Safari LTD and Quality control.

[Carnosaur]

Is it just me. or has there been a noticeable drop in the quality of Safari's figures in the last few years?
Loose sculpting, and really sloppy paint jobs seem much more commonplace than i remember.
I would have thought that with the demise of the Carnegie collection we would be seeing better figures in Safari's others toy lines.
But that doesn't seem to be the case.

[Pachyrhinosaurus]

Something I noticed about Safari's quality is that it decreases after the first year of production. I buy most of my figures when they first come out and by the next year or two, the new ones are sloppy whereas the ones I have are not.
For example, here's the Evolution of Man set that looks like the one I  have:

And here's how they're made now.

[Ikessauro]

 

[Carnosaur]

Wow thats a big difference.

[Lanthanotus]

Something I noticed about Safari's quality is that it decreases after the first year of production. I buy most of my figures when they first come out and by the next year or two, the new ones are sloppy whereas the ones I have are not.
For example, here's the Evolution of Man set that looks like the one I  have:

And here's how they're made now.

Given, both pictures show a great difference, but calling it "sloppy" is somewhat misleading, isn't it? I'd rather call the paintjob on the second set "excessively accurate", with no wash and some light touches that make the paint job looking more natural.

Personally I do not own that many Safari models out of the Carnegie line but as of yet I cannot complain about their quality.

[Pachyrhinosaurus]

Given, both pictures show a great difference, but calling it "sloppy" is somewhat misleading, isn't it? I'd rather call the paintjob on the second set "excessively accurate", with no wash and some light touches that make the paint job looking more natural.

Personally I do not own that many Safari models out of the Carnegie line but as of yet I cannot complain about their quality.

That was a bad example of sloppiness, my main point was to show the decreasing quality of the detail work in the models. I've seen a few theropods which have white on their lips from the paint on the teeth.The first one which comes to mind is the new WS tyrannosaurus.

[deanm]

While painting may be part of the issue - when you look compare the finer features (especially the faces of the two figures on the left) between the years it is pretty clear to me that there is a deterioation in the mold also (alternatively - different molds and second generation molds cast from a first gen figure (bootlegs figure issue)).

Seen this type of stuff at my work also.

[deanm]

One other thought - was anyone else disappointed with the early life toob paint-jobs?

Too me they just looked very fast and cheap - essentially a way to save cost and maximize profit... And I get the need for profitability - without it there is no next/new products.

Although I would have been willing to pay more for the toob if it had a better paint job - I don't know how many parents would have.

[Jose S.M.]

I own 12 wild safari dinos and one Carnegie, all of them bought from march of this year, the oldest is the WS Triceratops, and the only "sloppiness" that I found was in my Vagaceratops, in the slightly bigger scales (scutes??) on the frill that are supposed to be darker orange/brown, the color doesnt match those bigger scales in one side of the frill, while in the other it matches perfectly. Also the last tooth in one side of my Yutyrannus jaw is the same color as it's snout. But you have to pick up and examine closely to notice those faults. I can't speak for other Safari ltd products but the difference in the Evolution of Man set is very noticeable.

[DinoLord]

I've always noticed minor quality issues with the Safari figure paint applications. This is why I like to buy mine at brick and mortar retailers - I can check for googly eyes, milk mustaches, and the like.

[Pachyrhinosaurus]

I should say though that most of the paint issues I've experienced  are on their modern animals. The Dinosaurs for some reason tend to have fewer errors or goofs at least from my experience.

[RobinGoodfellow]

2016 Amebelodon figure (on the left)  VS the "old" one ( on the right) :

[Lanthanotus]

2016 Amebelodon figure (on the left)  VS the "old" one ( on the right) :

Quite noticable indeed, one can easily see that more work and time went into the old one.

I'm happy I'd been lucky with my pruchases as of yet, as I have to order all my Safaris (and most others expect for Schleich) as there's only one toy shop I know which also sells other brands than Schleich, but it's hard to reach for me and they only have a small variety of figures (compared to the number available) and most often just one of each kind, so doesn't make a difference.

[PaleoMatt]

Can anyone post the old and new Doedicurus, I havent seen the old paint job and the new one seemed quite sloppy to me.

[Mamasaurus]

I can see that there's certainly a difference in paint application, but honestly I think to many people it doesn't really matter. They are toys after all, and the average child certainly doesn't care if the teeth aren't all painted just so. To be perfectly honest I don't mind a sloppy paint job either.

If I'm lucky enough to be able to pick one up at the store and choose one with a good paint job then yes, I'd walk out with the best one I can find. But it's not really a deal breaker for me.

Then again, I don't build dioramas, and I use my figures for reference in my illustrations (& my kids to play with) not to display on a shelf.  So I can see how paint application would be a concern for you.

[terrorchicken]

2016 Amebelodon figure (on the left)  VS the "old" one ( on the right) :

wow Im glad I have the earlier model. My biggest Safari ltd issue have been paint rubs/sloppy paint on the toob figures... alot of my prehistoric sharks have this problem, stray paint marks from the other figures rubbing up against them.