Safari Ltd - New for 2022

[Stuckasaurus (Dino Dad Reviews)]

The only thing I am waiting on at this point is the Sahara Desert TOOB

SAME. I have a whole shopping cart ready to go, but I don't want to come back in a month just to pay separate shipping for the Sahara Toob. I wish they'd just release it already.

[Stuckasaurus (Dino Dad Reviews)]

- The Zuul is just top-notch, you can't get much better. Colors are a shame, so I may wait until next year to be sure the colors don't have any issues.

- Not as fond of the Cryolophosaurus. It is really good, and the colors are unique, but that pose is getting overused. All my Safari theropods are just 'standing with the head swayed'. I will still buy it, but I likely won't get any more Safari theropods. I far prefer energetic and even 'out-there' poses over the same thing multiple times over.

I'm planning on getting a pair of Zuul and repainting them to look like Mark Witton's Ghostbusters reference. I'm gonna use my Safari Ltd. Sinornithosaurus for the unidentified "Gozer-raptor" in the background.



I like my Battat Cryo; if I ever bother to get another version, I want it to have protofeathers.

[Shane]

The only thing I am waiting on at this point is the Sahara Desert TOOB

SAME. I have a whole shopping cart ready to go, but I don't want to come back in a month just to pay separate shipping for the Sahara Toob. I wish they'd just release it already.

Can't release an item that isn't in the warehouse to ship.

[SidB]

After mulling it over and getting over my initial disappointment in not getting a Gorgosaurus or Albertosaurus I have come around to the Nanotyrannus young Tyrannosaurus. I do think it is unfortunate that Safari went with calling it a Nanotyrannus. S @Shane's explanation as to why makes sense but I'm not sure how much critical thinking it will encourage vs. "oh hey, a new dinosaur for my kid" kind of a mentality. But it is a toy connected to a movie and specifically labeled as part of the Dino Dana Collection, not the Prehistoric World collection. Think of it as the Carnegie Collection. Made by Safari but another line entirely.

Being a father, I have seen the Dino Dana movie and the movie's big question is, "where are the kid dinos?" Dana mistakenly thinks the young Tyrannosaurus in the film is a Nanotyrannus and is confused as to why it hangs around with the adult T. rex. Stygimoloch and Dracorex are in the movie too. The science is used to also explore life in a blended family, but I digress. Nanotyrannus plays a role in the movie so including it in this line makes sense, regardless of what it is called.

Anyway, I'm quite liking the figure and although I generally don't collect growth stages of animals I might just make an exception for this one. Maybe I'll even review it for the blog. I will say this, it's odd that the Dino Dana adult T. rex is feathered and the Nanotyrannus young T. rex is not. It will make pairing this toy with the adult Safari T. rex kind of difficult. Also, that I like it so much makes me hope we do get an Albertosaurus from Safari too, especially since the one from Dino Dana is pretty cool looking.

@Bread, here is a screen shot of the Dino Dana Nanotyrannus. I had to take the picture with my phone so it's rather crude but you get the idea.


Lastly, I think the amount of backlash that Safari is getting over this is pretty harsh. Neither the Nanotyrannus young T. rex or Patagotitan are bad figures even if you aren't personally attracted to them and would have preferred to see something else. Safari didn't give us much last year but both the Daspletosaurus and Baryonyx were fantastic, long overdue figures. Safari is still ace in my book, unless they really do start repainting existing dinosaur figures and labeling them as something else. 

This post stuck with me over the months since it was made, specifically the discordancy between a feathered adult and a featherless juvenile, so I've arrived at a personal, Safari-based solution, at least until they make a new adult featherless rex. Here's the new juvenile over against the old 10th anniversary Carnegie Safri featherless tyrannosaurus. A good pair, IMO:

[Gwangi]

Those two do make for a more convincing pair. I'm still not sure if I'm going to get the Nanotyrannus young Tyrannosaurus simply because it lacks feathers and won't pair well with the Safari T. rex. I'm not sure that I have any adult T. rex to convincingly pair it with but this one works.

[suspsy]

I still don't think the "Nanotyrannus" was a good idea at all.

[GojiraGuy1954]

I still don't think the "Nanotyrannus" was a good idea at all.

He's true

[The Spinosaurus]

What scale is the Crylophosaurus?

[Thialfi]

About 1:30, @The Spinosaurus

[SidB]

What scale is the Crylophosaurus?

New Safari and classic Carnegie Safari:

[suspsy]

While I do feel that this new Cryolophosaurus is the best one yet, I also don't feel the need to add it to my shelf. I'm perfectly happy with the Carnegie version and its little PNSO sidekick.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

It would be the best of both worlds if they could be combined..detail and anatomical accuracy.

[Gwangi]

While I do feel that this new Cryolophosaurus is the best one yet, I also don't feel the need to add it to my shelf. I'm perfectly happy with the Carnegie version and its little PNSO sidekick.

I feel similarly. I love this figure but I already have Carnegie and Battat. With limited space I'm trying not to repeat genera too much. Still, I might cave and pick it up someday.

[Halichoeres]

About 1:30, @The Spinosaurus

Yep, that's what I get too. The one specimen we have of Cryolophosaurus is supposed to be a subadult, so you could maybe fudge it to 1:35 if you assume it could have gotten about 20% larger.

[Flaffy]

Just as I had feared, the actual number and arrangement of Zuul's osteoderms is markly different from the Dino Dana design, and by proxy the Safari ltd figure based off it. Seems like another 2020 Dilophosaurus & Edmontosaurus situation again.

New paper: Arbour et al. 2022 (https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsbl.2022.0404)
Accompanying artwork: Hank Sharpe

[Faelrin]

Ah that's a bummer, but not terribly unexpected. Seems like everything coming out these days is becoming outdated in some aspects faster then before. Carnotaurus, Dilophosaurus, Edmontosaurus, Spinosaurus, etc. The more discoveries or reconstructions made, the more this will occur as time goes on.

Honestly it won't hold me back from getting it. I would much rather a figure that was up to date based on current knowledge, and take the risk of it becoming outdated in some way, then perhaps not at all (or completely inaccurate). Plus it's the only option after wanting a figure of it for years now, since it was first described.

Who knows though. Maybe there will be a PNSO or BotM take on this in the future that can take advantage of this new information?

Edit: I also forgot to mention, love that the green Zuul paleo meme is still going strong lol. Though it could have been done to pay respects to the initial artwork of it when it was described.

[Carnoking]

It's the risk we all take 

[SidB]

It's the risk we all take 

On one hand, we applaude companies that are quick off the mark to release a newly discovered or reconfigured taxon, on the other, there's this - semi-obsolescence of a sort. Inevitable. I like @Faelrin 's approach - pragmatic realism.

[SpartanSquat]

What scale is the Crylophosaurus?

New Safari and classic Carnegie Safari:

I really want a new dilo using this scale and based in the new discoveries from 2020!
@Flaffy: You mean safari released the figure later after a new paper published? If its that, patagotitan could be counted, I love the figure but seems it was sculpted in 2017

[Flaffy]

@Flaffy: You mean safari released the figure later after a new paper published? If its that, patagotitan could be counted, I love the figure but seems it was sculpted in 2017

I meant a new paper with contradicting / novel information is published right after Safari releases a new figure in their lineup.

For Zuul, most notably Arbour et al. 2022 describes the proportions and osteoderms in greater detail than the initial description; which demonstrates that the 2022 Safari ltd Zuul has incorrect osteoderm placement, insufficient osteoderm number and a noticeably oversized head (Zuul had a small cranium even among Ankylosaurs).

The Patagotitan is different as I'm unaware of any new papers specifically describing the 200+ elements in greater detail than in the initial 2016/17 description. The Safari figure is consistent with the "official" paper skeletal, but not accurate to the actual animal when proper scaling and titanosaur anatomy is taken into consideration.

Was it confirmed by Shane or Doug that the Patagotitan was sculpted all the way back in 2017? I must've missed it, but wouldn't be surprised as companies can sometimes take multiple years before releasing a new figure from when the initial clay sculptwork has concluded.