodon is what it is now, and Safari released a very good figure of it for 2016.  Like Iguanodon, Mantellisaurus is also known from very good remains, so I'm happy to see CollectA make Mantellisaurus into a figure.  I think Mantellisaurus deserves it, never having a figure before (under its own name at least).

[suspsy]

CollectA is better than Safari this year

Let's hold off on that judgment until both lines are fully revealed.

[Ravonium]

To those complaining that "They didn't make a Deluxe Iguanodon!, Iguanodon was one of the first dinosaurs ever named!", (and not to the people complaining that they didn't make a Megalosaurus.).


Just chill out and just realise these two points.


1. Mantellisaurus is a very similar genus to Iguanodon. So similar, in-fact, that the remains of Mantellisaurus were originally assigned to Iguanodon.

2 (and this is probably the best point against their complaints). Iguanodon isn't actually the second dinosaur named anymore. Somewhat recent research has made the type species of Iguanodon Iguanodon bernissartensis, a species found over half a century after Iguanodon anglicus, the original Iguanodon species. More importantly though, Iguanodon anglicus is now known as Therosaurus anglicus. In conclusion while Iguanodon was the second name ever given to a dinosaur, the fossil that Iguanodon was originally given as a name to is no longer called Iguanodon. Therefore, if you're using the excuse that "It's the second dinosaur ever named" to prioritise the remaking of Iguanodon over other models, then your excuse does not work anymore.

In conclusion, what you need to realise the most is, you got an ornithopod figure, and a generic one at that, and you choose to complain that it isn't one of the slightly less underrepresented ornithopods. As for old models being remade, if there are any that I would prioritise the remaking of, it would be either the Baryonyx, Allosaurus or Megalosaurus.

[Joey]

I prefer an iguanodon and a deluxe megalosaurus. The iguanodon except Safari by Doug Watson is an unjustly undervalued figure in the toy market, perhaps because of its lack of appeal.

On the other hand both the iguanodon and the megalosaurus were the first dinosaurs discovered. They are important dinosaurs for that reason and deserve a decent position in the toy market.

Well said Shonisaurus, they were the first dinosaurs discovered and are very important to dinosaur/fossil history and therefor need more models of them (especially Megalosaurus).

Not quite.  My understanding is Megalosaurus is indeed the first dinosaur named, but while Iguanodon would be the second, the name "Iguanodon" is now used for a different type of animal than the ones that were originally called Iguanodon.  So the current Iguanodon species are not among the first dinosaurs named, Plateosaurus engelhardti for example was named before them.  I think Dinoguy2 summed up well how the revision of Iguanodon was handled (from this thread):

The Iguanodon thing was just bad from every angle. There's no way the "new" Iguanodon would even be considered the same genus as the original, let alone species. It's from a different time and place and country!

Anyway, Iguanodon is what it is now, and Safari released a very good figure of it for 2016.  Like Iguanodon, Mantellisaurus is also known from very good remains, so I'm happy to see CollectA make Mantellisaurus into a figure.  I think Mantellisaurus deserves it, never having a figure before (under its own name at least).

Thank you Sim for the info!

[Halichoeres]

I get that the Sciurumimus is supposed to appear fluffy but it just looks poorly proportioned to me, with a massively thick tail and thin torso. And it looks like the neck attaches to the jaw. I'll probably pass, though I do appreciate the effort. Now the Mantellisaurus is a welcome addition. Should display nicely with the Safari Iguanodon. Now I need the Safari Iguanodon. 

The images I can find of the fossil do seem to show the vertebrae joining the skull well below the back top corner. I can't find any explicit reference to the foramen magnum, but if it's more inferior and less caudal like the photos suggest then I think the head position with respect to the neck is pretty plausible. It might arguably not show enough room for muscle, but plenty of theropods are weakly muscled when young. I dunno, I'm no theropod expert. I'll get it regardless because it's a new taxon.





As to the reorganization, the popular (standard) line figures are much more often in 1:40 than the Deluxe ones are. I'm curious to see what gets assigned to what. Maybe Deluxe is just what we've been calling Supreme, but to my mind it should also include the "1:40" figures that are nowhere near 1:40, like Scelidosaurus, Neovenator, Rhomaleosaurus, etc, etc

[Sim]

I fell out of my chair at the Mantellisaurus. When was the last CollectA ornithopod again? The deluxe Parasaur?

As suspsy said, the 2013 deluxe Parasaurolophus was indeed the last ornithopod by CollectA.  But when was the last pennaraptoran in CollectA's prehistoric line?  After some searching, it turns out it's the 2011 Utahraptor.  That's for dromaeosaurids, for oviraptorosaurs it was the 2010 Oviraptor.  And the last ankylosaur with a tail club from CollectA was the 2008 Deluxe Ankylosaurus (I'm not counting repaints).

I've noticed that for some time now, even though CollectA tends to produce a high number of prehistoric figures, they tend to make a lot of figures for some dinosaur groups and ignore other groups completely.  This has resulted in some groups having quite a number of decent CollectA representations while other groups have none.  For example, there's not a single pennaraptoran in CollectA's prehistoric line that has complete wing feathering, and all of them are not very good figures.  The two dromaeosaurids both lack decent feathering and have other anatomical inaccuracies that aren't minor.  I don't know how CollectA managed to give their 2010 Deluxe Velociraptor that bizarre oval-shaped body and tiny tail, when the animal's skeleton is basically completely known.

Looking back until CollectA's 2014 dinosaur figure releases in their prehistoric line, it's noticeable how unbalanced the dinosaur representation is.  I'm not counting corpses or prey in a figure's mouth.

2017: 3 ceratopsids, 1 ornithomimosaur, 1 stegosaur
2016: 1 ceratopsid, 3 ornithomimosaurs, 2 tyrannosauroids, 1 allosauroid, 1 megalosaurid
2015: 2 ceratopsids, 2 tyrannosauroids, 1 allosauroid, 3 spinosaurids, 1 sauropod
2014: 1 ceratopsid, 2 tyrannosauroids, 2 allosauroids, 1 spinosaurid, 1 ankylosaur, 1 therizinosaur

I didn't even need to be more specific about what kind of sauropod it is as it's the only sauropodomorph there!  It's also interesting how almost all the ornithischians here are ceratopsids.  In just the last four years CollectA has made 7 different ceratopsids, and always at least one a year!  There are also six tyrannosauroid figures representing four different species, and four different allosauroid species represented, with tyrannosauroids and allosauroids being made each year except for 2017.  In contrast, there's nothing from a number of other dinosaur groups e.g. dromaeosaurids, oviraptorosaurs, ornithopods.  There's also no troodontids or heterodontosaurids, but none of the main toy companies has ever made one of those.

I think having several members from a group represented showing their diversity is good.  But when it becomes like this, where there's some groups that become over-represented while other groups remain with inadequate representation, I find it dispiriting.  Safari has been making good representations of the types of dinosaurs that didn't have that in their line quite quickly and efficiently in the last few years.  CollectA might be making figures of the kinds of dinosaurs they lack a decent figure of, but I don't think they are doing this quickly and efficiently, as shown by their quite unbalanced dinosaur representation.  I get the impression that on this forum CollectA tends to be seen as the "bold" one of the main toy companies.  This is true for some things CollectA has done.  With regards to the pennaraptorans though, as of the 2017 prehistoric figures: CollectA has still not made one with proper wings, while Safari has with Microraptor, Archaeopteryx and Velociraptor.  For 2018, Safari is doing this with Anzu.  Even Schleich is doing this with their Oviraptor!  I'm curious to see whether CollectA will have any in 2018.  Maybe for 2018 CollectA will give more attention to the types of dinosaurs that they don't have adequate representations of.  I'd like to see that.  What won't change though is that Safari was the "bold" one in being the first of the main toy companies to make figures of truly bird-like dromaeosaurids with proper wings.