Safari Ltd.: New for 2018

[Takama]

..

[Daspletotyrannus]

I think we should all get back on track with the topic.  If anything we should make a topic for guessing what Safari shares or something.

[Bucklander]

well its on a piece of "grass" iow its a figure they felt couldnt stand on their own. So thats also a clue.
it really doesn't feel like a dinosaur to me, it could be another prehistoric bird since they retired the gastornis...  hope its not a dodo though, I already have their old one. Wasn't there a moa relative with shorter thicker legs?
its also really sloppily painted!

Birds are Dinosaurs

Birds are avian non-archosaurs.

Birds are still archosaurs, in the same way humans are still mammals. You never stop being what your ancestors, you can be different just not a completely different thing, if that makes sense.

So then dinosaurs are still reptiles since that is what they evolved from.

Quite! And Amniotes, and Tetrapods. In fact we (vertebrates) are all fish! But why stop there? In cladistic terms, we are all worms, albeit topologically very complex ones!

I think we should all get back on track with the topic.  If anything we should make a topic for guessing what Safari shares or something.

I agree, but I just had to complete the logical progression.  Sorry.

[stargatedalek]

So then dinosaurs are still reptiles since that is what they evolved from.

That is actually subjective in itself. Some would argue only Lepidosauromorpha or even Lepidosauria (the crown group minus Archosaurs "and" Turtles) should be thought of as "reptiles". To Quote Wikipedia:

"But the traditional class Reptilia is not a clade. It is just a section of the clade Amniota: the section that is left after the Mammalia and Aves have been hived off. It cannot be defined by synapomorphies, as is the proper way. Instead, it is defined by a combination of the features it has and the features it lacks: reptiles are the amniotes that lack fur or feathers. At best, the cladists suggest, we could say that the traditional Reptilia are 'non-avian, non-mammalian amniotes'."

[bmathison1972]

let the invertebrate zoologist have a crack at it... 
It's most probably an extant bird with wide legs because it's small, prob a WoftheW or a TOOB figure, and I agree the green suggests domestic, or at least wild game, affiliations.

[PaleoMatt]

Back on topic please?

[Stuckasaurus (Dino Dad Reviews)]

Some sort of maniraptoran! Let's see, Safari already has an Archaeopteryx, a Microraptor, and a Velociraptor... I'm 80% sure this thing must be some kind of oviraptorid. The only question is whether it's Caudipteryx, Citipati/Oviraptor, or Gigantoraptor.

(The others of course look like an angler fish and a Clydesdale.)

[Faelrin]

Alright that one definitely interests me. I can't wait to see what it could be. I hope it is an oviraptorid. Would be interesting to see both Safari and Schleich having one this year if that is the case.

[Sim]

Some sort of maniraptoran! Let's see, Safari already has an Archaeopteryx, a Microraptor, and a Velociraptor... I'm 80% sure this thing must be some kind of oviraptorid. The only question is whether it's Caudipteryx, Citipati/Oviraptor, or Gigantoraptor.

It's not accurate for Caudipteryx.  Unlike other oviraptorosaurs, the third 'finger' of Caudipteryx had no claw and was reduced to almost non-existence.  In life, I think Caudipteryx would appear to have only two fingers, with the third 'finger' being entirely within the hand.  Having an incorrect number of fingers is an inaccuracy in the Carnegie Collection Caudipteryx, as mentioned on DinoGoss here: http://dinogoss.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/youre-doing-it-wrong-protobird-toys.html

Scott Hartman's Caudipteryx skeletal for comparison:

  (image source)

[Appalachiosaurus]

We have a Goosefish and the mandatory clydesdale, but that Dinosaur wing is pretty darn interesting! I still prefer feathered hands, but at least the primaries connect to the correct finger. I doubt they'll do two feathered velociraptors in a row, but other than that this could be one of hundreds of known maniraptorans.

[Daspletotyrannus]

Can it be a Gallimimus or Struthiomimus or something like that in that family? I hope it a Gallimimus.

[tanystropheus]

well its on a piece of "grass" iow its a figure they felt couldnt stand on their own. So thats also a clue.
it really doesn't feel like a dinosaur to me, it could be another prehistoric bird since they retired the gastornis...  hope its not a dodo though, I already have their old one. Wasn't there a moa relative with shorter thicker legs?
its also really sloppily painted!

Birds are Dinosaurs

Birds are avian non-archosaurs.

Birds are still archosaurs, in the same way humans are still mammals. You never stop being what your ancestors, you can be different just not a completely different thing, if that makes sense.

Thank you for the correction.

[Shonisaurus]

It sounds more like a prehistoric bird, an archaeoteryx I do not think it's three years ago that made a pretty good, a microraptor would be great although the Carnegie I liked a lot.

On the other hand a struthiomimus I do not imagine it with those hooves, I have a very conservative vision on that species of theropods. I could be more of an oviraptor, but I can honestly say nothing in this case. Until we have the complete images of prehistoric animals even if they are blurred like the hyaenodon (I have my hopes that that species by the Safari video seems unmistakable) or the mastodon, it is very risky to venture anything.

Safari is playing with us like last year to the riddles, until they reveal more information we will not know much at least what I have as a collector nothing or almost nothing.

However, the strategy of Safari in attracting our attention and our curiosity with images completely mutilated, it seems to me a very smart measure by Safari.

[tanystropheus]

Some sort of maniraptoran! Let's see, Safari already has an Archaeopteryx, a Microraptor, and a Velociraptor... I'm 80% sure this thing must be some kind of oviraptorid. The only question is whether it's Caudipteryx, Citipati/Oviraptor, or Gigantoraptor.

(The others of course look like an angler fish and a Clydesdale.)

I wonder why we don't have that many Gigantoraptor models. I was really looking forward to the Battat version 

[Irritation]

So let me recap what we know so far.
Confirmed:
Daeodon and Mastodon
Leaked:
Hyenadon
Unknown:
Sauropod with tiger colors
Prehistoric bird/theropod dinosaur with gray feet
A green and blue feathered dinosaur (possibly a dromeosaur or an oviraptorid

[Pachyrhinosaurus]

Hoping it's an anzu, but whatever it is I'm sure it'll be great.

[Takama]

So let me recap what we know so far.
Confirmed:
Daeodon and Mastodon
Leaked:
Hyenadon
Unknown:
Sauropod with tiger colors
Prehistoric bird/theropod dinosaur with gray feet
A green and blue feathered dinosaur (possibly a dromeosaur or an oviraptorid

No one said it will be prehistoric

[Sim]

It sounds more like a prehistoric bird, an archaeoteryx I do not think it's three years ago that made a pretty good, a microraptor would be great although the Carnegie I liked a lot.

Feathers of Microraptor were not those colours, they were iridescent black.  Also, Safari made a new Microraptor for this year (2017): http://dinotoyblog.com/2016/12/15/microraptor-wild-safari-by-safari-ltd/

I wonder why we don't have that many Gigantoraptor models. I was really looking forward to the Battat version 

Maybe it's because the top half of Gigantoraptor's head isn't known, and that part of the head varies quite a lot between different oviraptorosaur species - different head crests, some don't have head crests.  See this image for some examples: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Oviraptorinaeprofiles.jpg

So currently it's not known what the top half of Gigantoraptor's head looked like, if it had a crest and if so what it was like.  The only reason to make a figure of Gigantoraptor is if one wants to make a giant oviraptorosaur.  I think it's a bit sad though that there are a number of oviraptorosaurs with known head shapes that keep getting ignored by companies.  I'd much rather have a figure of one of those (e.g. Khaan, Citipati) than a Gigantoraptor with a conjectural head.

[ZoPteryx]

Interesting sneak peaks!

As for the sauropod, I agree Alamosaurus is probably the most likely candidate, but lets not forget about Rapetosaurs and Dreadnoughtus.  Rapetosaurus is known from very complete remains and Dreadnoughtus received a lot of media hype a few years back.  It could also conceivably be Patagotitan, but I think that one's a longer shot.  All of these species have proportions similar to what's seen in this figure.

I don't think the bird feet in the second batch are anything prehistoric or extinct.  I'm guessing they probably belong to a gamebird of some sort, maybe a grouse or pheasant.

That dino-wing in the third batch is intriguing!  The shortness of the secondary feathers immediately had me thinking a basal oviraptorosaur of some sort, but hopefully not Caudipteryx because, as Sim pointed out, the hands are all off, as is the arrangement of the wing feathers.  The proportions of the fingers and shape of the claws might be some indicator.  For example, it looks like the claw on the thumb is deliberately more curved than the other claws.  Going over Greg Paul's skeletals, I was surprised to find that troodontids match this condition and overall hand shape better than oviraptorosaurs, which usually have very long hands.


There also seems to be a convention to give troodontids relatively short wing feathers in paleoart.  With this in mind, I think the mystery figure is that of a troodontid, probably "Troodon".

[stargatedalek]

The fish is probably the frogfish from the trailer.

That wing matches the colours of the creature no one was sure if it was a dinosaur or a harpy, and it could still be the latter (just, before everyone starts going and arguing what kind of dinosaur it even is).