What is the most accurate Spinosaurus model on the market?

[DinoToyForum]

Derek, I'm not sure which member you're trying to insult there, but regardless, you're breaking Forum Rule #1, "no intentional personal attacks, rudeness, or personal provocation." Please don't continue to do so. 

He's a repeat offender, so I've just banned him. Permanently this time. 

[suspsy]

Derek, I'm not sure which member you're trying to insult there, but regardless, you're breaking Forum Rule #1, "no intentional personal attacks, rudeness, or personal provocation." Please don't continue to do so. 

He's a repeat offender, so I've just banned him. Permanently this time. 

Good riddance.

To answer the OP's question, my own personal favourite is the swimming version from CollectA, in part because it skirts the issue of posture entirely and in part because it was the first modern Spinosaurus toy.

That said, if someone asked me to name the best version overall, I'd probably go with Essien from PNSO.

[Mellow Stego]

What about the large spine? Is it supposed to be covered in a thin skin like a sail or is it more of a fatty hump?
One of the reasons I like the Schleich version so much is because the spine looks so much like a hump.

[stargatedalek]

What about the large spine? Is it supposed to be covered in a thin skin like a sail or is it more of a fatty hump?
One of the reasons I like the Schleich version so much is because the spine looks so much like a hump.

TLDR; no one knows, yet, and your answer will likely depend on your beliefs in methodology of dinosaur reconstruction at large rather than anything specific to Spinosaurus.

There are essentially three possibilities, which can even be combined together, and which are all backed by genuine anatomical analogues.

The most often used being chameleons as proposed by Ibrahim et al with the publishing of the 2014 reconstruction (which is why it became so pervasive). Chameleons were chosen because many of them have elongated vertebrae which similarly narrow at the top, as we see in many of the vertebrae in the front section of Spinosaurus' sail. Chameleons cover this with a relatively thin layer flesh and soft skin, and it usually forms a subtle ridge with the base of the vertebrae visible, but that doesn't highlight individual segments. The are exceptions to this, the crested chameleon being the most noteworthy here, and these are what the "spiderweb" sail is based on.

It should be noted the crested chameleon is more specialized than just having longer vertebrae, and while there is nothing inherently wrong with using crested chameleons as a reference, the only thing that makes them any more applicable than other chameleons is the length of the vertebrae (which are considerably more spaced than Spinosaurus). A more traditional thicker chameleon ridge, as seen in the veiled chameleon, remains another good option for reconstructing Spinosaurus.

Some people (myself included) would argue the traditional chameleon ridge is more accurate, since it's seen in the vast majority of chameleons, while others will argue the crested chameleon "sail" is more accurate because the length of the vertebrae is closer to Spinosaurus.

Spoiler

[close]

The third is the idea of a hump, which was of growing popularity in the years leading up to the 2014 reconstruction but initially regarded as outright debunked by the new vertebrae found. On later examination this comes into question however, as while the vertebrae on the front section of Spinosaurus' sail do narrow at the top, the back half widen at the top which is something seen in animals with humps, namely bison and rhinoceros.

Some people go with the idea of a hump that narrows towards the front of the animal, and others that the "sail" was split into two distinct sections.

[Faelrin]

@stargatedalek Thank you for posting all of that information, and providing some image examples. I was completely unaware about the whole chameleon comparison, let alone there were some species that have a sail of sorts (looking at that third image, if not the other two examples as well). I wonder if these examples are applicable to Dimetrodon and Edaphosaurus too (to some extant regarding Dimetrodon, considering the recent evidence showing its sail did not go to the tips as previously thought). In any case is perhaps the Safari Ltd Spinosaurus the only one going with the upper chameleon examples of how to restore the sail? It appears fleshier to me at least, then what I'm used to seeing on Spinosaurus. From the looks of it, most opt for something similar to the bottom option, which is pretty much how its always been done with the bones being sort of visible (and that goes for Dimetrodon and Edaphosaurus as well). I was under the impression that doing that would have been considered shrinkwrapping as well, but here I am seeing this on a living chameleon, so that does make wonder.

Also I'm going to edit the descriptions for the figures yet again, as apparently the term I was looking for to describe the first digit on the feet was "weight bearing", which completely slipped my mind. I went back and watched the "Your Dinosaurs are Wrong" video on Spinosaurus, which was very helpful in that regards, which means I was aware of that feature, but completely forgot about it because of how long it has been since I last watched that, as it does cover that in the video.

[stargatedalek]

Chameleons as a whole are not really relevant to the discussion of Dimetrodon or Edaphosaurus, unless we're talking about hypothetical transitional stages. Their neural spines are simply so thin that they wouldn't likely have been able to suspend very much mass.

The Favorite Kinto v. 1 Spinosaurus has a ridge structure not dissimilar to chameleons.

[Dinoguy2]

Derek, I'm not sure which member you're trying to insult there, but regardless, you're breaking Forum Rule #1, "no intentional personal attacks, rudeness, or personal provocation." Please don't continue to do so. 

He's a repeat offender, so I've just banned him. Permanently this time. 

Good riddance.

To answer the OP's question, my own personal favourite is the swimming version from CollectA, in part because it skirts the issue of posture entirely and in part because it was the first modern Spinosaurus toy.

Came here to say the same thing. CollectA swimmer is currently my go-to Spino. I also like that, while it's croc-like in the tail, it's not overbearingly so like many others, nor is it overly spiny/Todd Marshall inspired which has become such an overdone spinosaur cliche.

[Shonisaurus]

Safari spinosaurus is scientifically accurate but of insufficient size (I prefer larger figures).

Collecta's three spinosaurus are outstanding figures and in fact they won the prize for the best Prehistoric Times toy dinosaur (shared prize with Safari), it is scientific but its texture is a bit rough to the touch it is scientific but its plastic is somewhat rough since my point of view, but it is one hundred percent outstanding.

The PNSO spinosaurus is an outstanding ensemble and its base is one hundred percent artistic but the articulated jaw suffers from stability problems, it does not matter what happens with Collecta or Schleich. It is very scientific but it also has the problem that it does not stand up well.

Schleich's spinosaurus is a scientific but somewhat small figure, however it is the best carnivorous theropod made by the Schleich brand in its long history and a figure to be taken into account in collecting.

The Papo spinosaurus limited version is a very hyperrealistic scientific figure but it differs from the prototype in a negative way although it is a very detailed and outstanding figure and perhaps the eel tail of which the forum members have criticized a lot takes away scientific credibility although sincerely still We don't know what the spinosaurus really would be like and it will probably never be known how that impressive theropod was like with other dinosaurs such as the saltriovenator or badajasaurus (hopefully I was wrong) but as there are no more remains of those prehistoric animals as happened with the deinocheirus or The Edmontosaurus (thanks to Dakota) will never know what it really was.

On the other hand, the figure that I like most by far is the Rebor spinosaurus, a hundred percent scientific figure for me, like the rest of the aforementioned spinosaurus, but perhaps the best modeled and at a price that is super affordable, even for those who have little budget. It is a large, scientific and non-articulated figure, made of a cheap material such as vinyl and beautifully detailed and painted judging by the photographs. Without a doubt for me the best scientific figure of spinosaurus.

[Killekor]

First of all, I'll like to point out that we don't know exactly how Spinosaurus was, so I think that, depending of some eventual new discoveries, any of the following figures could be the most accurate one (except for some proportions issues in the anatomical department).

In my opinion, the best Spinosaurus figure on the market is REBOR's rendition. First of all for the fact that it has a naturalistic appearance without losing the ultra detailed sculpting (which makes a figure great for my tastes). Plus, it's scientific and all the color options are great. Vote 11/10.

I'll soon receive Papo's new version, which I'm really excited to see in person. From all the photos I saw of it it looks great. I'm not disturbed at all by the quality of its color scheme, and I always wanted a Spinosaurus figure with colors based on Bonadonna's artwork.
Plus, in my view of the species itself the idea of that fish tail it's cooler and more likely than all those crocodile tails. As with REBOR's model the sculpt is masterfully made. Vote 10/10.

PNSO's rendition certainly it's stunning, with the high level of detail in the sculpt and that base with the dead Onchopristis. I'll surely get it one day and for me it's one of the best models in the market. Vote 10/10.

I own both the Schleich version and the CollectA Deluxe one. Schleich's Spinosaurus is an amazing figure, and it's really well made. Vote 9/10.
CollectA's Spinosaurus is a real classic for me. It's the star of my dinosaur collection and I'm really fond of it. It's only defect is that it could have a better color scheme. Vote 8,5/10.

The Favorite Ltd swimming model is for me a really nice figure in a striking pose. I'll probably get one someday. Vote 9/10. Also Kanna's model is great. Vote 8,5/10.

Safari's Spinosaurus is the one I like less between all the scientific versions of these animals. The sculpt is great and, as always, Mr. Watson made a masterful job making it the most accurate possible, but for some reason I just don't like it. I understand that it's a scientific figure etc etc... but for my tastes (and only for my tastes) it's a bit ugly. Vote 7/10.

Anyways, I'm really happy to see so many great and different versions of this animal, which is my favorite dinosaur. And I sincerely hope to see Eofauna's rendition of it, which will be certainly amazing!

Killekor

[GojiraGuy1954]

For once, the Rebor one is the most accurate. Never thought i'd say that in my life.

[stargatedalek]

For once, the Rebor one is the most accurate. Never thought i'd say that in my life.

In some senses anyway. It actually gets some skeletal anatomy (the feet) wrong, but it has probably the best soft tissue reconstruction, with a rare middle ground of "not shrink-wrapped" relative to "wearing a crocodile".

[Faelrin]

So based on the objective evidence, is it at all possible, or even worth composing together a list from most accurate to least accurate in regards to the options that are currently available? Or is what I have done in the OP probably the most helpful way of going about it, to address the very question in the thread's title? It seems most all seem to have one particular thing that's missed or done incorrectly (such as the knuckle walking), that would probably make it hard to do so anyways, but well it doesn't hurt to ask here either on if it would be worth having or not. From what I'm gathering it seems like Safari Ltd, CollectA, PNSO, and Rebor's are probably the most accurate options, despite something here or there, with everything after (such as Papo, Favorite, etc)?

[Patrx]

I think the list at the top of this thread probably is the most useful way of looking at the options for now; we've got less of a spectrum from "most accurate" to "least accurate" and more of an assembly of pros and cons. Finding one's ideal Spinosaurus out of these seems to be a matter of identifying which features one finds most important to get right.

[Faelrin]

Well it looks like most of these have now been left behind in some regard to the new science on the tail: http://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=8631.0

Kind of a shame that many of these produced last year were made just a little too early before this discovery with the possible exception of the Papo one with its finned tail that comes close in some ways (although misses the mark in others).

[stargatedalek]

The tail on the Papo version is not accurate either. It's "more accurate" in the sense that putting dragon wings on a Velociraptor is more accurate than not giving it wings.

Is it better to not include a feature, or include it but get it entirely wrong? I think that's going to have to be up to personal decision.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

The tail on the Papo version is not accurate either. It's "more accurate" in the sense that putting dragon wings on a Velociraptor is more accurate than not giving it wings.

Is it better to not include a feature, or include it but get it entirely wrong? I think that's going to have to be up to personal decision.

Exactly.

[stargatedalek]

Looking at how little material we really have from Baryonyx and Suchomimus, particularly from their tails, I have to wonder if they're going to need updated figures now too.

[Faelrin]

@stargatedalek You make a fair point, and I do understand that it does get the details wrong. True I would prefer one to get it right at all, and in this case they clearly don't, but of course at the time no one could have known what was to come. The way I see it is quite like that artist who hypothesized about a feathered theropod with four wings many many years before Microraptor was finally discovered. I think it is interesting that they even thought of giving it a finned tail in any shape at all, likely due to its aquatic lifestyle (and probably a result of their typical monster-ization as well I suppose, with what the latter Giganotosaurus continues the trend of) prior to this new revolutionary evidence, despite the particular eel like anatomy they went with being incorrect. Or perhaps another example would be like Talon from Primal Rage having some head feathers, which at the time was a step in the right direction (although some paleoartists were leaning towards restoring them with feathers and much more bird like prior, though it was far from the norm back then of course), despite it being far off from the reality of what further discoveries would show what dromaeosaurids truly looked like.

Additionally with how excited I was over the discovery and after reading the input of others in the thread discussing and comparing the discovery to the Papo figure, I couldn't quite help but make the comparison myself as well. Perhaps I took it too far or literal as well (which with being autistic has contributed me to doing many many times in the past without me even realizing it, until later), before really stopping to think and look at it. Basically I initially jumped at the idea of it having a finned tail, and the real animal also having a finned tail despite major anatomical differences between the two.


Maybe I ought to go back and edit things in the first post on the first page to be more clear?


In any case because of the very nature of this discovery all previous figures are now (for better or worse) outdated (though some certainly get more things right based on the available evidence at the time such as the Safari Ltd one), so I can only wonder is who and when will the first be to incorporate this discovery into the sculpt of their figure?

And right before I go to post this I see you also posted about Baryonyx and Suchomimus and their tails. That is certainly an interesting thing to think about. I too also wonder if they should be depicted with webbed feet much like Spinosaurus and whatever mystery theropod those footprints one of their relatives had, assuming they haven't been already (I can't think of any though).

[Sim]

I doubt Baryonyx and Suchomimus had tail fins.  They were adapted for a more generalist lifestyle than Spinosaurus which was more adapted for an aquatic lifestyle.  This can be seen in a nuumber of areas, for example the nostrils being further up the snout in Spinosaurus than in Suchomimus and Baryonyx, Suchomimus (and presumably its close relative Baryonyx) having longish, strong legs while Spinosaurus has very reduced legs, Baryonyx and Suchomimus having serrated vertical teeth while Spinosaurus had teeth that pointed outwards and had no serrations, Baryonyx being known to have eaten Iguanodon as well as fish.  Also, Suchomimus has a tail vertebra preserved which appears to show it doesn't have a tail fin.  Ichthyovenator however appears to have a tail fin:



Webbed feet in Suchomimus and Baryonyx seems more possible than a tail fin, although I don't know how likely it is.

[Halichoeres]

It's been interesting seeing Papologists touting the 2019 quadruped as the most accurate on the market. The tail, in silhouette, does look pretty good! But on any closer inspection, the anatomy is pretty laughable. Papo's figure doesn't have elongated neural spines, it has pterygiophores and lepidotrichia. And it has them both top and bottom. I think Papo's could be the most accurate if you kept it behind a veil on a shelf, backlit.