CollectA New for 2017

[stargatedalek]

Wouldn't it be a blast if it turns out Collecta releases nothing but herbivores this year?

The Styracosaurus and Einiosaurus both are really beautiful, the Gigantspinosaurus has a great color scheme but its shoulder spikes look too thick. Three herbivores is a good sign after the theropod-heavy last year. Still hoping for one or more sauropod figures though, preferably one in the deluxe range...

Unless they included a Tupandactylus or some tortoise(s) I have to say I wouldn't be very enthused to have an entirely herbivorous (let alone theropod devoid) line up. I've just never been a large herbivore person, even including dinosaurs for the most part. I can appreciate a lot of large herbivore groups are very underrepresented, but stegosaurs and (derived) ceratopsians are certainly not among them, so from my perspective this is the sort of line-up expected from CollectA which is why I'm a bit disappointed. I like to be surprised and CollectA usually delivers this in their choices of obscure or underrepresented theropods or non-dinosaurs, in contrast most of the ornithischians they make are entirely predictable even if at times still new on the genus level.

Quality is undeniable here regardless, and it's nice to finally see Gigantspinosaurus with correctly shaped spines.

I am very interesting about the gigantspinosaurus, I think that is a beautiful dinosaur. The styracosaurus looks great but I don't like this einiosaurus(I will get the safari one)

My question is: Why anyone don't do a Sinornithosaurus model? Is an amazing dinosaur, they know what color it was, he can flight, an probably was VENOMOUS! So, why?

No solid evidence that I know of suggests it had venom.

Further to this, the 'evidence' used for this hypothesis is very shaky and probably not accurate. I believe it may have been based on comparisons with Komodo Dragon teeth, and it's still being debated whether they are venomous or not. While it is a definite possibility for this species, I think it unlikely for Sinornithosaurus. Also, Sinornithosaurus couldn't technically fly but rather glide. Sorry to be the party pooper, but this forum has trained me well in that role!

You'd be surprised how little debate actually remains on monitor lizard venom in the published formats (albeit largely because there's not much if anything left to test/say). MRI's have proven conclusively that venom glands are present in Komodo dragons and lace monitors, to suggest these are vestigial when they aren't present in other monitor lizards seems highly unlikely (although in fairness some iguanids posses seemingly vestigial venom glands) and is potentially untestable.

However the idea that the Komodo's unusual teeth are linked (directly) to venom is entirely erroneous, presumably a carry-over from the incorrect idea of them carrying flesh-eating bacteria. Any lizard venom glands are saliva based, not at all reliant on tooth structure for deployment. The unusual patterns of Komodo teeth are probably linked to their method of attacking prey, where they hold it and allow it to injure itself as it struggles (similarly to giant petrels of all things). Teeth designed for holding onto prey doesn't seem unreasonable for a flying animal adapted to hunting prey in dense forests without the aid of grasping feet, more of a kite than a Komodo.

Sinornithosaurus was probably capable of flight. No tests have ever been done on Sinornithosaurus specifically but Microraptor generates significant lift to sustain powered flight if it moved at high enough speeds. The "leg wings" which give it incredible agility potential combined with its habitat makes sense, most forest dwelling birds of prey are comparatively fast and agile. Additionally Microraptor's feather configuration offers virtually no potential for efficient gliding (which would necessitate slow speeds), the "leg wings" only generate lift or improve mobility at high speeds, and such a clearly elaborate and biologically expensive feature wouldn't be present unless it had genuine aerodynamic function.

[Sim]

I'm thrilled about Gigantspinosaurus!  Only the other day I thought this genus should make a good model and wondered if perhaps it would appear eventually in the PNSO line, given that they seem to have a fondness for stegosaurs.  As for Einiosaurus - you just can't have too many of them.  Two after all this long wait!  I'm also happy to see they are continuing with the Deluxe line, and even happier to see that a ceratopsian has been chosen.  However, given it's a larger model, I'll have to think about space before eventually pressing the "buy" button.  I already have a large Styracosaurus from Sideshow, so might need to exercise restraint here!

Three Einiosaurus actually: CollectA, Safari and PNSO. 

[SpartanSquat]

My opinion:
- Gigantospinus: Great addition, but Im not very happy with the paint job.
- Einiosaurus: The sculpt its great but too bright that green.
- Styracosaurus: The best of Collecta, it reminds me to Favorite.
One question, why Collecta is still adding quills to ceratopsians, I read the quills on Triceratops was a missidentification

[Sim]

...But even though, as a patriotic Brit, I hate to say this about the Great British dinosaur toy company, no one will ever be able to do Ceratopsians like our very own Doug. 
Looking good so far!

I got the impression CollectA might not be a British company from what was mentioned here: http://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=10.msg94064#msg94064

[ceratopsian]

Three Einiosaurus actually: CollectA, Safari and PNSO. 

Yes, I remembered that later in the morning - thank you for the correction!  I'm not at my best early on! In fact I have the PNSO version coming over from China, somewhere en route.  It can function as a juvenile!

[sauroid]

yes ive always had the impression that CollectA was a Chinese/Hong Kong company too and because they are just so under represented in the (former) UK, also MojoFun (which is a CollectA breakaway group if i remember correctly is also a HK/Chinese company). which makes them more interesting imo. seems only Safari Ltd. and Papo are the only western brands left making interesting figures.

[Gwangi]

It's funny how we've gone all these years without an Einiosaurus and then we get three within a year. Not that I'm complaining, I've wanted one for years. CollectA ceratopsians seem to be improving too, I quite like this Einiosaurus and the Styracosaurus might be my favorite ceratopsian from CollectA.

[suspsy]

Perhaps 2018 will be the year of Centrosaurus.

[Flaffy]

I wouldn't mind a whole year of herbivores, or ceratopsians and stegosaurs!
But it's highly unlikely though...

[Gwangi]

Perhaps 2018 will be the year of Centrosaurus.

We can only hope, it's another favorite that is long overdue.

[Stuckasaurus (Dino Dad Reviews)]

One question, why Collecta is still adding quills to ceratopsians, I read the quills on Triceratops was a missidentification

It wasn't ever because of Triceratops. Psittacosaurus is more basal, and so presumably represents the ancestral appearance of ceratopsians. Some took the pointed scales on a Triceratops flanks as corroborating evidence, theorizing that they were attachment points for additional quills, but that has been discredited. Still no evidence on whether large ceratopsians had tail quills though, as those parts have not been preserved.

[Shonisaurus]

My opinion:
- Gigantospinus: Great addition, but Im not very happy with the paint job.
- Einiosaurus: The sculpt its great but too bright that green.
- Styracosaurus: The best of Collecta, it reminds me to Favorite.
One question, why Collecta is still adding quills to ceratopsians, I read the quills on Triceratops was a missidentification

I agree with you Roland. I also do not like the colors of the gigantspinosaurus in addition its figure is not as well finished as is the case of einiosaurus, this from my point of view.

On the other hand the styracosaurus looks magnificent and giving up the grinding colors that we had accustomed in many of his figures Collecta. It is a big step on the part of Collecta, the bad thing that until next week we will not know more news.

Until next Friday.

[Stuckasaurus (Dino Dad Reviews)]

I love each the first three models! My only complaint is that I wish Collecta would stop referring to clearly oversized models as 1:40 scale. They're perfectly within their right to make large models, and I encourage them to do so as that probably appeals more to "casual" toy buys, but I'm getting tired of the false advertising.

[terrorchicken]

nice start for Collecta 2017. My favorite is the einiosaurus (except for the puke green color.)

[sauroid]

how many prehistoric figures is the company going to release for 2017? any info at all?

[suspsy]

how many prehistoric figures is the company going to release for 2017? any info at all?

They've released around a dozen prehistoric figures annually for the past two years, so it's reasonable to assume that this assortment will be no different.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

One question, why Collecta is still adding quills to ceratopsians, I read the quills on Triceratops was a missidentification

It wasn't ever because of Triceratops. Psittacosaurus is more basal, and so presumably represents the ancestral appearance of ceratopsians. Some took the pointed scales on a Triceratops flanks as corroborating evidence, theorizing that they were attachment points for additional quills, but that has been discredited. Still no evidence on whether large ceratopsians had tail quills though, as those parts have not been preserved.

The area where the "quills" are being added to Collecta Ceratopsians was preserved for Triceratops Lane and demonstrates clearly that the animal had no similar integument. It is conceivable that ceratopsians may have sported highly modified scales, but highly unlikely they had any sort of structures like those being offered here, given triceratops Lane. We can also eliminate the likelihood, based simply off psittacosaurus, as psittacosaurus was likely a dead end on the family tree.....it had already lost the fenestrae for instance between the eye and nasal, whereas triceratops retained it. Psittacosaurus had also evolved away from having all five digits on the hands, whereas more derived ceratopsians retained them. Nature seldom does complete U-turns and evolves away a feature only to return it downline millennia later, so it is highly unlikely psittacosaurus was ancestral to any of the more derived ceratopsian family.....along with its quills. Possible.....yes...likely no. Artistic license apparently.....

[Shonisaurus]

One question, why Collecta is still adding quills to ceratopsians, I read the quills on Triceratops was a missidentification

It wasn't ever because of Triceratops. Psittacosaurus is more basal, and so presumably represents the ancestral appearance of ceratopsians. Some took the pointed scales on a Triceratops flanks as corroborating evidence, theorizing that they were attachment points for additional quills, but that has been discredited. Still no evidence on whether large ceratopsians had tail quills though, as those parts have not been preserved.

The area where the "quills" are being added to Collecta Ceratopsians was preserved for Triceratops Lane and demonstrates clearly that the animal had no similar integument. It is conceivable that ceratopsians may have sported highly modified scales, but highly unlikely they had any sort of structures like those being offered here, given triceratops Lane. We can also eliminate the likelihood, based simply off psittacosaurus, as psittacosaurus was likely a dead end on the family tree.....it had already lost the fenestrae for instance between the eye and nasal, whereas triceratops retained it. Psittacosaurus had also evolved away from having all five digits on the hands, whereas more derived ceratopsians retained them. Nature seldom does complete U-turns and evolves away a feature only to return it downline millennia later, so it is highly unlikely psittacosaurus was ancestral to any of the more derived ceratopsian family.....along with its quills. Possible.....yes...likely no. Artistic license apparently.....

I totally agree with ambos.Es Collecta an artistic license.
As each company says dinosaur has its own philosophy, although it would be better without feathers or horsehair on his tail, it remains nonetheless an outstanding figure.

[Neosodon]

Really happy to get an exotic member of the stegosur family. Its been an underrepresented group in my opinion. My only complaint is the name. Gigantspinosaurus = giy-gant-spin(not spine)-osaurus. Well that's just my guess.

With the amount of ceratopsians collecta has been putting out in recent years they might as well change their name to Collecta Ceratopsians and other Prehistoric Creatures. But I will admit ceratopsians make good collectibles with all their unique ornamentation.

[Tyto_Theropod]

Star and Sauroid, thanks for correcting me. The venom gand thing I knew in the back of my mind, but I genuinely remembered someone telling me that CollectA was a British company.

Perhaps 2018 will be the year of Centrosaurus.

Here's hoping indeed, it will look nice next to my Parasaurolophus herd!