HAOLONGGOOD - New for 2024

[GnastyGnorc]

The PNSO wasn't advertised as 1:35, but it would be much too large for that scale, I did some measurements and compared it to the measurements given for a fairly complete skeleton on p. 167 of Peter Dodson's "The Horned Dinosaurs" (centrum  length 5.5-5.8 meters, femur length 83 cm, and height at the hips around 1.65 m) and it seems to be close to 1:25 scale. The Battat actually seems pretty close to 1:35 with 14 cm length, femur 2.5 cm, hip height 4.7 cm, but if HLG is also correct for a large size Styracosaurus at 1:35 scale I'll pick it up (sometimes HLG seems to depict individuals that are considerably smaller than the largest known for the genus, like with Edmontosaurus which the dinotoyblog review said was more like 1:45 for a large individual, or Maiasaura which the DinosDragons youtube review said was around 1:40).

The size estimates one finds for Styracosaurus typically are in the range of 5-6 meters, with many sources stating a size of 5.5 meters but with the added note that observations on some specimens indicate that Styracosaurus could have grown somewhat larger. So 5.5 meters would be about 16 cm in 1:35 scale. The PNSO figure is about 18 cm long, so this would represent an individual of between 6 and 6.5 meters. Certainly on the large end of the spectrum, but not impossible considering population statistics, e.g. the ratio between the largest individual of a species and the average size of a species. So for the PNSO figure slightly oversized probably yes, but much too large no.

Also I believe there has been more research indicating that a down turned nasal horn(which the PNSO has slightly) can possibly coincide with age. I believe this was research was done for centrosaurus.

So I guess you can make a good case that It represents a very old and large individual and have it be fairly close to the current estimates.

[SidB]

After waiting for years (in vain) on Wild Past's 1:35 Majungasaurus, Haolonggood finally swoops in and delivers the goods. What a beautiful model. Can't wait to see the other variant. The Styracosaurus looks great as well! I liked the subdued color palatte, but I'm guessing the other variant will be more colorful.

Yup, I've just about given up on that Wild Past one, so tis release seems to be the answer.

[dinofelid]

The PNSO wasn't advertised as 1:35, but it would be much too large for that scale, I did some measurements and compared it to the measurements given for a fairly complete skeleton on p. 167 of Peter Dodson's "The Horned Dinosaurs" (centrum  length 5.5-5.8 meters, femur length 83 cm, and height at the hips around 1.65 m) and it seems to be close to 1:25 scale. The Battat actually seems pretty close to 1:35 with 14 cm length, femur 2.5 cm, hip height 4.7 cm, but if HLG is also correct for a large size Styracosaurus at 1:35 scale I'll pick it up (sometimes HLG seems to depict individuals that are considerably smaller than the largest known for the genus, like with Edmontosaurus which the dinotoyblog review said was more like 1:45 for a large individual, or Maiasaura which the DinosDragons youtube review said was around 1:40).

The size estimates one finds for Styracosaurus typically are in the range of 5-6 meters, with many sources stating a size of 5.5 meters but with the added note that observations on some specimens indicate that Styracosaurus could have grown somewhat larger. So 5.5 meters would be about 16 cm in 1:35 scale. The PNSO figure is about 18 cm long, so this would represent an individual of between 6 and 6.5 meters. Certainly on the large end of the spectrum, but not impossible considering population statistics, e.g. the ratio between the largest individual of a species and the average size of a species. So for the PNSO figure slightly oversized probably yes, but much too large no.

I think quoted lengths (especially in scientific books like Dodson's) are usually intended to be measured along the curved path of the spine and center of the skull rather than straight horizontal length (this is mentioned for example on p. 8 of the book Dinosaur Facts and Figures: The Sauropods, and DinosDragons' newer videos often mention using centrum length for this reason, though his Jan 2022 Styracosaurus video used the horizontal length). The PNSO model is 18 cm horizontally (measured from the tip of the horn, if measured from the beak more like 16.5 cm horizontally) but more like 20-20.5 cm for centrum length, which would be 7-7.2 m at 1:35. And if there are no fossils with complete set of vertebrae + skull it might be that there's more guesswork in total length compared to femur length or hip height, Dodson's numbers imply centrum length is longer than femur length by a factor of 6.6 - 7, but looking at Scott Hartman's skeletal here and using some curved measuring tape on the screen, the ratio there is more like 6.15, so with Hartman's proportions (which seem pretty close to the PNSO model if I try to scale it to be about the same size on my screen) a femur length of 83 cm would imply a length closer to 5.1 meters. This again would make the PNSO model close to 1:25 scale, similar to what I get if I go by femur length (3.5 cm) or hip height (6.3 cm).

It's possible that there might be more fragmentary Styracosaurus fossils that can be compared with the more complete one Dodson discusses to suggest a much larger individual, does anyone know if that's the case? Here's what Dodson says about the fossil he gives measurements for:

As a footnote, in 1935 the University of Toronto investigated the site where C. M. Sternberg had collected S. albertensis 22 years earlier. Some bone was exposed at the site, and further excavation resulted in the recovery of the missing lower jaws and a good portion of the skeleton. These bones have never been described but were eventually traded to Ottawa to accompany the type skeleton. Dale Russell kindly supplied me with measurements of the skeleton. The lengths of the femur and tibia, 83 cm and 61 cm respectively, suggest that Styracosaurus was a little larger than the Centrosaurus skeletons in New York and New Haven. It was perhaps 5.5-5.8 m in total length and 1.65 m high at the hips.

[SidB]

The grey Syraco works for me, yes there are subtleties there. I don't mind have another one to accompany my herd (Battat, Favorite (2), Safari, PNSO, Schleich). The Majunga is a winner, it seems.

[Turkeysaurus]

Muddy brown and bunch of random black blotches for such an iconic species?

[thomasw100]

The PNSO wasn't advertised as 1:35, but it would be much too large for that scale, I did some measurements and compared it to the measurements given for a fairly complete skeleton on p. 167 of Peter Dodson's "The Horned Dinosaurs" (centrum  length 5.5-5.8 meters, femur length 83 cm, and height at the hips around 1.65 m) and it seems to be close to 1:25 scale. The Battat actually seems pretty close to 1:35 with 14 cm length, femur 2.5 cm, hip height 4.7 cm, but if HLG is also correct for a large size Styracosaurus at 1:35 scale I'll pick it up (sometimes HLG seems to depict individuals that are considerably smaller than the largest known for the genus, like with Edmontosaurus which the dinotoyblog review said was more like 1:45 for a large individual, or Maiasaura which the DinosDragons youtube review said was around 1:40).

The size estimates one finds for Styracosaurus typically are in the range of 5-6 meters, with many sources stating a size of 5.5 meters but with the added note that observations on some specimens indicate that Styracosaurus could have grown somewhat larger. So 5.5 meters would be about 16 cm in 1:35 scale. The PNSO figure is about 18 cm long, so this would represent an individual of between 6 and 6.5 meters. Certainly on the large end of the spectrum, but not impossible considering population statistics, e.g. the ratio between the largest individual of a species and the average size of a species. So for the PNSO figure slightly oversized probably yes, but much too large no.

I think quoted lengths (especially in scientific books like Dodson's) are usually intended to be measured along the curved path of the spine and center of the skull rather than straight horizontal length (this is mentioned for example on p. 8 of the book Dinosaur Facts and Figures: The Sauropods, and DinosDragons' newer videos often mention using centrum length for this reason, though his Jan 2022 Styracosaurus video used the horizontal length). The PNSO model is 18 cm horizontally (measured from the tip of the horn, if measured from the beak more like 16.5 cm horizontally) but more like 20-20.5 cm for centrum length, which would be 7-7.2 m at 1:35. And if there are no fossils with complete set of vertebrae + skull it might be that there's more guesswork in total length compared to femur length or hip height, Dodson's numbers imply centrum length is longer than femur length by a factor of 6.6 - 7, but looking at Scott Hartman's skeletal here and using some curved measuring tape on the screen, the ratio there is more like 6.15, so with Hartman's proportions (which seem pretty close to the PNSO model if I try to scale it to be about the same size on my screen) a femur length of 83 cm would imply a length closer to 5.1 meters. This again would make the PNSO model close to 1:25 scale, similar to what I get if I go by femur length (3.5 cm) or hip height (6.3 cm).

It's possible that there might be more fragmentary Styracosaurus fossils that can be compared with the more complete one Dodson discusses to suggest a much larger individual, does anyone know if that's the case? Here's what Dodson says about the fossil he gives measurements for:

As a footnote, in 1935 the University of Toronto investigated the site where C. M. Sternberg had collected S. albertensis 22 years earlier. Some bone was exposed at the site, and further excavation resulted in the recovery of the missing lower jaws and a good portion of the skeleton. These bones have never been described but were eventually traded to Ottawa to accompany the type skeleton. Dale Russell kindly supplied me with measurements of the skeleton. The lengths of the femur and tibia, 83 cm and 61 cm respectively, suggest that Styracosaurus was a little larger than the Centrosaurus skeletons in New York and New Haven. It was perhaps 5.5-5.8 m in total length and 1.65 m high at the hips.

I am fully aware of the fact that length mesurements of vertebrates are reported along the centra. However, the difference between horizontal length and length through the centra for ceratopsians is not so large. Quick approximate length estimations may be done using horizontal length and subsequently refined by more accurate measurements.

We can compare the length of the PNSO Styracosaurus of 18 cm with that of their recent Lokiceratops which is 18.5 cm. The Lokiceratops figure has been reconstructed in close collaboration with the paleontologists which described the species and they quote a length of 6.7 meters for the holotype. The Styracosarus has pretty much the same profile as the Lokiceratops, so the PNSO model of the Styracosaurus would represent an approximately similarly sized animal.

I think that we need to work with rather large error margins when dealing with size estimates of extinct animals. It is very difficult to estimate the maximum size of a species, given that at best we may have a few dozen fossils of species which existed in many million individuals. I would generally doubt that the size range of the fossils we have would be even marginally representative of the true size range of that species.

A slightly more robust approach that has been advocated is to use other vertebrate megafauna (including extant mammals) as a proxy for obtaining the ratio between the largest known individual in a population and the average size of individuals of that populations. That ratio typically lies between 1.2 and 2 as far as I remember. We can use these ratios for obtaining an estimate for the size range of fossil species, but taking into account the still large error margin of that estimate.

In conclusion, I would not worry at all about a 20 percent size difference between a figure and the average size of know fossils of any extinct species. So I happily take the PNSO Styracosaurus figure as a large old individual.

[DefinitelyNOTDilo]

If you ask me, any measurement is gonna be in some way flawed. Measuring length will be affected by whether or not you follow the curve, and maybe the tail of a model is too short or too long. Measuring various anatomical features is better, but there's still the issue of a model being out of proportion and the difficulty of finding where some bones start and end. Imo the best method is to get a grid or object you know is 1/35 of a meter and simply overlay a trusted skeletal or some other image and see how they line up, something I plan to do for my models soon.

[Gwangi]

I understand the "love" of some nostalgic collectors of the ol' Carnegies and Battat figures, but saying that the Battat styracosaurus is "superior" to any of the market ... sorry, it is years away from them, in every aspect, even the shiny paint. I don't think I need to number all the flaws of that figure, because they are obvious for anyone to see. And yes, I'm a vintage collector myself (I don't think lots of people have the variety of different collections I have) and yes, I love of every one of them.

Comments like this make me chuckle but since I'm the one that brought up the Battat Styracosaurus I feel compelled to respond. I think the Battat Styracosaurus is superior to any on the market. It is MY opinion and you do not have to agree with it. Nothing you can say or have said can change my mind. When I look at the Battat Styracosaurus it generates a positive reaction in my brain that no other Styracosaurus figure has ever done. And it's not nostalgia, I did not grow up with Battat toys. I don't feel the same way about most other Battat figures. I think Haolonggood's Ouranosaurus is better (despite its flaws) than Battat's and I don't like the Battat Ceratosaurus at all, and I could go on. But I collect PNSO, Doug Watson's ceratopsians, and Haolonggood, and the Battat Styracosaurus stands alongside them all and they do not influence how I feel about it. I don't care about the orientation of its hands or where its nostrils are, it is FLAWLESS, and what you call flaws are just byproducts of its age that I cannot hold against it. That is all.

[Duna]

I don't care about the orientation of its hands or where its nostrils are

For me there is a clear difference between "loving" one figure and saying it is "superior" to any other more accurate Styracosaurus, that's why I said that because that is what I think. I hope I made it clear for you. You can think whatever you like, of course. That is all.

[Duna]

rep, delete

[bmathison1972]

I don't care about the orientation of its hands or where its nostrils are

For me there is a clear difference between "loving" one figure and saying it is "superior" to any other more accurate Styracosaurus, that's why I said that because that is what I think. I hope I made it clear for you. You can think whatever you like, of course. That is all.

whenever someone says something is 'superior' or 'the best' it is always a non-quantifiable subjective comment. Sure, one can argue the pedantics of the placement of this foot, or the length of this tail, or the thickness of these spikes, but at the end of the day, these are plastic renditions of animals no one has ever, or probably will ever, see in nature. I just read Gwangi saying that was his favorite or the best in his opinion. Nothing more, nothing less.

[dinofelid]

I am fully aware of the fact that length mesurements of vertebrates are reported along the centra. However, the difference between horizontal length and length through the centra for ceratopsians is not so large. Quick approximate length estimations may be done using horizontal length and subsequently refined by more accurate measurements.

We can compare the length of the PNSO Styracosaurus of 18 cm with that of their recent Lokiceratops which is 18.5 cm. The Lokiceratops figure has been reconstructed in close collaboration with the paleontologists which described the species and they quote a length of 6.7 meters for the holotype. The Styracosarus has pretty much the same profile as the Lokiceratops, so the PNSO model of the Styracosaurus would represent an approximately similarly sized animal.

I think that we need to work with rather large error margins when dealing with size estimates of extinct animals. It is very difficult to estimate the maximum size of a species, given that at best we may have a few dozen fossils of species which existed in many million individuals. I would generally doubt that the size range of the fossils we have would be even marginally representative of the true size range of that species.

A slightly more robust approach that has been advocated is to use other vertebrate megafauna (including extant mammals) as a proxy for obtaining the ratio between the largest known individual in a population and the average size of individuals of that populations. That ratio typically lies between 1.2 and 2 as far as I remember. We can use these ratios for obtaining an estimate for the size range of fossil species, but taking into account the still large error margin of that estimate.

In conclusion, I would not worry at all about a 20 percent size difference between a figure and the average size of know fossils of any extinct species. So I happily take the PNSO Styracosaurus figure as a large old individual.

Sure, I agree it's reasonable to use horizontal length as a first approximation, but with more accurate measures the scale estimates can be refined--if you take the PNSO model as being 1:35 and compare it to the fossil Dodson describes, it'd be 34% larger based on hip height of 1.65 m, 39% larger if you use the centrum length of 5.1 meters I got using proportions from the Scott Hartman skeletal, and 48% larger with a femur length of 83 cm (though it's hard to judge exactly where the ends of the femur would be under the skin and muscle in the model, I could see it being as little as 3.2 cm rather than 3.5 cm, in which case it'd be more like 35% larger). Based on the numbers you mention it may be that for some large herbivores this is plausible for a large individual compared to an average one (assuming Dodson's was about average), for others well outside the range of what's been measured. For example in the case of African Elephants, p. 550 of this paper gives an average male shoulder height of 320 cm, and this page mentions the largest male on record was 3.96 meters at the shoulders, or about 24% taller.

[Sim]

I did get the impression a few posters were saying the Battat Styracosaurus is better than any other version of the animal.  I disagree with that opinion...  I love the Battat Styracosaurus, it is extremely good, but its skin texture isn't consistent with what is known of ceratopsian skin.  I believe the PNSO Styracosaurus is the best figure of the species, and I guess Haolonggood's is too although I don't like the latter's rather simple colouration as seen so far.

I think the Battat Ouranosaurus is better than Haolonggood's unfortunately.

[bmathison1972]

I did get the impression a few posters were saying the Battat Styracosaurus is better than any other version of the animal.  I disagree with that opinion... 

and to reiterate what I wrote above, you both simply have opinions. Gwangi thinks Battat's is the best, you think PNSO is the best. Neither of you are correct, neither are wrong... 

[thomasw100]

Sure, I agree it's reasonable to use horizontal length as a first approximation, but with more accurate measures the scale estimates can be refined--if you take the PNSO model as being 1:35 and compare it to the fossil Dodson describes, it'd be 34% larger based on hip height of 1.65 m, 39% larger if you use the centrum length of 5.1 meters I got using proportions from the Scott Hartman skeletal, and 48% larger with a femur length of 83 cm (though it's hard to judge exactly where the ends of the femur would be under the skin and muscle in the model, I could see it being as little as 3.2 cm rather than 3.5 cm, in which case it'd be more like 35% larger). Based on the numbers you mention it may be that for some large herbivores this is plausible for a large individual compared to an average one (assuming Dodson's was about average), for others well outside the range of what's been measured. For example in the case of African Elephants, p. 550 of this paper gives an average male shoulder height of 320 cm, and this page mentions the largest male on record was 3.96 meters at the shoulders, or about 24% taller.

How do we know if the holotype? described by Dodson is an average sized, small or large individual?

[Sim]

Yes, and Gwangi did acknowledge it was his opinion in his original post.  I was responding more to the posts which seemed to say the Battat is objectively better.

[bmathison1972]

Yes, and Gwangi did acknowledge it was his opinion in his original post.  I was responding more to the posts which seemed to say the Battat is objectively better.

Yeah, over the years I have tried to refrain from things like 'best' and 'worst' and try to say things like 'my favorite' or 'least favorite' and explain why 

[Pinbacker]

Muddy brown and bunch of random black blotches for such an iconic species?

There's obviously going to be another color variant, and I'm sure it will be a brighter color palette

[Doyouthinkhesaurus Rex]

Haolonggood PLEASE I can't TAKE this anymore, simply too many good releases, I can't keep up anymore hahah

We really are in a golden age of dinosaur collecting, so many good releases from so many companies clearly passionate about their work. My wallet is definitely not in a golden age though... 

[Sim]

I'm very happy Haolonggood has produced a theropod again and that they are releasing two figures at the same time.  However, Majungasaurus isn't a species that interests me...  I wish companies would give representation to Abelisaurus, Aucasaurus or Skorpiovenator...  I guess Majungasaurus is popular though, so it gets attention after Carnotaurus...  I'm happy lots of people are pleased by this figure.  The Styracosaurus doesn't appeal to me, which is fine since I'm happy with the PNSO version.