Schleich - new for 2016

[Kovu]

I don't have any Schleichs so far. That doesn't seem to be changing this year...

[tanystropheus]

They have a Schleich charm to them and are certainly heaps better than Hasbro's efforts. I vaguely like them.

I think the Icthyosaurus and Mosasaurus could have benefited from a deluxe size.

[Sim]

I'm very curious to know what species the mystery theropod is.  If it's a Herrerasaurus I can see some flaws which I just put down as due to being made by Schleich.  If it's a Baryonyx, that would make the toy's weird down-turned neck shape and other details more appropriate, although it would be a very flawed representation of Baryonyx. It's hard to tell if some parts of the toy are really there, like if it has a fifth toe on each foot (which would suggest it's something from the Triassic), or if that line in the middle of its head outlines the crest Baryonyx would have there (I only noticed this line when I went to look at the toy again after it was said it might be Baryonyx).

Funnily enough, I've been really wanting a toy of Baryonyx that does it justice, like with Herrerasaurus...  The excitement and unexpectedness of this Schleich toy has worn off now, and I really don't like how its hands are posed and some of its skin details.  I'm still interested in it though, and I await more info on it.

If it is a Baryonyx, this is far from the first time a Schleich prehistoric toy is unrecognisable as the species it's named.  I recently came across this gem of a thread from the old Dinosaur Toy Forum while searching for something on Google images: http://dinotoyforum.proboards.com/thread/3440  In addition to the Giganotosaurus, Schleich's "Velociraptors" don't come close to looking like the real animal (the head alone on those toys is a completely wrong shape).  And if it wasn't for its horns, the pink Schleich Carnotaurus would be unrecognisable as a Carnotaurus because its proportions are so wrong.

[PaleoMatt]

I don't believe that the mystery dino is Baryonyx, the head is completely wrong and it looks like something out of the triassic.

[Shonisaurus]

According to the new link is a Herrerasaurus. But why at one point said it was a baryonxy? Since then Schleich unfortunately this year for lack of space has low expectations for me.

The only thing that interests me is the dunkleosteus, but not better than the excellent dunkleosteus Safari.

[Takama]

Just Talked to Everything Dinosaur and this is what they had to say

The official line is that this is a Baryonyx but it could change as last year's Pentaceratops was referred to a as Triceratops for six months prior to launch.  We believe this is Baryonyx, one of two new Baryonyx figures from the majors in 2016.

[Shonisaurus]

This being so if that is a dinosaur according Schleich baryonyx is like saying that an egg is the same as a chestnut.

[PaleoMatt]

This being so if that is a dinosaur according Schleich baryonyx is like saying that an egg is the same as a chestnut.

Very True, the head is nothing like a Baryonyx though!

[Takama]

According to the new link is a Herrerasaurus. But why at one point said it was a baryonxy? Since then Schleich unfortunately this year for lack of space has low expectations for me.

The only thing that interests me is the dunkleosteus, but not better than the excellent dunkleosteus Safari.

The guy who made that list, is the guy i got the information from.    He said he made a mistake, so he corrected it.

[DinoToyForum]

According to the new link is a Herrerasaurus. But why at one point said it was a baryonxy? Since then Schleich unfortunately this year for lack of space has low expectations for me.

The only thing that interests me is the dunkleosteus, but not better than the excellent dunkleosteus Safari.

The guy who made that list, is the guy i got the information from.    He said he made a mistake, so he corrected it.

http://modellpferdeforum.de/index.php/Thread/26023-Liste-der-Schleich-Neuheiten-2016/?postID=1540554#post1540554

So now it is listed as Herrerasaurus. But isn't that simply because that's what *we* thought it was?

[Takama]

According to the new link is a Herrerasaurus. But why at one point said it was a baryonxy? Since then Schleich unfortunately this year for lack of space has low expectations for me.

The only thing that interests me is the dunkleosteus, but not better than the excellent dunkleosteus Safari.

The guy who made that list, is the guy i got the information from.    He said he made a mistake, so he corrected it.

http://modellpferdeforum.de/index.php/Thread/26023-Liste-der-Schleich-Neuheiten-2016/?postID=1540554#post1540554

So now it is listed as Herrerasaurus. But isn't that simply because that's what *we* thought it was?

I asked him what were his reasons for changing it, and rather or not it was our influence or if his sources says it was incorrect.  Currently awaiting his response

[deanm]

So far for 2016, the Dimorphodon is the first new pterosaur toy. Not the best but I will be getting it for the pterosaur flock.

[DinoToyForum]

So far for 2016, the Dimorphodon is the first new pterosaur toy. Not the best but I will be getting it for the pterosaur flock.

And I'll be seeking out the marine reptiles for my sea dragon pod. Completists like us can't resist. 

[Dilopho]

Dimetrodon will go nice with a Papo one (which i don't have  )
I like the Dunkleosteus! I prefer the wild safari one but the Schleich one looks really nice!

[stargatedalek]

the best thing Schleich did this year are those diorama helpers/playsets, the waterfall is stunning and would work for prehistoric dioramas with little tweaking.

Even if they totally stole that river concept from Playmobil I might still have to buy those! The little flamingo is really nice too.

[Shonisaurus]

Although nothing has to do with the forum Schleich pelican is one of the few figures that have impacted me.

[Silvanusaurus]

I cannot conceive of how that could be misinterpreted as being an appropriate design for a Baryonyx at any point in the production process... I mean, it doesnt even look like a stylized baryonyx, even the worst baryonyx figures at least get the general head shape. I really don't believe it is supposed to be one, as theres no reason why they would get the mini one vaguely right but then miss this by such a distance.

[Dilopho]

I cannot conceive of how that could be misinterpreted as being an appropriate design for a Baryonyx at any point in the production process... I mean, it doesnt even look like a stylized baryonyx, even the worst baryonyx figures at least get the general head shape. I really don't believe it is supposed to be one, as theres no reason why they would get the mini one vaguely right but then miss this by such a distance.

Uhhh....which figure are we talking about? The blue one theropod?

[suspsy]

Putting aside the fact that it's a poor person's Papo, where did the sculptor get the idea that Dimetrodon had a short, stumpy tail?

Also, is Schleich aware that there are other euplocephalids besides Saichania?

[Ikessauro]

This information was exchanged with me back in late September, and the only picture i saw was the Dunkolosteus.

I think you are misspelling Dunkleosteus there. Second time you do that in your posts. I had to point it out, just a nitpick of mine. As a matter of fact, I have noticed how many people misspell prehistoric creatures names, despite the fact that they claim to be knowleadgeable about prehistoric life. Prehistoric Times has loads of misspellings of prehistoric names too, believe it or not.

Maybe we should create a topic about it in the forum, to avoid going to much off topic here.