Top 10 Tyrannosaurus Toys [Completed]

[Tyrant Lizard Queen]

How about the Kaiyodo Capsule Q Feathered Tyrannosaurus? I own it, and it is extremely accurate and also has tons of details packed into such a tiny sculpt.

Papo's Tyrannosaurus are nice as far as they are fantasy monsters

LMAO. You know that Stan Winston designed it's T-Rex with accuracy in mind? I already made more than enough comparison's with the actual skeleton and Winston's replica.. There are some minor innacuracies like longer hands, but saying that it's just a Fantasy ( ?! ) monster is nothing but plain silly. Or you simply don't know anything about T-Rex anatomy. It's just impossible to take such comments seriously. I would understand if you talked about JP raptors or Spino, but certainly not Rex, as it's one if not the most accurate dino in the whole franchise.


P.S. I would never buy a feathered T-Rex model as there are absolutely none direct evidence from any of the found fossils that grown-up Tyrannosaurus Rex had feathers.

If I can assure you something is that every single dinosaur interpretation that appears in Jurassic Park,and probably Jurassic World too is not accurate by one thing or another.JP is the all time most well-known dinosaur movie,and in such a succesful movie you don't do your dinos as accurate as possible,people will get a weong view of dinosaurs.Which is in fact what has happened.Science has told us,(or is it me) that every single: deinonychosaur,troodontid,therizinosaur,and ornithomimosaur.Tyrannosaurs may sound optional for you,but take Dilong and Yutyrannus into account.Plus,some people say that young Tyrannosaurus was feathered when there is 0 evidence for that.Please don't talk about the feather thing again,it gets repetitive 

P.S. My 1300th post!

Read my post again. You do realise that I was talking about T-Rex specifically? You don't need to tell me about some innacurate species in JP. My point was that Stan Winston did a hella good job on recreating Tyrannosaurus Rex, based on it's anatomy (again - with some minor innacuracies). But overall it's still one of the best replicas of a T-rex, and certainly the most accurate replica in a movie trilogy. So when I see someone saying that Winston's recreation is pure fantasy - I call it bs, because that's exactly what it is. If you need pics where I did comparisons - let me know.

P.S. As for feathered trex - I wasnt the one who started talking about it. Other than that, there are 0 evidence to feathers on trex anyways.. So I stand behind my point.

[Concavenator]

Even the Tyrannosaurus is inaccurate,look at this.If you want a scaly Tyrannosaurus,this is pretty much the most accurate tou can get.This is how it should look:

http://scotthartman.deviantart.com/art/Stan-n-Sue-comparison-360918612

[Tyrant Lizard Queen]

Even the Tyrannosaurus is inaccurate,look at this.If you want a scaly Tyrannosaurus,this is pretty much the most accurate tou can get.This is how it should look:

http://scotthartman.deviantart.com/art/Stan-n-Sue-comparison-360918612

There are some inaccuracies but overall it still looks pretty accurate, far more from "fantasy monster" statement. Which is pure bs and overstatement.

Also here's comparison of a real skull & Winston's head sculpt (it's actually Rebor's replica which is based on Winston's design - but a lot more accurate and less bulky)

If there's to be some innacuracies with the head, like wider or higher snout - it could also easily be explained via differencies in proportions, found on many different T-Rex skulls.

All in All Winston's recreation (or should I say REBOR's?..) is more or less accurate.

[Concavenator]

Yes,that's Rebor's-not JP's-could you post a comparision between the JP T.rex and a real T.rex skull?Because there are some differences.

[Tyrant Lizard Queen]

Yes,that's Rebor's-not JP's-could you post a comparision between the JP T.rex and a real T.rex skull?Because there are some differences.

Sure.

Here you can see that there are a lot of details put in Winston's sculpt with some minor innacuracies - mostly a little too short and high snout, little too bulky lower jaw. But again, there are many examples found with different skull proportions. T-Rex is no exception.

However REBOR did an outstanding job on the head sculpt by improving Winston's version (making the snout little longer and overall head a lot less bulky, as you can see) while fitting the real skull as showed in the comparison photos.

[Concavenator]

Have you seen the new Carnegie Tyrannosaurus?It has the best head sculpt ever on a Tyrannosaurus imo.

[Tyrant Lizard Queen]

Have you seen the new Carnegie Tyrannosaurus?It has the best head sculpt ever on a Tyrannosaurus imo.

Can you share a link?

EDIT: Nevermind, I have seen it. I like it but not as much as newest Rebor replica.

But SS/Rebor aside (since those are not toys in anyway), I agree that Carniegie did a decent job. Too bad that the figure itself looks very low-end in terms of detail and painting.

[Concavenator]

Have you seen the new Carnegie Tyrannosaurus?It has the best head sculpt ever on a Tyrannosaurus imo.

Can you share a link?

https://safariltd.com/products/view/carnegie-dinosaurs-tyrannosaurus-rex-figurines-411301

[DinoToyForum]

@ Tyrant Lizard Queen. Warning 2. Three and you're out. This isn't the sort of forum where it is permitted to LMAO at someone elses honest opinion, call it "pure bs", or LOL at mods when they call you out on it. You can disagree and debate with tyrantqueen but you have to do so politely. Thanks for your understanding. 

[Tyrant Lizard Queen]

@ Tyrant Lizard Queen. Warning 2. Three and you're out. This isn't the sort of forum where it is permitted to LMAO at someone elses honest opinion, call it "pure bs", or LOL at mods when they call you out on it. You can disagree and debate with tyrantqueen but you have to do so politely. Thanks for your understanding. 

Atleast im making valid points with examples to stand behind my statements, instead of posting stuff that makes little to no sense.
If 'lol' hurts your eyes so much - I will go with 'laughing out loudly' next time. You fine with that?

[triceratops83]

Have you seen the new Carnegie Tyrannosaurus?It has the best head sculpt ever on a Tyrannosaurus imo.

I agree. Kinda makes me wanna see some companion pieces in different poses. Beautiful sculpt.

[Concavenator]

@ Tyrant Lizard Queen. Warning 2. Three and you're out. This isn't the sort of forum where it is permitted to LMAO at someone elses honest opinion, call it "pure bs", or LOL at mods when they call you out on it. You can disagree and debate with tyrantqueen but you have to do so politely. Thanks for your understanding. 

Atleast im making valid points with examples to stand behind my statements, instead of posting stuff that makes little to no sense.
If 'lol' hurts your eyes so much - I will go with 'laughing out loudly' next time. You fine with that?

Please be more polite.I have been rude sometimes and have tried to correct it 

[Tyrant Lizard Queen]

@Concavenator - In case you wonder - I wasn't talking about you (we had a nice diacussion btw), but about that other guy who told that Winston's recreation is a Fantasy monster. Which was a complete nonsense and overstatement, which I proved to be plain wrong.

Now lets get back on topic. Shall we?

[Concavenator]

@Concavenator - In case you wonder - I wasn't talking about you (we had a nice diacussion btw), but about that other guy who told that Winston's recreation is a Fantasy monster. Which was a complete nonsense and overstatement, which I proved to be plain wrong.

Now lets get back on topic. Shall we?

I agree with him,I think it's a monster.I just doesn't look either natural or possible to me.But that's my opinion,and I guess everyone has theirs.

[suspsy]

P.S. As for feathered trex - I wasnt the one who started talking about it. Other than that, there are 0 evidence to feathers on trex anyways.. So I stand behind my point.

There is actually more evidence that Tyrannosaurus rex possessed some degree of feathers than there is that it possessed none. We know for an absolute fact that Yutyrannus and Dilong possessed them. We also know that dinosaurs as large as Deinocheirus possessed them. Phylogenetic bracketing means that it's perfectly reasonable, even likely, that T. rex had feathers. No one can force you to like that interpretation any more than Spinosaurus fans can be forced to like the semiaquatic quadruped theory, but to claim that there is no evidence is simply fallacious.

[Tyrant Lizard Queen]

@Concavenator - In case you wonder - I wasn't talking about you (we had a nice diacussion btw), but about that other guy who told that Winston's recreation is a Fantasy monster. Which was a complete nonsense and overstatement, which I proved to be plain wrong.

Now lets get back on topic. Shall we?

I agree with him,I think it's a monster.I just doesn't look either natural or possible to me.But that's my opinion,and I guess everyone has theirs.

Well I disagree, not because I disrespect your opinion but because of the fact that Winston's head design is infact pretty damn close to the actual skull... Especially REBOR's uptated model (which you also agreed on).

There might be some minor innacuracies but saying its a "fantasy monster" is not only a nonsensical overstatement but also a disrespect to Stan Winston himself (RIP).

But whatever..

[suspsy]

@Concavenator - In case you wonder - I wasn't talking about you (we had a nice diacussion btw), but about that other guy who told that Winston's recreation is a Fantasy monster. Which was a complete nonsense and overstatement, which I proved to be plain wrong.

Stan Winston had nothing to do with any of the Papo T. Rex sculpts. At best, they were inspired by JP, but they go on to take liberties of their own. The female's tail is far too short and she's standing upright like Godzilla. The male's head is malformed and the teeth are all wrong, more like the V. Rex from Peter Jackson's King Kong. And both figures  have pronated wrists and  ridiculously oversized limbs and feet. And then there are the babies, whose heads are completely wrong and against fossil evidence.

They are still recognizable as T. Rexes, but the term "fantasy monster" is not altogether unreasonable.

[Concavenator]

@Concavenator - In case you wonder - I wasn't talking about you (we had a nice diacussion btw), but about that other guy who told that Winston's recreation is a Fantasy monster. Which was a complete nonsense and overstatement, which I proved to be plain wrong.

Now lets get back on topic. Shall we?

I agree with him,I think it's a monster.I just doesn't look either natural or possible to me.But that's my opinion,and I guess everyone has theirs.

Well I disagree, not because I disrespect your opinion but because of the fact that Winston's head design is infact pretty damn close to the actual skull... Especially REBOR's uptated model (which you also agreed on).

There might be some minor innacuracies but saying its a "fantasy monster" is not only a nonsensical overstatement but also a disrespect to Stan Winston himself (RIP).

But whatever..

Meh,I didn't totally agree.Just passable.Besides,not sure what are with the huge head crests on the JP T.rex...
Well... 

[Tyrant Lizard Queen]

P.S. As for feathered trex - I wasnt the one who started talking about it. Other than that, there are 0 evidence to feathers on trex anyways.. So I stand behind my point.

There is actually more evidence that Tyrannosaurus rex possessed some degree of feathers than there is that it possessed none. We know for an absolute fact that Yutyrannus and Dilong possessed them. We also know that dinosaurs as large as Deinocheirus possessed them. Phylogenetic bracketing means that it's perfectly reasonable, even likely, that T. rex had feathers. No one can force you to like that interpretation any more than Spinosaurus fans can be forced to like the semiaquatic quadruped theory, but to claim that there is no evidence is simply fallacious.

Im sorry but this proves nothing, at all. Relatives having feathers doesn't make every specie of the same family to have feathers. Just because Yutyrannus was feathered it doesnt make Trex feathered too.

Feathered tyrannosaurus rex is only a theory / speculation at best. I would rather backup my arguments by actual facts like non existant marks of any feathers on any of the found t-rex fossils, then speculations.

So far, every non-feathered, recreation / representation of tyrannosaurus rex are technically correct.

EDIT: Glad you woke up! We were talking about Papo taking a freaking Inspiration from Stan, obviously. That doesnt change the fact it took most of its design choices from Winston, who recreated t-rex with accuracy in mind ( with some flaws ofc). If you even cared to read the whole discussion you would realise why calling it a fantasy monster is a complete nonsense.

[triceratops83]

Dor mei aside, I'm gonna have to pick the Invicta (I have a soft spot for retro upright tripods ), but the recent Carnegie is the best modern interpretation.