CollectA - new for 2019

[PhilSauria]

Collecta's 2019 Baryonyx - the competition. My favorite is the, er, Favorite (even though I missed out on one - last time I'll mention that, honest).

[suspsy]

I'm not sure it's fair to make a call on this until we've seen the CollectA one from different angles. But for now I'll say that both it and the Favorite version easily trounce the other two.

[Stuckasaurus (Dino Dad Reviews)]

No, I'm not sure, but based on CollectA's history, it's a reasonable prediction. Consider:

2014: Arsinoitherium and Mosasaurus.
2015: Daeodon, Moropus, Smilodon, Pliosaurus, and Temnodontosaurus.
2016: Andrewsarchus and Thalassomedon.
2017: Uintatherium, Basilosaurus, Kronosaurus, and Excalibosaurus.
2018: Gomphotherium and Dunkleosteus.

Personally I'm crossing my fingers for a large Leedsichthys to complement their Mini model. That or an Archelon for the same reason. A guy can dream! I don't even mind if either isn't quite 1:40.

Also, I'm really surprised Collecta still hasn't done a Dakotaraptor yet! If they ever get around to it, I insist on 1:40 for that one. I need to round out my Hell Creek diorama!

[PhilSauria]

I'm not sure it's fair to make a call on this until we've seen the CollectA one from different angles. But for now I'll say that both it and the Favorite version easily trounce the other two.

Agreed, but it's the only pic available as the moment. I am reserving judgement until I see more images. Too bad Collecta don't show the new release with multiple views as Safari does.

[Shonisaurus]

By the way, Collecta's bayonyx in terms of color is reminiscent of the Favorite brand.

Honestly, I like the Favorite brand very much. The only defect I find is that it has a removable base, mine bought Brett has the manufacturing defect that does not hold properly (I'll have to buy another Brett soon) the positive is that His pose is elegant and does not have an articulated jaw, but honestly the one I like the most is Collecta (although it is still too early to judge since it is still a commercial photo and we have not seen it physically or even shown it yet. toy market fairs.

As regards the fuleciraptor of Collecta it is extremely beautiful but I personally like it more, the positive version of Collecta's is that it has no removable base, but in everything else for me Favorite's fukuiraptor is superior, apart from that it comes with a skull animal attached to the figure which increases the scientific character of that dinosaur.

Regarding the latest dinosaur revelations of Collecta 2019 my desire is (I cross my fingers) to make a prehistoric marine animal, a dinosaur and a prehistoric mammal (as it happens every year) if it depended on me I would like them to reveal at least five figures and three were prehistoric mammals (although I am aware that it is practically impossible).

Anyway, in my case I do not complain about anything of this world and less than what is still planned by Collecta and I am satisfied with what it is even if in the next week they did not reveal any prehistoric animal I would be satisfied with the novelties of Collecta already revealed (Keep in mind that we already have six prehistoric animals, five dinosaurs and a prehistoric animal plus the box of miniatures) and with what Collecta has revealed, I am happy.

Only the caiuajara of Collecta 2019 by far supplies all the new revelations of prehistoric animals and it is to be taken for granted. For my part it has been one of the best years of Collecta and I congratulate the excellent sculptor Matthias Geiger and obviously Anthony Besson and his outstanding team. 

[Halichoeres]

I'll stick with the Favorite versions of these two. So far I'm not interested in any of the theropods.

Is it me, or do the colors of the Bary look just like this year's Brontosaurus, and those of the Fukuiraptor just like the Dimetrodon?

[MLMjp]

As much as I like the more slender built of the Favorite Baryonyx. I think I will stick to Collecta´s cheaper and more accesible figure.

[suspsy]

No, I'm not sure, but based on CollectA's history, it's a reasonable prediction. Consider:

2014: Arsinoitherium and Mosasaurus.
2015: Daeodon, Moropus, Smilodon, Pliosaurus, and Temnodontosaurus.
2016: Andrewsarchus and Thalassomedon.
2017: Uintatherium, Basilosaurus, Kronosaurus, and Excalibosaurus.
2018: Gomphotherium and Dunkleosteus.

Personally I'm crossing my fingers for a large Leedsichthys to complement their Mini model. That or an Archelon for the same reason. A guy can dream! I don't even mind if either isn't quite 1:40.

Both of those would be nice, but I'd like it if CollectA did a relatively small sea monster for a change like Nothosaurus, Metriorhynchus, or Helicoprion. Same goes for the prehistoric mammals. A Synthetoceras or a Thylacosmilus would be wonderful. So would a dire wolf, but given that CollectA is releasing two new modern wolves next year, that seems doubtful.

Also, I'm really surprised Collecta still hasn't done a Dakotaraptor yet! If they ever get around to it, I insist on 1:40 for that one. I need to round out my Hell Creek diorama!

Again, I think it's just a matter of time before they get around to doing more dromaeosaurs. I would email them about it. The more people who ask for one, the more likely they'll make it!

[stargatedalek]

CollectA's is definitely the best, but I feel like Mattel's has some saving grace relative to the Favorite. It lacks the crest, but it's otherwise not bad, and it's definitely much less shrink-wrapped.

[Shonisaurus]

I understand that you should contact directly with the company Collecta and the best way is to go to the website of Collecta www.collecta.biz in the link below the website there is a button (I call it that) What is Suggestions? There you put your personal data, you indicate the email in this case [email protected] and in the drop-down check box of Type you display the arrow and there is a section that indicates Suggestions of new products and below there is a space to fill in with comments . How many more are we talking about our concerns about new products more will be influenced by Collecta and especially Anthony Besson to make new figures of prehistoric animals but as I say you have to send it in an educated and correct tone and maybe Collecta will hear our requests. The more ideas that DTF members send among me, the more possibilities there are for our dreams to be fulfilled.

For example, I sent a request to [email protected] to send information about the news of Collecta 2019 and my request was heard. On the other hand I have ordered them to make figures of animals of the tyrannosaurus rex family in the past and in a way they listened to me, performed the bistahieversor and the lythronax. At least you give them ideas that they can still adopt if they consider them convenient but they can be sure the members of DTF that often do not fall on deaf ears. The Collecta brand hears its clients as long as they are expressed in a correct, courteous and polite manner.

[ceratopsian]

I will be doing the same.  These latest two releases definitely don't appeal to me enough to buy them, and I already have the Favorite versions.

I'll stick with the Favorite versions of these two. So far I'm not interested in any of the theropods.

[Renecito]

I love this Baryonyx!!! Everything is awesome. Colecta is the winner.

[Sim]

I may not be the biggest fan of excluding their primary feathers but CollectA's ornithomimids are still relevant and worthy of mention in this discussion (I disagree with the idea of wings evolving for display, and therefore with the plausibility of wings existing without primary feathers, but that's another topic).

It's possible that ornithomimosaurs didn't have wings.  In such a situation, ornithomimosaur forelimbs could have convergently evolved to be similar, although not the same as, wings.

I didn't forget about CollectA's ornithomimosaurs, in case anyone thought that.  Ornithomimosaurs, oviraptorosaurs, dromaeosaurids, and other "bird-like" theropod groups are all very different to each other.

CollectA's is definitely the best, but I feel like Mattel's has some saving grace relative to the Favorite. It lacks the crest, but it's otherwise not bad, and it's definitely much less shrink-wrapped.

I'm going to say it: the Mattel Baryonyx is a terrible representation of Baryonyx.  It's fine to like it for what it is, but one thing it isn't is a good representation of the real animal known as Baryonyx.  The lack of the crest is pretty major, as that's one of the things that makes spinosaurids so distinctive.  Its teeth are not much like what the teeth of Baryonyx are known to be like.  For example, having been made so generic the Mattel's teeth are not large enough or small enough in different parts of the mouth.  Additionally, the number of teeth in the lower jaw of the Mattel Baryonyx is definitely too low, it only has 14 teeth on each side, while Baryonyx has 32 teeth on each side.  Perhaps that's not too surprising when one considers that the teeth in the Mattel figure's lower jaw are mostly much too big, except for ironically most of the teeth at the front which are too small.

The feet of the Mattel Baryonyx are huge.  I don't doubt this was done to keep the toy standing, and I'm not criticising it here.  But, as we're comparing the different figures, this is one more area where other Baryonyx figures like the Favorite are better than the Mattel version.  Also, quite minor, but the Mattel's hand claws and small first toe claws aren't painted.  It's definitely a small thing, but it further detracts from the quality of the reconstruction.  There's nothing wrong with liking the Mattel Baryonyx, but it's clearly not meant to be an accurate representation of the real animal.  It looks more like a cartoon monster than a Baryonyx.  Personally, I think it's one of the ugliest Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom designs.

As for what the best Baryonyx toy is?  The 2019 CollectA figure isn't released yet, and I can't check certain details from the one photo that's been provided, and it's a possibility that the final figure won't be as good as what's shown in the pre-release photo.  However, if the CollectA 2019 Baryonyx is as good as is reasonable to think based on what's been shown so far...  I think both the CollectA 2019 and the Favorite will easily be the only good toy versions of Baryonyx, with neither being completely superior to the other, and with the Invicta being a good retro version.  (And this is coming from someone who has always hated that the Invicta version has a fish permanently attached to it.)  Every other toy version of Baryonyx has one or more major flaws, that to be frank makes them poor representations of the animal, and in some cases that's putting it mildly.

The Favorite Baryonyx doesn't seem to have much shrink-wrapping to me, it certainly has less than some previous Favorite figures by the same sculptor.  There are extant reptiles that have some visible skull openings on their heads, for example:
- Visible fenestrae at the back of the head of the gharial: photo 1  photo 2
- Demarcated eye socket in the water monitor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bindenwaran-101.jpg
- Demarcated eye socket in the Nile monitor: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nile_monitor_lizard_(Varanus_niloticus)_head.jpg
I definitely think there's been dinosaur figures that are too shrink-wrapped to the point it's implausible.  However, slight shrink-wrapping can be within the range shown by extant animals.

One thing that sets apart the CollectA 2019 Baryonyx and the Favorite Baryonyx is that the CollectA figure has a hump.  As mentioned in the Everything Dinosaur blog post, this is based on a single neural spine that has been considered to belong to an animal closely related to Baryonyx and Suchomimus.  However, it's possible it doesn't belong to Baryonyx and that Baryonyx didn't have a hump.  More details relating to this can be seen in the following discussions:
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Dinosaurs/Image_review/Archive_January_2018_-_April_2018#Baryonyx_Done
2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Dinosaurs/Image_review/Archive_January_2018_-_April_2018#Revised_Spinosauridae_Size_Comparison_Done

So, it may be that the CollectA 2019 and Favorite versions of Baryonyx are both good restorations of Baryonyx, which at the same time are fairly different to each other.

[SidB]

Excellant analysis, Sim. Your conclusions correspond precisely to the actual facts of the matter. I like your observations  on the issue of shrink-wrapping. It is important to note that some evidence of this phenomenon is observed in nature, that is to say - one does not have to absolutely reject any possibility of this when evaluating the accuracy of a sculpt. Of course, extreme instances or over-applications are to be avoided. The exception "proves" the rule, so to speak, but must not become the rule.

[tanystropheus]

I may not be the biggest fan of excluding their primary feathers but CollectA's ornithomimids are still relevant and worthy of mention in this discussion (I disagree with the idea of wings evolving for display, and therefore with the plausibility of wings existing without primary feathers, but that's another topic).

It's possible that ornithomimosaurs didn't have wings.  In such a situation, ornithomimosaur forelimbs could have convergently evolved to be similar, although not the same as, wings.

I didn't forget about CollectA's ornithomimosaurs, in case anyone thought that.  Ornithomimosaurs, oviraptorosaurs, dromaeosaurids, and other "bird-like" theropod groups are all very different to each other.

CollectA's is definitely the best, but I feel like Mattel's has some saving grace relative to the Favorite. It lacks the crest, but it's otherwise not bad, and it's definitely much less shrink-wrapped.

I'm going to say it: the Mattel Baryonyx is a terrible representation of Baryonyx.  It's fine to like it for what it is, but one thing it isn't is a good representation of the real animal known as Baryonyx.  The lack of the crest is pretty major, as that's one of the things that makes spinosaurids so distinctive.  Its teeth are not much like what the teeth of Baryonyx are known to be like.  For example, having been made so generic the Mattel's teeth are not large enough or small enough in different parts of the mouth.  Additionally, the number of teeth in the lower jaw of the Mattel Baryonyx is definitely too low, it only has 14 teeth on each side, while Baryonyx has 32 teeth on each side.  Perhaps that's not too surprising when one considers that the teeth in the Mattel figure's lower jaw are mostly much too big, except for ironically most of the teeth at the front which are too small.

The feet of the Mattel Baryonyx are huge.  I don't doubt this was done to keep the toy standing, and I'm not criticising it here.  But, as we're comparing the different figures, this is one more area where other Baryonyx figures like the Favorite are better than the Mattel version.  Also, quite minor, but the Mattel's hand claws and small first toe claws aren't painted.  It's definitely a small thing, but it further detracts from the quality of the reconstruction.  There's nothing wrong with liking the Mattel Baryonyx, but it's clearly not meant to be an accurate representation of the real animal.  It looks more like a cartoon monster than a Baryonyx.  Personally, I think it's one of the ugliest Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom designs.

As for what the best Baryonyx toy is?  The 2019 CollectA figure isn't released yet, and I can't check certain details from the one photo that's been provided, and it's a possibility that the final figure won't be as good as what's shown in the pre-release photo.  However, if the CollectA 2019 Baryonyx is as good as is reasonable to think based on what's been shown so far...  I think both the CollectA 2019 and the Favorite will easily be the only good toy versions of Baryonyx, with neither being completely superior to the other, and with the Invicta being a good retro version.  (And this is coming from someone who has always hated that the Invicta version has a fish permanently attached to it.)  Every other toy version of Baryonyx has one or more major flaws, that to be frank makes them poor representations of the animal, and in some cases that's putting it mildly.

The Favorite Baryonyx doesn't seem to have much shrink-wrapping to me, it certainly has less than some previous Favorite figures by the same sculptor.  There are extant reptiles that have some visible skull openings on their heads, for example:
- Visible fenestrae at the back of the head of the gharial: photo 1  photo 2
- Demarcated eye socket in the water monitor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bindenwaran-101.jpg
- Demarcated eye socket in the Nile monitor: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nile_monitor_lizard_(Varanus_niloticus)_head.jpg
I definitely think there's been dinosaur figures that are too shrink-wrapped to the point it's implausible.  However, slight shrink-wrapping can be within the range shown by extant animals.

One thing that sets apart the CollectA 2019 Baryonyx and the Favorite Baryonyx is that the CollectA figure has a hump.  As mentioned in the Everything Dinosaur blog post, this is based on a single neural spine that has been considered to belong to an animal closely related to Baryonyx and Suchomimus.  However, it's possible it doesn't belong to Baryonyx and that Baryonyx didn't have a hump.  More details relating to this can be seen in the following discussions:
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Dinosaurs/Image_review/Archive_January_2018_-_April_2018#Baryonyx_Done
2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Dinosaurs/Image_review/Archive_January_2018_-_April_2018#Revised_Spinosauridae_Size_Comparison_Done

So, it may be that the CollectA 2019 and Favorite versions of Baryonyx are both good restorations of Baryonyx, which at the same time are fairly different to each other.

I think as a toy, the Mattel version is relatively decent, albeit, inaccurate representation. I think for the layman, it looks close enough to a Baryonyx and will get a likely pass, and perhaps that's the problem as it will continue to confuse. Did Baryonyx have a prominent crest? From the available models, I only see something resembling one on the CollectA version (and angry eyebrows on the other models). I bet the Mattel version would be great for modding...perhaps add a few more teeths, add some crests and tinker a bit with the formula. For what it's worth, it is still the best Baryonyx toy available. It will be relegated to "toy" status, especially in light of the full articulation and target audience.

And, I agree, I don't feel the Favorite version is shrink-wrapped to an unrealistic degree.

[Sim]

Did Baryonyx have a prominent crest? From the available models, I only see something resembling one on the CollectA version (and angry eyebrows on the other models).

The midline head crest of Baryonyx is relatively small compared to the rest of the animal, but it's clearly visible, see Scott Hartman's skeletal for example: https://www.deviantart.com/scotthartman/art/Walker-s-heavy-claw-2018-320348239

The midline head crest is clearly present on many Baryonyx figures.  Ones I recall lacking this feature are Mattel's and Toyway's.  Additionally, the Kenner The Lost World version places the crest on the nose for some incomprehensible reason, even though the original Baryonyx specimen clearly shows the crest wasn't located there.  As a result, that unsightly Kenner Baryonyx looks like a cross between Baryonyx and Ceratosaurus.

Most Baryonyx figures I can think of don't have angry eyebrows.  I guess one could say the Invicta does, but it's done in a way that seems plausible to me, similar to the "angry eyebrows" in eagles for example.

For what it's worth, it is still the best Baryonyx toy available. It will be relegated to "toy" status, especially in light of the full articulation and target audience.

I think "action figure" would be a more appropriate term than "toy" here.  I'm not aware of any reason that stops the Favorite, 2019 CollectA, or Invicta Baryonyx from being toys, for example.  In fact, when I was little I had prehistoric animal figures from Kenner Jurassic Park, Invicta, Battat, the Carnegie Collection, among others, and these were all toys.  Perhaps the Mattel might be the best Baryonyx action figure, although no action figure has been a good reconstruction of Baryonyx, and I'm not interested in spending time considering which of the action figures might be the best.

[Andreioli]

Wait, has there ever been an Elasmotherium figure ?
I don't think any company ever made one.

So far CollectA hasn't revealed a prehistoric mammal for next year, so it there will be one, I'm hoping for an Elasmotherium to pair with the new Safari Coelodonta.

And if they also reveal a marine creature, maybe a Megalodon ?

[Ravonium]

Assuming that the '5 dinosaurs' figure is true (which there is little reason to think it isn't), they will have to skip either the prehistoric mammal or the marine animal in favour of the 5th dinosaur.

I'm hoping, and thinking, that they'll skip the former, as there have been no marine animals revealed from any of the big 4 companies for 2019 yet, and they already revealed a boxset largely consisting of prehistoric mammals.

[Shonisaurus]

Assuming that the '5 dinosaurs' figure is true (which there is little reason to think it isn't), they will have to skip either the prehistoric mammal or the marine animal in favour of the 5th dinosaur.

I'm hoping, and thinking, that they'll skip the former, as there have been no marine animals revealed from any of the big 4 companies for 2019 yet, and they already revealed a boxset largely consisting of prehistoric mammals.

Es una pena de que Collecta según esa suposición no haga un mamífero prehistórico Deluxe pero lo comprendo. El tubo de mamíferos prehistóricos suple la carencia este año de esa especie de animales prehistóricos sinceramente que incluso me gusta con igual intensidad que los dinosaurios y que son la mayoría muy raros en el mercado del juguete.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

I would like to thank @Sim for the very informative posts, in fact I always enjoy reading your long posts.
However, I would like to ask something - hasn't Ornithomimus itself been found to have "primitive" wings, or where you just talking saying that some Ornithomimosaurs might not have wings?