Ictonyx's Carnegie collection

[Ictonyx]

The 1988 Carnegie Stegosaurus - a rather underwhelming model. I don't particularly like the colour scheme, and would have preferred if the plates had been more colourful and stood out more in contrast to the body. The pose and fatness of the model make this a very old fashioned take on Stegosaurus. The head in particular is pretty poor.

[Ictonyx]

I have two Carnegie Triceratops - the 1988 model, and 1999 model. The 1988, like the 1988 Stegosaurus, is a chunky and rather passive looking model. I actually quite like it though - the sculpt is basically decent, and I like the colour scheme, particularly the blue 'war paint' on the face and the weathered looking grey horns.







The 1999 model is a much more dynamic sculpt. The wide gape is quite cool, especially as this is fairly unusual in ceratopsian toys. I'm not a fan of the colour scheme though.

[Ictonyx]

The 1992 Carnegie Spinosaurus. I have a soft spot for this model. It is one of the first Carnegie dinosaurs I remember seeing / owning, I think the sculpt and pose is compelling, and it has one of my favourite colour schemes of all the Carnegie models. I think it is also of some historical interest, reminding us that in the early 90s, many people had absolutely no idea what spinosaurids were supposed to look like. I remember all the dinosaur books of my young childhood depicting Spinosaurus as some sort of allosaur-ish animal with a sail, and this toy is like a sort of snapshot of spinosaurid depictions a few decades ago.

[Ictonyx]

I have two Carnegie T. rex models - the 1988 and 1998.

I have very fond memories of the 1988, which was the first Carnegie toy I ever bought. While the sculpt is dated, the model still look pretty cool from some angles - particularly the 3/4 view. I love the colour scheme - I think the mild green striping and neatly painted yellow eyes are great.

[Ictonyx]

The 1998 T. rex is a huge improvement sculpt wise. The arms are detailed and carefully shaped, as opposed to the flat, spatulate arms of the 1988 model. The horizontal posture is nice, though the sharp tail bend and tripod posture is a shame. The biggest improvement is the head sculpt - the overall head shape is great, with a lot of width across the back of the skull, individually sculpted teeth, a detailed inside o f the mouth, and the detailed gold eyes are a nice touch. The paint scheme is pretty good, but it's a slight pet peeve of mine that T. rex is so often depicted as a brick red colour - why did this trope catch on so much? When this toy came out 20 years ago it blew the other available T. rex toys out of the water, and 20 years on it still holds up pretty well.

[Shonisaurus]

I congratulate you I @Ictonyx  on your Carnegie figures. Although antiquated they do not stop having their charm, although also it is necessary to recognize that they are figures of more than 20 and 30 years. In my case I can not complain that these figures are not up to some current especially Safari, but as I say we must take into account the date of manufacture.

Of all of them, the one I like the most is Carnegie tyrannosaurus from 1998. It was a great toy dinosaur figure and revelation in its day.

[RobinGoodfellow]

I have two Carnegie T. rex models - the 1988 and 1998.

..I'm not a Carnegie expert but the one you're showing doesn't seem to be the 1988 version..
The Carnegie Rex had several version: https://www.dinosaur-toys-collectors-guide.com/dinosaur-t-rex.html
The 1988 version is like that:
 
It has a rounded head and less defined teeth :


The figure you're showing could be the 1996 version:

( 1996 version VS 1994 version )

As I said, I'm not a Carnegie expert.

[Ictonyx]

RobinGoodfellow: This is really interesting, because as you say my figure undoubtedly looks like the mid-90s ones you posted. However, the date on the belly of the toy says 1988. I wonder if some or all of the mid-90s models have the old date on them for some reason?

[RobinGoodfellow]

RobinGoodfellow: This is really interesting, because as you say my figure undoubtedly looks like the mid-90s ones you posted. However, the date on the belly of the toy says 1988. I wonder if some or all of the mid-90s models have the old date on them for some reason?

I also have the 1996 version:



The "older" one:


Unfortunately I can't check their belly because they're in storage right now.. 

[Roselaar]

Some good nice golden oldies there! Great photography as well.

[Halichoeres]

In 1996-1997 most of the Carnegie models had their sculpts retooled, but they weren't considered new releases, so the bellies continued to show the date of the original figure's release. Some of the differences were very small; in some cases I'm not confident I could distinguish them without a side by side comparison.

[Ictonyx]

Thanks for the information!