PNSO: New For 2021

[stoneage]

I still haven't purchased the new Triceratops, but I'm looking forward to how it will look in the reviews on YouTube. I'm also curious how this one compares to the Eofauna Triceratop. I really like that one and Eofauna's Triceratops is only 1/3rd of Doyles price. So while I definitely want this figure, I'm still on the fence of actually purchasing it.

Yes, as always it is a matter of weighing the pro's and con's, which are, to some degree, subjective. But the newest PNSO Triceratops is not 3 times more expensive, from what I can tell. More like 1,5 times more expensive (PNSO up to $60, the Eofauna about $40). Anyway, I like the PNSO Triceratops better, for different reasons, like the detailed integument, the reconstruction overall, the pose, and the simplistic color scheme.

I purchased the eofauna triceratops from dejankins for $30 and he hasn't jacked up his price since then.  This one is going to probably cost $50 plus on amazon so it's going to go for at least 40% more in price.  But here's the kicker, I'm really starting to cool on this new PNSO and I'm blaming my son for it, LOL    He collects too and he won't be getting it because of the legs being 'as thick as tree trunks' he said and he also thinks the feet are very inaccurate like some people here have also pointed out.  I have stated previously that the eye placement seems wrong to me for some reason so I already had my own concerns.  But now that my kid pointed out the incredibly thick limbs I'm starting to quickly back pedal on buying this.  Add to that all the other issues others have pointed out here and now I'm probably not going to buy this even though I'd love to get my hands on that included skull and I love the simple color scheme applied to the figure.

Strange, but what legs should an animal weighing several tons have, which periodically butts its horns in fights with others ?! In addition, they recently wrote that this reconstruction takes into account the latest data on the anatomy of the legs, especially the feet.

Wasn't the head-butting horn theory disproven a while ago, or has it been brought back from its grave?
I don't exactly trust PNSO with that statement. That's what they said about Wilson's mouth, and then proceeded to give it no lips.

Personally I dislike the lips, I feel it makes them look like lizards and I prefer the crocodile look, besides, aren't dinosaurs more closely related to crocs than lizards?  IDK but it seems like a crying shame to cover up T-rex teeth.  If there is still debate on whether they even had lips then I'll keep buying lipless.

Well aren't Dinosaurs more related to Birds then Lizards? Think of Dinosaurs with beaks with teeth.

[SidB]

Thanks @Faras for the info. Paleofiguras rumors should be taken with a grain of salt. Seems like they just repost images they find while browsing Chinese forums like Baidu, and sometimes things get lost in (auto?)translation.

That's most likely the case with this one. It has happened before.

Disappointed this isn't the actual figure. Looked too good to be true and I should have realized that. Plus we have yet to know if the rumored list is true. Oh well... the wait begins again for the next release/reveal.

Yeah, my reaction too.

[CARN0TAURUS]

The amazon page is listing the new doyle at $59.99 so it's definitely twice the cost of everyone else's and in some cases even 3x as much.  I know that's not a concern to many here as many here will probably buy all of them anyways    But if I was ten years old again with the limited cash I made from my paper route, my stipend, and from cutting the neighbors' lawns, I'd probably go for the most accurate one I could get from the less expensive group and then ask my my grandparents for the PNSO for X-mas, LOL.

[Takama]

One look at the box of ANY PNSO product will tell you that these are for those 14+

[Python]

Unfortunately, with the tiny scales and high price tags, PNSO is becoming more like the really expansive companies I don't buy from like Nanmu and W-Dragon, but sometimes I see something I like (Cretoxyrhina, Lambeosaurus, Machairoceratops). I overall prefer Safari more, but that's just me

[Antey]

Unfortunately, with the tiny scales and high price tags, PNSO is becoming more like the really expansive companies I don't buy from like Nanmu and W-Dragon, but sometimes I see something I like (Cretoxyrhina, Lambeosaurus, Machairoceratops). I overall prefer Safari more, but that's just me

My country has a land border with China and toys are not subject to additional tax. And the prices for toys from European manufacturers are quite high. Two days ago in the store I saw a feathered tee rex from Collecta. It cost exactly the same as Winter Wilson. And the difference in the quality of performance is heaven and earth!
Of course, it is better to wait for discounts on PNSO, but we do not have discounts on European manufacturers.

[SRF]

I guess prices of different brands can differ a lot depending on which part of the world you live. This will of course give different motivations to purchase a figure of a certain brand or not.

To me PNSO does stand out when it comes to quality and sculpting detail compared to brands like Safari and Collecta. Meaning that if the brands where from the same country, it still would make sense to me that PNSO's products are more expensive than of the other two brands.

However PNSO's prices in itself went up a lot last year. That is also due to the current economic situation in the world of course, but I still have a feeling that the production quality of PNSO's products has declined slightly as well. To make an easy comparison: as a product, so not talking about the realism of the skin detail etc. Winter Wilson is a superior product compared to Andrea, which released ~ 8 months later. The material feels sturdier, the quality of the paint application is better (at least on my figures) and the articulated jaw makes sense at least. I also feel that this applies to figures like the Qianzhousaurus and the Carnotaurus compared to their later theropods.

I held of purchasing some of PNSO's 2020 releases (the Spinosaurus, the Pachyrhinosaurus and Sinoceratops are still on my want list) because of everything they've released last year. But now I'm more inclined to purchase some of these 2020 figures than the new Triceratops which does seem to have some issues especially with that articulated jaw and the bit goofy eyes (which are a common problem for me in 2021 releases from PNSO as well).

[Antey]

There is one more nuance that we shyly keep silent about. This is our collecting strategy. Someone (and most of them) cannot endure a week without a new replenishment of the collection. Heating their hobby constantly requires firewood. Others (like me) deliberately and carefully limit themselves to only the most important and best examples. I don't have extra money and extra space to buy everything more or less suited to the topic. And even more so to collect a complete fossil record in reconstructions, from the Ediacaran to the Neanderthals.
Therefore PNSO fits perfectly into my collecting strategy. Moreover, I think that the final collection will not exceed 50 copies, but most likely not more than 30. After that I will stop replenishing it. In total, I set aside 5 to 7 years for this. Then I will just make a leisurely rotation, replacing old samples with new and more accurate ones. But even the latter I doubt.

[Shonisaurus]

It is sincerely appreciated that practically every week PNSO reveals a new figure of a dinosaur or other prehistoric animal. Whoever can afford the purchase of each of the PNSO figures is something laudable and plausible. Honestly I personally complained that companies revealed few dinosaur products at most more than a dozen such as Collecta or Safari and PNSO has fulfilled the dreams of every dinosaur collector (at least mine) and it is appreciated although This is a bit of an economic drain.

PNSO prices are fair, the quality and paint of the product are valued.

To all that, the 2022 Doyle triceratops is much better and more scientific than its predecessor but in return the old PNSO replica of the triceratops had a much better articulated jaw made with fewer seams. I sincerely understand that dinosaurs or carnivorous prehistoric animals have articulated jaws in the case of PVC figures, although I do not agree, but in the case of herbivorous dinosaurs I think it is a mistake and it is something that is spreading to the rest of the companies, not only PNSO, the Herbivorous dinosaurs by having smaller or less bulky jaws without being small compared to carnivorous theropod dinosaurs by articulating said jaws honestly spoil the figure but it is my assessment.

I think herbivorous dinosaurs should not have jointed jaws and the same can be said for Cenozoic mammals even if they are carnivores.

[SidB]

It is sincerely appreciated that practically every week PNSO reveals a new figure of a dinosaur or other prehistoric animal. Whoever can afford the purchase of each of the PNSO figures is something laudable and plausible. Honestly I personally complained that companies revealed few dinosaur products at most more than a dozen such as Collecta or Safari and PNSO has fulfilled the dreams of every dinosaur collector (at least mine) and it is appreciated although This is a bit of an economic drain.

PNSO prices are fair, the quality and paint of the product are valued.

To all that, the 2022 Doyle triceratops is much better and more scientific than its predecessor but in return the old PNSO replica of the triceratops had a much better articulated jaw made with fewer seams. I sincerely understand that dinosaurs or carnivorous prehistoric animals have articulated jaws in the case of PVC figures, although I do not agree, but in the case of herbivorous dinosaurs I think it is a mistake and it is something that is spreading to the rest of the companies, not only PNSO, the Herbivorous dinosaurs by having smaller or less bulky jaws without being small compared to carnivorous theropod dinosaurs by articulating said jaws honestly spoil the figure but it is my assessment.

I think herbivorous dinosaurs should not have jointed jaws and the same can be said for Cenozoic mammals even if they are carnivores.

We can observe in the Arms, jaws and tails' thread that the new member, @MesozoicJohn , provides examples of an elegant solution to the 'gap' problem, especially when it is particularly egregious. Rather than give up on an otherwise commendable sculpt, the immobilization of the joint and filling in of the same seems a sensible answer. Admittedly, not everyone has the skill-set at hand, but this can be developed or a competent artist be approached.

[Antey]

Fresh and in-depth review of the new Doyle
https://youtu.be/1Q2kTdyI2hc

[Psittacoraptor]

It's impressive that they managed to reproduce those tiny tiny scales on the frill in mass production.

[Fenestra]

I wonder if new Doyle would have had problems with eating from the ground with those horns.
Just plants and leaves at eye level.

NO GRASS FOR YOU!

[Psittacoraptor]

@Fenestra Grasses didn't evolve until after the K-Pg extinction (based on the fossils discovered so far), so it wouldn't have had any grass to eat anyway.

But the horns hindering eating is an interesting thought. I wonder if a triceratops ever got stuck on a tree trunk after munching on some leaves.

[Sim]

@Psittacoraptor, grass existed in the Cretaceous, as is shown in here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poaceae#Evolutionary_history

[Psittacoraptor]

@Sim Huh, seems like the geology professor whose lecture I attended last year hadn't updated his slides in quite a while then. Thanks for the link.

[Gwangi]

@Sim Huh, seems like the geology professor whose lecture I attended last year hadn't updated his slides in quite a while then. Thanks for the link.

That'll happen. I attended a weekly lecture about the evolution of life over the different geologic periods, at my local museum no less, and they told us that turtles were anapsids. 

[SidB]

Well, looks like grass is "in" for my Cretaceous dioramas. I was using it sparingly anyways, but now I can employ it doubt free!

[Psittacoraptor]

@Gwangi Yeah, but that was "just" a museum, I'm talking about someone who teaches geosciences at university. IIRC his research focuses are mass extinction events and paleoclimatology, so perhaps grass isn't interesting enough for him to keep his info up to date, or he didn't consider the sparse literature on the topic substantial enough to include it.

S @SidB Keep in mind that the evidence is very limited. That wiki page cites four papers over a span of 15+ years, each arguing for the existence of grasses based on microscopic structures found in coprolites from a small number of deposits. They don't know what those plants looked like, just that they're associated with rice and bamboo. Wide-spread geographic distribution and actual grasslands that animals could graze are still only known from the late Cenozoic onwards.

[suspsy]

Say hello to Harvey:

https://www.facebook.com/814219578676241/posts/4551807478250747/?d=n