The best figure of every species, according to Halichoeres

[Halichoeres]

@frank08 I don't usually consider the ease of acquiring a figure when I'm evaluating them. That could definitely be an important consideration, but I'm willing to spend a little time and money finding better figures, to a point.

I'm surprised it didn't make the cut for best figure. It's a lot easier to find than the Favorite Co version. It took me about 5 minutes to find and order that figure. I've been looking for Favorite Co for weeks and no results. Not to mention it has feathers. And a well rounded color scheme. I call for a relook into the best Bistahieversor!

Honestly I'm not surprised Halichoeres chose the Favorite, Collecta's one has too wide hips, a weird body sharpe and an head sculpt that doesn't match Bistahieversor. Also I think that the availability of a figure is not been considered when chosing the best one. Anyway this is his thread, so I think he'll answer you on the question, I'm just offering my thoughts on Collecta's one.

L @Leyster correctly identifies some reasons I prefer the Favorite version. The CollectA also has very strange feet:

Theropods were digitigrade, meaning they walked on all of the phalanges of their feet. This one is posed only on its ungual phalanes and maybe the next most distal ones, making it more like unguligrade. Its foot looks like a hybrid between that of a theropod and that of an antelope. The 2015 feathered rex had the same problem, which might be part of the reason they retired it. As for feathers, I don't have a strong opinion on whether large tyrannosaurs in subtropical or warm temperate latitudes had them, so I don't use that as a criterion.

Despite being a little shrinkwrapped (expected from an Araki sculpt), I much prefer the Favorite version. I even like the blue color, although I acknowledge that it isn't the most likely coloration.


Edited to add: when I did own the CollectA Bistahieversor, it quickly pitched forward on its too-flexible legs, despite being kept in an air-conditioned room. If you keep its clear plastic saddle under it, you probably won't have that problem.

[Shonisaurus]

I honestly like both Favorite and Collecta bistahievesor figures but without a doubt I prefer Favorite bistehievesor for a reason it has no plumage and honestly although that is no longer scientific in theropods I am more used to theropods without plumage, maybe because I grew up With this scientific interpretation, on the other hand, I sincerely like the color blue and although it is not scientific either, I like this bistahieversor of Favorite, as I also like the carnotaurus of Favorite 2020.

[Sim]

PNSO Mamenchisaurus
Scale: 1:30
Sculptor: Zhao Chuang
Released: 2017
The scale estimate is based on M. constructus or M. youngi, which are smaller but well-known. Other species assigned to Mamenchisaurus were much larger. But I think PNSO meant it as one of those smaller species in any event, which means they are, like most other companies, making their figures in a larger scale than what they claim. This replaced the Invicta and Safari "Dinosaurs of China" versions, which I previously couldn't decide between.

@Halichoeres, I don't think the PNSO Mamenchisaurus represents M. youngi, the skull shape doesn't seem to match: http://www.paleofile.com/Dinosaurs/Sauropoda/Mamenchisaurus.asp  M. constructus is a possibility, but I think so is M. hochuanensis which is the species known to have a "tail club" which the PNSO Mamenchisaurus has.  In the booklet that comes with the PNSO Mamenchisaurus, there's an illustration of a Mamenchisaurus skeleton.  Comparing it to the reconstructions in Gregory Paul's second edition of The Princeton Field Guide to Dinosaurs, the one in the booklet seems to match M. hochuanensis, particularly in the skull.

[Mononykus]

@Halichoeres  I will concur that the PNSO Mamenchisaurus is most likely M. hochuanensis.
In addition to the features mentioned by @Sim, there are the following considerations:

It is not M. constructus because that species actually has a proportionately shorter neck than other Mamenchisaurus species.
It is not M. youngi because that species has a unique sacral structure so that the tail emerges in a way to produce a humped shape at the base of the tail, as shown by the Mojo figure.
I believe their pricey resin figure was actually identified as M. hochuanensis, so that species seems to be their 'go-to' species for this genus (as opposed to the larger M. sinocanadorum or M. jingyanensis, the latter which seems to get little attention or illustration).
Since M. hochuanensis is about 22m long, the PNSO model would be at 1/45 scale. What is the official scale for this figure? I wasn't aware they listed one (but I think I got mine without the box to save money).

[frank08]

Well, you can have your Bistahieversor and I can have mine. But that might change soon. I've been talking to Brett and I might be purchasing the Favorite Co figures. I heard this nice rule: never judge a figure by a picture, you have to see it in person. I also believe that if modern day animals had a certain color, dinosaurs could have that color too. Who knows! I might get that figure and end up liking it very much! The Favorite Bistahieversor may be a good friend for the Collecta Bistahieversor.

[RobinGoodfellow]

I heard this nice rule: never judge a figure by a picture, you have to see it in person.

You said it well ! 

[frank08]

Thank you! Thank you! There doesn't have to be a fight or as the Internet calls it, a "flame war" over the best Bistahieversor, I like my Collecta one and I might like the Favorite one. In fact once I have it in hand I will really like it. It happens every time! I'm sure the Collecta Bistahieversor and the Favorite Bistahieversor will have fun hunting the Pentaceratops that comes in the set! 

[frank08]

Also, where can I get the Stokesosaurus?

[frank08]

I'm actually surprised how many Jurassic coelurosaurs have toys, albeit not many good ones.  That poor poor Stokesosaurus... 

Isn't it hilarious, though? I mean it really just looks like a cartoon T rex, down to the two fingers, but I usually go by whatever they call it.

Here are the remaining Jurassic theropods:

Yowie Ozraptor (Lost Kingdoms B)
Scale: 1:25
Released: 2001

How did you get that Ozraptor? I would like to know where to get one.

[Halichoeres]

@Sim @Mononykus Thanks for that information! I had concluded it was M. youngi mostly based on this promotional photo:



But I'm not particularly well versed in sauropod anatomy, and moreover I'm not sure who's responsible for this photo. It might not be PNSO at all. Based on what you're both saying, it seems like M. hochuanensis seems like a pretty good bet. I think this whole line of boxed figures was marketed as 1:35, but most of them are considerably larger--this is the only one I can think of that would actually come in at or under scale. (Although one can always construe it as a less-than-max-size individual.) Anyway, thanks again!

@frank08 I certainly hope I didn't come off as trying to flame the CollectA Bistahieversor; I don't think it's bad, it just isn't my favorite version of the genus. I agree that there's a limit to what you can learn about figures from photos.

As for the Stokesosaurus, I bought that from an eBay seller in Europe. A Yowie subsidiary recently released a repainted version in the US but called it Tyrannosaurus (which it honestly more closely resembles). The Ozraptor I got from a seller on Australian eBay. I find that most Australian listings don't show up on US eBay, but sometimes sellers are willing to ship to the US if you contact them directly. Once or twice helpful forum members have also forwarded me packages from Australia. International shipping is kind of a crapshoot right now, but I expect it will calm down in time.

[frank08]

Thank you Hali! I am now thinking about doing some dioramas. I want to house dinosaurs from the same scale, place, and time in an accurate diorama. My shelf is quite helter-skelter right now so maybe using cardboard diorama cases will make my shelf a more organized place. I have 3 levels (maybe Triassic, Jurassic, Cretaceous) but that would leave out my Paleozoic and Cenozoic figures. Maybe Paleozoic, Mesozoic, and Cenozoic with index cards explaining the time periods. Any ideas of scale, place, or time period will be appreciated! It will be quite a "Mammoth" undertaking!;)

Also when you get a figure and find a better version (like with your Battat Triceratops and your Safari Triceratops) where do you put the unlucky version? And I agree, shipping is not at its best!:D

[Halichoeres]

@frank08 Strong start, you've got some real gems! I've found that organizing by scale actually takes up a lot of space because figures come in essentially every possible scale (I have figures that are 10×life size, but also some that are 1/100th life size). Still, for Jurassic and Cretaceous animals, 1:35 is really common and you can find a wide variety of animals that look good together. On the other hand, for the Paleozoic, Cenozoic, and Triassic, you'll probably find more at 1:20 scale or even larger. Finally, there is just much more available from the Cretaceous than any other period. In fact, according to the stats on dinotoycollector, there are more figures of Cretaceous animals than all other periods combined. So it might make sense to have an all-Cretaceous shelf, since it looks like your collection also has the Cretaceous heavily represented. When I first started collecting I tried to have shelves dedicated to particular formations or geological stages, but there are really very few that have a good proportion of the fauna represented at roughly similar scales. I chose to relax the contemporaneity criterion, but you might instead choose to relax the scale criterion--whatever arrangement makes you pleased when you gaze upon your shelf!

As for what happens when I get a new version of a given species, I generally trade or sell the old one. It's a good way of keeping the collection to a manageable size.

[frank08]

I'm sure you saw my Carnegie Giganotosaurus. I got him at a Jurassic quest, and the suppliers treated him very rough. On one hand, two of his fingers broke off but he's so rare I usually overlook that and call it "battle scars" because large theropods lead rough lives. I think that if I have two figures that I want to put on a diorama together, but they're not the same scale, I could call one a juvenile. I'm thinking about doing Triassic first. Also how did you find the Bullyland figures?

[RobinGoodfellow]

@frank08  : Posting your images on someone else collection thread is not so kind.. 

[frank08]

@RobinGoodfellow whatever do you mean my friend? I don't see any pictures.

[SBell]

@RobinGoodfellow whatever do you mean my friend? I don't see any pictures.

They're referring to the photo of your shelf, I think.

[frank08]

What photo of my shelf? Are you misremembering things? Has the Mandela Effect struck again? Can only Halichoeres post on here? So many questions!

[Flaffy]

What photo of my shelf? Are you misremembering things? Has the Mandela Effect struck again? Can only Halichoeres post on here? So many questions!

You do realise people can see that you've edited your posts right? Pretty sure admins can check what's been edited as well.

[frank08]

If you don't want me to post photos on here, than I won't.  I can make my own judgements about figures.

[RobinGoodfellow]

If you don't want me to post photos on here, than I won't.  I can make my own judgements about figures.

..no, don't be angry.. just remember to post your pictures in right thread, that's all.. 
There are a lot of threads for your pictures, don't worry..
I just said that it's not kind to post personal pictures in a collection thread of someone else..
You've just to choose the right thread 
Regards