The best figure of every species, according to Halichoeres

[Halichoeres]

OK, IK this was updated a while ago. Regarding the best Cryo, I think Safari's is more accurate. Battat's is good but it has the crest split in half where it was one structure in real life.

I also think Safari's a better figure personally.

I hadn't noticed that about the crest. I had actually replaced the Battat in my collection; however, I hadn't updated the reference list to reflect that. I'll do that next time I edit it. I went to grad school with Nate Smith, who advised on the sculpt, and he is one of those paleontologists who would actually pay attention to life appearance of an animal (many don't, concerned with other questions).

Following the post by Primeval12, I think the PNSO Tarbosaurus is better than the Favorite museum exclusive version.  The scales on the PNSO are a more realistic size and the teeth are more appropriately sized than the Favorite's uniform teeth.

The Favorite does have oversized scales and the teeth are possibly too small (and too similar in size). But I find the PNSO version really off-putting. It's bulbous, and I'm pretty sure the teeth are too large. That, coupled with the lack of oral tissue, makes it look irredeemably goofy to me. So I'm sticking with the Favorite version for now at least. I'd consider the Creative Beast one if it were in 1:35, but 1:18 is too big for me.

And now, some Mesozoic miscellany:


CollectA Mosasaurus
Scale: 1:40
Sculptor: Matthias Geiger, presumably
Released: 2023
Campanian - Maastrichtian
Etymology: Fr./Gr. "Meuse [River] lizard"
Usually when CollectA makes a deluxe version of an animal they've made before, it has roughly the same palette, but this is quite different from their 2014 edition. More importantly, though, the sculpt is a huge improvement. Geiger filled in the hollow fenestrae and added some really fine detail. The pterygoid teeth aren't as distinct as they could be, but it's clear they were at least attempted.


With PNSO's "Ron," which the Collecta figure is replacing. Both CollectA and PNSO have improved their mosasaurs. I think this is the third Mosasaurus figure I've owned in succession; it would be nice if companies would try some other mosasaur genera.


A crunchy snack.


CollectA Shastasaurus
Scale: 1:25*
Sculptor: Matthias Geiger, presumably
Released: 2023
Late Triassic
Etymology: Gr. "[Mount] Shasta lizard;" "Shasta" is an exonym for an indigenous group displaced by the California gold rush.
CollectA continues to be the top producer of oddball ichthyosaurs. The figure is a little tricky to interpret. As S. pacificus, it's about 1:25, and probably a bit too long-snouted. It might be intended as S. sikanniensis, although that species probably belongs in another genus. It would be about 1:75 in that case. In any event, the weird toothless mouth enhances the penguin impression given by the paint job.


It replaces this old Sonokong Shastasaurus, which looks more like a mosasaur anyway. There are few things more satisfying with a collection like mine than ditching a homely figure for a much nicer one.


And because most of you are too discerning to have ever owned any Sonokong figures, the more familiar Safari Nothosaurus for scale.


Mattel Austroraptor (Jurassic World)
Scale: 1:20 - 1:25
Released: 2023
Maastrichtian of South America
Etymology: L. "southern thief"
Mattel actually did okay on the overall shape, but it inexplicably lacks feathers except along the ulna. This is also the only Mattel action figure I have that doesn't stand stably. This one, too, will be satisfying to ditch one day.


Mattel Elaphrosaurus (Jurassic World)
Scale: 1:18-ish
Released: 2023
Upper Jurassic of Africa
Etymology: Gr. "light/agile lizard"
This is a contender for the most difficult Mattel theropod to pick out of a lineup. It has essentially nothing in common with the actual animal, which was a little like an ornithomimosaur before there were ornithomimosaurs, and probably without feathers. I went to Best Buy recently to get a case for my new phone, and after I picked one out I noticed they had a toy section, which I wasn't aware of. Imagine my surprise when they had these in stock, although sadly not the Nothosaurus, which is the one I wanted most from this assortment.


With a much nicer action figure for scale.

[JimoAi]

sick finally you have obtained the collectA mosasaurs. barring the Botm Tyrannosaurus, this is my favourite 2023 prehistoric release and one that's 100% staying even after my recent downsizing my prehistoric collection to only couple of late Cretaceous genera. however I feel that it's more 1:32/1:35 based on the current estimates for M. hoffmani and to be honest I wished the figure was a way darker colour but it's just an opinion

[SBell]

sick finally you have obtained the collectA mosasaurs. barring the Botm Tyrannosaurus, this is my favourite 2023 prehistoric release and one that's 100% staying even after my recent downsizing my prehistoric collection to only couple of late Cretaceous genera. however I feel that it's more 1:32/1:35 based on the current estimates for M. hoffmani and to be honest I wished the figure was a way darker colour but it's just an opinion

I've debated on the mosasaurus. I have several already... and the official photos don't do it justice. But the photos here make it look great.

[TooOldForDinosaurs]

Great acquisitions @Halichoeres and I agree with @SBell , your photos make the mosasaur look better than the official ones. Something about the shastasaurus bugs me though and I don't quite know what it is. Either the white around its eyes or the open mouth or both things together make it look like an agitated penguin. 

[Sim]

I hadn't noticed that about the crest. I had actually replaced the Battat in my collection; however, I hadn't updated the reference list to reflect that. I'll do that next time I edit it. I went to grad school with Nate Smith, who advised on the sculpt, and he is one of those paleontologists who would actually pay attention to life appearance of an animal (many don't, concerned with other questions).

Which figure did Nate Smith advise on?

The Favorite does have oversized scales and the teeth are possibly too small (and too similar in size). But I find the PNSO version really off-putting. It's bulbous, and I'm pretty sure the teeth are too large. That, coupled with the lack of oral tissue, makes it look irredeemably goofy to me. So I'm sticking with the Favorite version for now at least. I'd consider the Creative Beast one if it were in 1:35, but 1:18 is too big for me.

The teeth of the PNSO Tarbosaurus look okay to me when compared to Scott Hartman's Tarbosaurus skeletal: https://www.skeletaldrawing.com/theropods/tarbosaurus
It's fair enough if you find the PNSO Tarbosaurus isn't for you, although I am surprised that you find it off-putting and goofy as I find it excellent and many other people like it as it has placed first in our forum's top 10 figures of 2021 poll.  Also, I find the Favorite Tarbosaurus goofy due to its expression combined with the uniform teeth and large scales.  Different strokes for different folk, I guess!

Mattel Austroraptor (Jurassic World)
Scale: 1:20 - 1:25
Released: 2023
Maastrichtian of South America
Etymology: L. "southern thief"
Mattel actually did okay on the overall shape, but it inexplicably lacks feathers except along the ulna. This is also the only Mattel action figure I have that doesn't stand stably. This one, too, will be satisfying to ditch one day.

I hope the day you ditch this figure will come, as that means a better Austroraptor will have been made, something which I'd like very much!

[Faelrin]

Tbh I think Mattel's later upcoming Piatnitzkysaurus is probably a worse offender then that Elaphrosaurus, though neither do a good job at looking like the dinosaurs in question. Hoping you can get better versions of these someday. The Austroraptor was particularly frustrating as they have given other dinosaurs feathers that likely wouldn't have had them (Eocarcharia, maybe the Xuanhanosaurus), but omitted them from the ones that did, or likely would have (such as that one, and the Sinotyrannus). Granted if it had been made back in like 2018, I probably wouldn't be so harsh on it, and eagerly picked it up, as the franchise didn't embrace feathered dinosaurs back then, and it would easily fit in alongside their retro misnamed Deinonychus. But now the tables have changed, and with it my standards.

[Halichoeres]

sick finally you have obtained the collectA mosasaurs. barring the Botm Tyrannosaurus, this is my favourite 2023 prehistoric release and one that's 100% staying even after my recent downsizing my prehistoric collection to only couple of late Cretaceous genera. however I feel that it's more 1:32/1:35 based on the current estimates for M. hoffmani and to be honest I wished the figure was a way darker colour but it's just an opinion

I've had them for weeks, just hadn't gotten around to photographing them. Instead they've been sitting next to my couch so I can handle them often! And fair enough, this could fit a pretty wide range of sizes but 1:30 - 1:35 is probably a more typical specimen.

I've debated on the mosasaurus. I have several already... and the official photos don't do it justice. But the photos here make it look great.

I think black flatters most figures! For what it's worth, this is my favorite Mosasaurus so far, and there are plenty of good ones. But part of me still wishes it were Kaikaifilu or something.

Great acquisitions @Halichoeres and I agree with @SBell , your photos make the mosasaur look better than the official ones. Something about the shastasaurus bugs me though and I don't quite know what it is. Either the white around its eyes or the open mouth or both things together make it look like an agitated penguin. 

It definitely has strong penguin vibes. The toothlessness, the tuxedo, the general head shape. Still happy they made it at all, though!

Which figure did Nate Smith advise on?

The Safari version, per a post by Doug Watson.

The teeth of the PNSO Tarbosaurus look okay to me when compared to Scott Hartman's Tarbosaurus skeletal: https://www.skeletaldrawing.com/theropods/tarbosaurus
It's fair enough if you find the PNSO Tarbosaurus isn't for you, although I am surprised that you find it off-putting and goofy as I find it excellent and many other people like it as it has placed first in our forum's top 10 figures of 2021 poll.  Also, I find the Favorite Tarbosaurus goofy due to its expression combined with the uniform teeth and large scales.  Different strokes for different folk, I guess!

It might be my imagination, but it seems like they stick out too far from the gums, like less of the tooth should be visible? Regardless, I'm certainly aware that it's very popular, but the things that bother me about it exceed the things that bother me about the Favorite version. Also, these days a big tyrannosaur or carcharodontosaurid has to clear a pretty high bar to get me to buy it and that one just didn't. My desire to have the best representation of each species occasionally conflicts with my desire to not reward endless rehashes. I think the new PNSO Giganotosaurus is an improvement on EoFauna's, for example, but I don't plan to buy it just because I don't want to spend any more money on Giganotosaurus. The Meraxes might be a different story because one of my best friends was on the paper describing it (although even he says all carcharodontosaurs are pretty much alike).

Mattel Austroraptor (Jurassic World)
Scale: 1:20 - 1:25
Released: 2023
Maastrichtian of South America
Etymology: L. "southern thief"
Mattel actually did okay on the overall shape, but it inexplicably lacks feathers except along the ulna. This is also the only Mattel action figure I have that doesn't stand stably. This one, too, will be satisfying to ditch one day.

I hope the day you ditch this figure will come, as that means a better Austroraptor will have been made, something which I'd like very much!

At least it has a reasonably distinct appearance! I can get behind a theropod that can be distinguished from its relatives. It also occurs to me now that this and the Captivz Pyroraptor are, I think, the only JP/JW dromaeosaurs I've ever owned.

Tbh I think Mattel's later upcoming Piatnitzkysaurus is probably a worse offender then that Elaphrosaurus, though neither do a good job at looking like the dinosaurs in question. Hoping you can get better versions of these someday. The Austroraptor was particularly frustrating as they have given other dinosaurs feathers that likely wouldn't have had them (Eocarcharia, maybe the Xuanhanosaurus), but omitted them from the ones that did, or likely would have (such as that one, and the Sinotyrannus). Granted if it had been made back in like 2018, I probably wouldn't be so harsh on it, and eagerly picked it up, as the franchise didn't embrace feathered dinosaurs back then, and it would easily fit in alongside their retro misnamed Deinonychus. But now the tables have changed, and with it my standards.

The Piatnitzkysaurus is pretty egregious too. It's also a very unremarkable taxon, whereas at least Elaphrosaurus, while incomplete, has some distinctive features. For that reason the existence of the Mattel version might be a good thing on balance if it makes a good version from someone else more likely. And yeah, a featherless Austroraptor is more baffling now that there are feathered Pyroraptors, although then again there are all those naked Atrociraptors...

[Halichoeres]

I might be the only person on the forum who follows what Japanese confectioner Kabaya does. Back in the day they sold some decent capsule figures and some slightly larger Kazunari Araki-sculpted figures, but I follow them for their Hone Hone Zaurus line of modular, usually skeletal, prehistoric animal building toys. In the past they've made oddballs like Tarascosaurus, Nipponosaurus, and Eucladoceros, which I've found easy enough to ignore because I don't generally collect skeleton figures. But last year they released a set with a prehistoric fish that I doubt anybody else will ever make, and some other animals that have equally long odds against them. It was a big, complex set, but these are the only six components I care about.


Sharovipteryx
Scale: 1:3 - 1:4
Late Triassic
Etymology: Gr. "[Aleksandr] Sharov's wing"
One of the most distinctive gliding animals that has ever lived, and to the best of my knowledge this is the only toy version. It's animals like this that make me love the Triassic, all the weird innovations that must have worked for a while, but didn't last. This one actually comes in two pieces, attached with a ball joint at the waist, which means it can do a little belly dance. Of all the animals I'm showing here, I think this is the one most likely to get a future figure.


Callichimaera
Scale: slightly more than life size
Cenomanian
Etymology: "beautiful chimaera" in the sense of a monster made of parts of other animals
While apparently adults, fossil individuals of this Cretaceous crab genus had features more typical of larvae. Even today you can find crab larvae that look kind of like this, but are generally tiny, even planktonic. This is a half decent representation, although naturally I'd prefer one in Kaiyodo's style. It shows the huge eyes, the broad swimming legs, and the heavily modified crab shape.


Mecochirus
Scale: 1:2
Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous
Etymology: Gr. "length hand"
This belongs to a group called the glypheoid lobsters, with really long chelae. Well known from the Jurassic Solnhofen Limestone, they were thought extinct until the 1970s when a living member was discovered in the Indo-Pacific reef system. Another species in a new genus was found in the Coral Sea in the early 2000s. It's not quite as dramatic as the coelacanth, but it's actually pretty close! Anyway, thanks to Kabaya for prompting me to learn about these weird aye-aye-looking crustaceans. Learning stuff like this is why I'm in this hobby.


Sichuanobelus
Scale: 1:3
Late Triassic to Early Jurassic
Etymology: Gr. "Sichuan dart"
There have been a couple of belemnite toys, but I think this is the first to be named as a specific genus rather than just as "belemnite." This genus is significant for being one of the key fossils showing a Triassic origin for belemnites, which became more common later in the Mesozoic.


Mortoniceras
Scale: 1:6
Albian
Etymology: Gr. "[Samuel George] Morton's horn"
Samuel George Morton was a 19th-century physician most famous for his view that the different human races were created separate from one another. He was, predictably, obsessed with differences in cranial volume. In his free time he described a bunch of ammonite fossils, although most have new names now, such as this one that the former Field Museum curator Seth Meek renamed in his honor. It's a distinctive genus; intact specimens have a flange near the siphon that curls in the opposite sense to their shells, truly horned ammonites! In this toy the flange shows as a closed loop, with which it can conveniently attach to parts of other toys in the set.


Menaspis
Scale: 1:5
Late Permian
Etymology: Gr. "moon shield"
And finally, the reason I bought the set, a chimaera (in the sense of a holocephalan) from the Permian that shows remarkable convergence with armored catfish and sea robins (a notorious crank has even proposed that it shows a Paleozoic origin of catfishes, which is complete nonsense). It's sufficiently weird that a paper in the 1970s thought it might be a late relative of placoderms, but that's nearly as far-fetched. Anyway, a very cool little fish, not one I'm about to pass up a toy of, even if it's as silly-looking as this (Menaspis had head appendages, but none shaped like a sawed-off dowel).


As I said, these are part of a larger set with roughly two dozen creatures, although these are the only ones I care about. They all come on sprues and have interchangeable parts; I even found a way to build a horrible chimaera (again in the sense of a monster) from all six of them. They are the wrong size to be compatible with Lego, but that's okay, they'll have happy homes with my other prehistoric toys.

[Stegotyranno420]

One would expect there to be at least a deceng amount of Sharovipteryx figurines in the market due to its bizarre yet fascinating wing structure.  I recall hearing its aviation method was even more efficient than Pterosaurs, but I am not sure where I heard this or I should even be regurgitating thks information.
Still, the niche diaspora of non-archosaur archosaurimorphs is amongst my favorite chapters of the history of life.

As for the invertebrates and fishes, I am glad you were able to find those generae, and if it was not for Paleozoo I think these are your only chance at finding these generae(of course, we should be more optimistic haha). Learning about what get left out of prehistoric textbooks is almost analogous to observing a new world. So much diversity on incomprehensible levels exists below our noses!

[Gwangi]

Really surprised that Kaiyodo hasn't at least made a Sharovipteryx. Maybe CollectA will, one day. Or Mattel, lol. 

[bmathison1972]

Kabaya made some nice insects in the early 2000s, but I don't think I have anything recent by them.

[Dusty Wren]

I'm...kinda of shocked to realize that Sharovipteryx doesn't have any other toys made of it? It really seems like it should have a few, it's such an interesting weirdo. I guess I thought Kaiyodo or another Japanese company would have done it by now.

I like the simplicity of these little figures. They don't have a lot of detail, but the shapes are all pleasing.

[Faelrin]

Both Callichimaera (since it was described in 2019. Folks may remember it as the googly eyed crab) and Sharovipteryx have been on my wishlist for a while now. I'm surprised to see any figures of them at all, but I'm (still) hoping for more naturalistic options in the future. Come to think of it, Drepanosaurus is another from the Triassic I'd still like a figure of, if not one of its relatives.

[SBell]

Both Callichimaera (since it was described in 2019. Folks may remember it as the googly eyed crab) and Sharovipteryx have been on my wishlist for a while now. I'm surprised to see any figures of them at all, but I'm (still) hoping for more naturalistic options in the future. Come to think of it, Drepanosaurus is another from the Triassic I'd still like a figure of, if not one of its relatives.

There's always this 3d STL of Drepanosaurus if you have a printer
https://www.myminifactory.com/object/3d-print-drepanosarus-231484

[Faelrin]

@SBell I do not unfortunately.

[SBell]

@SBell I do not unfortunately.

There are services in lots of places. I think that'll the easiest way to get less common species

[Avian]

@SBell I do not unfortunately.

There are services in lots of places. I think that'll the easiest way to get less common species

Agreed, I have recently explored some 3D printing sites with some absolutely niche and unique species available.

[Avian]

Both Callichimaera (since it was described in 2019. Folks may remember it as the googly eyed crab) and Sharovipteryx have been on my wishlist for a while now. I'm surprised to see any figures of them at all, but I'm (still) hoping for more naturalistic options in the future. Come to think of it, Drepanosaurus is another from the Triassic I'd still like a figure of, if not one of its relatives.

According to a quick Google search, Rheic has made a pretty nice looking Callichimaera model. Looks to be about 70 USD on Ebay.

[Faelrin]

@SBell I didn't know that was a thing. Guess I'll have to research what options are out there then. I've bookmarked it for now in any case.

@Avian Thanks for letting me know about that. The painted one looks absolutely beautiful, but definitely out of my budget at the moment (same for the unpainted one).

Here's a pic of the painted one for anyone curious, and the link to it as well:

[SBell]

@SBell I didn't know that was a thing. Guess I'll have to research what options are out there then. I've bookmarked it for now in any case.

@Avian Thanks for letting me know about that. The painted one looks absolutely beautiful, but definitely out of my budget at the moment (same for the unpainted one).

Here's a pic of the painted one for anyone curious, and the link to it as well:

The Rheic models are so beautiful. And yeah, way more than I can afford