PNSO : New for 2023

[dragon53]

[Prehistory Resurrection]

[oscars_dinos]

so...could this be 1/35th ?? I know it looks like that but I don't know I just think if its a smaller member of the species wouldnt the proportions or something be different

[Quiversaurus]

After watching DinosDragons' review it seems that it could represent a smaller member of the species, if indeed one wants it to be 1:35th scale. If I collected sauropods I feel I would be alright with that? But then again it looked a bit small compared with the PNSO Lingwulong and the REBOR Diplo...

[thomasw100]

After watching DinosDragons' review it seems that it could represent a smaller member of the species, if indeed one wants it to be 1:35th scale. If I collected sauropods I feel I would be alright with that? But then again it looked a bit small compared with the PNSO Lingwulong and the REBOR Diplo...

What I understand from the DinosDragons review and also from some earlier discussion in this thread is that the PNSO model is pretty close in terms of size to the specimen USNM 15560, which in turn is middle size relative to the smallest and largest individual found. What I do not know is if specimen USNM 15560 represents a subadult or just a small adult individual of Alamosaurus. As I will be most probably getting both the PNSO and the Haolonggood model, I plan to display them as a pair of subadult and large adult together.

[oscars_dinos]

After watching DinosDragons' review it seems that it could represent a smaller member of the species, if indeed one wants it to be 1:35th scale. If I collected sauropods I feel I would be alright with that? But then again it looked a bit small compared with the PNSO Lingwulong and the REBOR Diplo...

What I understand from the DinosDragons review and also from some earlier discussion in this thread is that the PNSO model is pretty close in terms of size to the specimen USNM 15560, which in turn is middle size relative to the smallest and largest individual found. What I do not know is if specimen USNM 15560 represents a subadult or just a small adult individual of Alamosaurus. As I will be most probably getting both the PNSO and the Haolonggood model, I plan to display them as a pair of subadult and large adult together.

so I guess the promotions don't matter... now its just a matter of money although honestly maybe pnso might come out with a bigger sauropod by the time I get the money so

[Joel1905]

PNSO have a penchant for basing their models on specific specimens, so the Alamosaurus being the same size as USNM 15560 checks out.

[Leyster]

Since it was a sort of a contentious point when this was out, here is my review of the PNSO Gorgosaurus. TLRL, to answer some points that were raised:
a) yes, it's based on a real Gorgosaurus skull.
b) yes, it can be traced to a single specimen.

[Bread]

Since it was a sort of a contentious point when this was out, here is my review of the PNSO Gorgosaurus. TLRL, to answer some points that were raised:
a) yes, it's based on a real Gorgosaurus skull.
b) yes, it can be traced to a single specimen.

Thank you for this assessment Leyster!

Again, another one of PNSO's choices to base it on a direct specimen.

Not sure if I like this route when it's modeled to represent an adult when in reality it replicates some aspects of a sub-adult or younger specimen.

[Leyster]

@Bread it's not modeled to represent an adult at all. The only thing that may lead to this is its size, but Lythronax is way smaller than PNSO makes it, too.

[Sim]

I've compared the mentioned reconstructions to the Gorgosaurus skulls shown on paleofile, and to me the PNSO Gorgosaurus's head looks more like an adult's than a juvenile's.  The WWD Gorgosaurus looks stylised.

[Leyster]

@Sim you can see with your own eyes how it fits perfectly in ROM 1247.


Also no, the WWD Gorgosaurus is not particularly stylized. Keep in mind the picture I posted is not a profile but is sightly rotated, I wasn't able to find a better image.

[Sim]

I agree the PNSO figure's head matches well with that specimen, but comparing it to the various Gorgosaurus adult and juvenile skulls on Paleofile, it doesn't look inaccurate for an adult, while the juveniles have much shallower heads.  Also, the Gorgosaurus skull you're referring to is incomplete according to Paleofile and The Theropod Database.  So when you look at only the known parts of Gorgosaurus skulls, to me it looks like an adult rather than a juvenile.

The WWD Gorgosaurus looks stylised to me due to those large, forward-pointing horns.  But perhaps it's not and it's actually based on the unnamed Dinosaur Park Formation Daspletosaurus species, specifically FMNH PR308?  Its skull looks more like that specimen's than any Gorgosaurus skull I've seen, including the holotype's.

[Concavenator]

@Sim ROM 1247 is not a juvenile, but a subadult (Voris, 2018).

[Leyster]

About the size of the horns, they are covered in keratin, so within the realm of speculation. About their orientation, there are Gorgosaurus specimens with forward pointing horns like ROM 1247 itself and TCM 2001.89.1 ("Ruth").

About the completeness of the skull, it's true that ROM 1247 is incomplete, but as I wrote the PNSO model matches too well the replica owned by the Witmer Lab (whose scan might as well been used as model) to be a coincidence. Also I never said it was a juvenile, as you keep saying, I said it's a subadult.

Also paleofile is not the most trustwhorty source, I encourage you to look at papers.

[Sim]

I don't see forward-pointing horns in those two Gorgosaurus specimens.  It is possible Gorgosaurus's horns looked like the WWD version's in life, but they seem a bit too generous to me if based on Gorgosaurus while a perfect match for the Dinosaur Park Daspletosaurus.

I learnt subadult meant not fully adult and that juvenile meant not adult, I guess I got a bit confused by that and thought subadult = juvenile.  Not everywhere agrees though, here ROM 1247 is said to be an adult: https://blog.everythingdinosaur.com/blog/_archives/2022/04/15/juvenile-gorgosaurus-skulls-shed-light-on-tyrannosaurid-growth-patterns.html

I don't fully rely on Paleofile, but sometimes I think it can be useful.  Finding the right paper isn't always simple.

[Leyster]

This is the skeletal restoration they used for the movie. As you can see, the skeleton's lacrimals are not so forward pointing and what you see in the movie is keratin.

[Sim]

Thanks for that, Leyster!  I find it interesting the movie's version ended up looking so much like the DPF Daspletosaurus.  On a different note, I saw that on The Theropod Database ROM 1247 is said to be a juvenile.  It looks like there isn't agreement on what growth stage it is...

[Leyster]

Well, keratin can dramatically change the profile of a skull. Just look at the horncores of modern animals.

[Bread]

@Bread it's not modeled to represent an adult at all. The only thing that may lead to this is its size, but Lythronax is way smaller than PNSO makes it, too.

I meant as a presumption that collectors would display it alongside other figures at its scale (assuming they're 1/35 as PNSO hovers around this scale with their therapods usually).

Plus, this is the assumption that PNSO intended this to be an adult, but simply based the skull on a sub-adult.