HAOLONGGOOD - New For 2023

[Quiversaurus]

@Concavenator I had the same thought! It may be possible to do one a Kentrosaurus in a different scale, and I might consider one in 1:30 scale, and put the difference down to individual variation heh.

Your collection habits are so similar to mine, it's so interesting - I too am only interested in specific taxons, one of which is S. ungulatus, on top of Kentrosaurus. I have not completely given up hope though, perhaps PNSO might surprise us and put out a 1:35 Kentrosaurus down the line, seeing as they've shown that they're able to do smaller figures (like the Stegosaurus and Torosaurus babies). I really hope they do (:

[thomasw100]

@Concavenator I had the same thought! It may be possible to do one a Kentrosaurus in a different scale, and I might consider one in 1:30 scale, and put the difference down to individual variation heh.

Your collection habits are so similar to mine, it's so interesting - I too am only interested in specific taxons, one of which is S. ungulatus, on top of Kentrosaurus. I have not completely given up hope though, perhaps PNSO might surprise us and put out a 1:35 Kentrosaurus down the line, seeing as they've shown that they're able to do smaller figures (like the Stegosaurus and Torosaurus babies). I really hope they do (:

You can get a Kentrosaurus in 1:35 scale from Dinosauriacreatures (https://dinosauriacreatures.com/en). The model is 135 mm which for an estimated size of about 5 m is pretty close. It is available as unpainted or painted version. For the painted version, they connect you with a painting artist who does the commissions for the. You can then discuss the paint design with the painter through Discord. I have actually ordered one and I am in the process of discussing the design with the painting artist right now.

[Sim]

@Sim As far as I'm aware it's only known from a forelimb/hand, and a paper reporting a  juvenile specimen that I've just happened across (which has remains for the skull). Is there more material for it out there? Otherwise I think there are others with better remains like Aerosteon, or Murusraptor.

The known remains for Megaraptor can be seen here, its remains are better than those of Aerosteon and Murusraptor which are also shown here: https://www.deviantart.com/getawaytrike/art/Megaraptoran-series-703711797

[Quiversaurus]

T @thomasw100 Man that is so cool, thank you for the recommendation! I might actually consider getting this. Please share pictures once you have your Kentro in hand!

[Eatmycar]

That megaraptor is SO good. They really don't miss the good part of Haolonggood with these designs. I would love to see it in the Mattel colors, frankly. What a beautiful sculpt!

Must resist the urge to get a 1:35 figure...

[thomasw100]

T @thomasw100 Man that is so cool, thank you for the recommendation! I might actually consider getting this. Please share pictures once you have your Kentro in hand!

It was a pleasure to point you to this. What really excites me about Dinosauriacreatures is that they have many models of smaller species available in the right size. For example, there are Protoceratops, Leptoceratops and Prenocephale and several others. And they seem to be adding new ones at least once a week and their catalog is growing fast.

[marisaura]

i've been hoping for a good large-scale megaraptoran figure for a while now and this one looks really impressive. so sick of articulated jaws but everything else seems great to my untrained eye!

[Faelrin]

@Sim Thanks for sharing that. Based on those skeletals, I think as far as postcranial remains go I do think Aerosteon has a bit more going for it, as it has more of the hindlimbs, and pelvis (which Megaraptor lacks for the most part), in addition to what Megaraptor also has (some of the neck and spine, forelimbs, etc). It also has a bit of the back part of the skull, but the juvenile Megaraptor is probably better with having the front part of the snout (although still not fully grown, so I would expect some differences to the final adult skull, which we currently lack), which all the others lack. Australovenator seems to be the only one with substantial remains from the lower jaw as well, and pretty complete forelimb and hindlimb elements, compared with the rest. I think if all are combined you might be able to make something, but it also does really pretty heavily on extrapolation, if not speculation, as all are missing key elements in some way or another.

I checked out the pic of the Megaraptor, and I think it's good, although I think the skull is a little shrinkwrapped, and the large claw appears to be too small? In any case though, it's nice to see any megaraptoran getting some representation, even if the above holds true (I mean the heavy extrapolation, and speculation), as there are very few figures of them over all, with very few of them based on the modern reconstructions.

[Flaffy]

and the large claw appears to be too small? In any case though, it's nice to see any megaraptoran getting some representation, even if the above holds true (I mean the heavy extrapolation, and speculation)

The claws look too short to me too. The keratin sheath overlying the bony core would've lengthened the claws significantly in life. Will wait for better pics before judging further. The rest of the sculpt looks good so far, though I personally would've preferred a bit of feathering.

[Flaffy]

@Flaffy I don't know how you can infer anatomical traits from what are still mostly just teeth and vertebrae but from different species.

Sorry I don't quite understand where the "but from different species" thinking comes from. We have an almost complete vertebral column of O. megalodon (IRSNB P9893), jaw fragments from Japan (GMNH-PV-3246) and rostral nodes from a potential juvenile specimen (USNM 474994 – USNM 474999). To not accound for such important evidence in reconstructions strike me as absurd. I feel like you aren't giving paleontologists enough credit on how much material we've recovered from the species over the years.

List of skeletal material from megatooth sharks (Lamniformes, Otodontidae); Greenfield 2022:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361094391_List_of_skeletal_material_from_megatooth_sharks_Lamniformes_Otodontidae

From Cooper et al. 2022.

Figure description:

Spoiler

Modeling procedure. (A) Sample of 11 of the 141 vertebral centra in the Otodus megalodon column (IRSNB P 9893). (B) 3D scan and reconstruction of the O. megalodon vertebral column, with centra from (A) linked to their corresponding position. (C) Sample of seven O. megalodon teeth from the UF 311000 dentition (lingual view) with their respective positions (uppercase denotes upper teeth; lowercase refers to lower teeth; "A" denotes anterior teeth, and "L" lateral). (D) 3D scan and reconstruction of the UF 311000 dentition (labial view) with the corresponding labels from (C). (E) 3D scan of Carcharodon carcharias chondrocranium used to model O. megalodon's head. (F) C. carcharias chondrocranium with UF 311000 dentition and IRSNB P 9893 column attached and hoops outlining the model's head. (G) 3D scan of the full body of the C. carcharias specimen used for flesh reconstruction with elliptical hooping methodology indicated for the (H) dorsal fin, (I) pectoral fins, (J) abdomen, (K) pelvic fins, and (L) caudal fin. (M) Base skeletal model with octagonal hoops that mark flesh boundaries. (N) Final lofted polygon mesh of O. megalodon used for analyses at lateral view and (O) dorsal view. (P) Visualization of open gape at 75° angle at oblique view and (Q) 35° gape angle at lateral view.

[close]

I'm not saying that the 2020 paper is not of value or that I don't appreciate the science involved. In fact, I stated that I would prefer something more like what the study concluded. But we didn't get that. And I'm not going to lose sleep over it or disregard the figure, because again...all we have are teeth and vertebrae. I love paleontology and science but there needs to be some humility here too. We don't know what megalodon looked like. If all we had were teeth and vertebrae from a hammerhead we would never know about its cephalofoil. Or that the longfin mako has longer pectoral fins than the shortfin mako. Or that angelsharks are flat. So, sorry, but it really doesn't matter to me that much if this toy matches up with "Ferrón, H.G. et al. (2020)'s most recent conclusions".

Just because we don't understand what a species looked like 100%, doesn't mean we shouldn't attempt to get as close to the truth as possible based on available evidence. Refering to the evidence we do have for O. megalodon as "just" teeth and vertebrae is not the right way to go about things imo. There are many things about soft tissue we can't account for based solely on hard tissue fossils I agree; but the fact of the matter is reconstructing extinct taxa inherently relies on inferrence from close relatives and/or living analouges (where applicable) when the full picture is unavaiable.

The example you use on Hammerheads and Angelsharks doesn't apply, simply because the situation for O. megalodon is different from what you're suggesting. Otodus isn't monotypic, we have at least 7 different species from the genus, and plenty more in the family Otodontidae. That alone provides a wealth of information on the general morphology and anatomy of the genus. This isn't a case like Spinosaurus where we knew next to nothing about it until more and more fossils were discovered. We know of the general Otodontid body plan, and the ecological roles they would've played.

Again using Hammerheads as an example:
- We uncover Hammerhead "A" fossils, but we don't have this specific species's cephalofoil preserved
- Thankfully since we've already found fossil Hammerheads "B" and "C" with better remains, we can infer that Hammerhead "A" likely had a cephalofoil as well. We just don't know the exact morphology of said structure.
Same goes for the megatooth sharks. O. megalodon most definitely isn't a case of where we know nothing about the entire genus's anatomy.


"A composite reconstruction of cranial and jaw material from otodontids in left lateral view. Lightest gray represents preserved areas and darker grays represent reconstructed areas. The right palatoquadrate (reversed) and left Meckel's cartilage of Cretalamna hattini (LACM 128126) are redrawn from Shimada (2007). The rostral node of either Otodus megalodon or Parotodus benedenii (USNM 474998) is redrawn from Mollen & Jagt (2012). Both scale bars are 10 centimeters." - Greenfield. 2022


"The rostral nodes of otodontids and lamnids in dorsal view, demonstrating the different arrangements of the lateral rostral cartilages. The node of either Otodus megalodon or Parotodus benedenii (A, USNM 474998) is redrawn from Mollen & Jagt (2012). The nodes of Lamna nasus (B), L. ditropis (C), Isurus oxyrinchus (D), and I. paucus (E) are redrawn from Mollen et al. (2012). Not to scale. - Greenfield. 2020

[Faelrin]

Dacentrurus on Amazon store now (both colors are $36.99 each). Here's a link and the images:

https://www.amazon.com/HAOLONGGOOD-010-Dacentrurus-Xuning/dp/B0CDHJMSV1

Xuning:

Spoiler

[close]

Lingzhen:

Spoiler

[close]

Edit: Megalodon is available on My Online Toy Store Aliexpress store. $20.99 without box.

[Stegotyranno420]

I feel like they are picking up the prices too fast...what happened to the 20s range? And the colours on the dacentruri dont look as good as first.

[Gwangi]

Yes, @Flaffy "teeth and vertebra" but from different species. You said that we have "close relatives & extant taxa in which we can infer anatomical traits from" but the material from the close relatives is the same material we have for O. megalodon, and that's all I'm pointing out. It still doesn't tell us what O. megalodon looked like.

Observe how many times I circled "teeth and vertebra".



And yup, down at the bottom there are rostral nodes. But they could be from O. megalodon or another species from AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT GENUS! Likewise, Cretalama is also a different genus. So, based on that chart you shared, we only have teeth and vertebrae from Otodus and MAYBE rostral nodes. And YOU think that's enough to reconstruct O. megalodon so accurately that you can dismiss the model from Haolonggood as being inaccurate? That sounds like hubris to me. Could you imagine trying to reconstruct a great white shark on the basis of material from Isurus? It wouldn't look right, despite makos being the closest relatives of white sharks.

I don't even know why you're coming at me so hard about all of this. I acknowledged the importance and value of the 2020 study and I admitted I would have preferred a figure more accurate to that study. I'm just not taking it as absolute gospel when it comes to reconstructing an animal that has switched the genus it belongs to at least 3 times in my own lifetime. It appears that your issue is with me undervaluing the importance of material that I think you might overvalue. I already read the paper when it came out, I don't need you to convince me of anything or provide cliff notes. At the end of the day I still think this $20 Haolonggood toy is "good enough" and that any reconstruction of O. megalodon is highly speculative.

Sorry for using the word "just". I didn't know it would have this effect on you. 

EDIT: This is the type of shark fossil I believe we can confidently reconstruct. If something like this exists for any Otodus species I will sing a different tune.

[Bread]

I feel like they are picking up the prices too fast...what happened to the 20s range? And the colours on the dacentruri dont look as good as first.

They're more expensive on Amazon. Always have been.

Aliexpress and LanaTimeShop they're under $20.

[Cretaceous Crab]

What's the shipping cost like on Aliexpress and Lanatime?

[Bread]

What's the shipping cost like on Aliexpress and Lanatime?

Free.

I've seen LanaTimeShop charge for shipping before, as well as Aliexpress. But that usually depends on the product. So far these Haolonggood figures are free shipping to here in the U.S.

[Stegotyranno420]

Thanks for the reassurance @Bread

[ceratopsian]

Transit time from AliExpress to the UK is quick too. Currently I'm getting 12 day delivery guaranteed free.

[SidB]

Transit time from AliExpress to the UK is quick too. Currently I'm getting 12 day delivery guaranteed free.

Wow, that's impressive! Is that a consequence of the UK's historic connection with Hong Kong, @ceratopsian ?

[ceratopsian]

I buy from My Online Toy Store and the package doesn't go through Hong Kong. They are flown out from mainland China. So, no, I don't think so S @SidB. Until very recently it had been 15 day guaranteed, though was arriving a bit quicker than that. Then I noticed it had changed again. However with an early placed order like my Dacentrurus they might not meet that if they don't physically have the models yet. As VAT is paid up front boxes don't seem to linger at all in customs.

Transit time from AliExpress to the UK is quick too. Currently I'm getting 12 day delivery guaranteed free.

Wow, that's impressive! Is that a consequence of the UK's historic connection with Hong Kong, @ceratopsian ?