CollectA: New for 2022

[suspsy]

Oh, I remain very much open to the possibility of T. rex possessing minimal integument of some sort, but I'm a realist first and foremost. I don't think that the 2015 CollectA and the 2017 Safari versions are plausible anymore, although I still adore both toys. In any case, the only reason I brought that up was to make the point that it's perfectly fine to consider the CollectA Edmontosaurus an annectens as opposed to a regalis. There's no reason to think that it didn't also possess a comb.

[Flaffy]

Aren't there differences in skull morphology between E. regalis and E. annectens?
IIRC regalis has the more deep and robust skull, while annectens has a flatter, longer skull.

[MLMjp]

Aren't there differences in skull morphology between E. regalis and E. annectens?
IIRC regalis has the more deep and robust skull, while annectens has a flatter, longer skull.

Exactly.

[suspsy]

Aren't there differences in skull morphology between E. regalis and E. annectens?

Yes, E. annectens has a longer skull, but it's not radically different from E. regalis. At one point, it was suggested that the two represented a male and female.

[Flaffy]

Aren't there differences in skull morphology between E. regalis and E. annectens?

Yes, E. annectens has a longer skull, but it's not radically different from E. regalis. At one point, it was suggested that the two represented a male and female.

Interesting! Without direct access to fossil specimens, I guess strata the specimens are found in is the most reliable method in differentiating the two species.
Now I'm really curious to see how the CollectA Edmontosaurus's skull morphology compares with both the Safari ltd Edmontosaurus-es and "Anatotitan".

[Sim]

I find it disappointing when CollectA makes lots of species from one group of closely-related animals and ignores other groups.  Before it was allosauroids which I'm glad CollectA isn't making any of this time, now it's ornithopods...  Why does CollectA neglect deinonychosaurs so much?

I love their ornithopods. If CollectA continue to produce solid and beautiful pieces for this group, why stop? Although I do agree that they should dish out some deinonychosaurs, plus their Allosaurids were pretty weak glad they slowed down on producing those.

@Bread I agree that CollectA's allosauroids aren't great.  You also make a good point with why stop if they come out well.  I think it would be good if representation was better balanced so CollectA's prehistoric line better represented diversity.  I find it frustrating how they focus on certain groups for years and ignore other animals that would be popular.


Regarding whether Edmontosaurus annectens could have a crest, I think D @Dinoguy2 once suggested it was unlikely E. annectens had a crest since: There's only one E. regalis mummy and it has a crest and there's a number of E. annectens mummies and none of them have a crest.  I couldn't find the relevant post, so Dinoguy2 please correct me if I made any mistake.

[Dinoguy2]

I find it disappointing when CollectA makes lots of species from one group of closely-related animals and ignores other groups.  Before it was allosauroids which I'm glad CollectA isn't making any of this time, now it's ornithopods...  Why does CollectA neglect deinonychosaurs so much?

I love their ornithopods. If CollectA continue to produce solid and beautiful pieces for this group, why stop? Although I do agree that they should dish out some deinonychosaurs, plus their Allosaurids were pretty weak glad they slowed down on producing those.

@Bread I agree that CollectA's allosauroids aren't great.  You also make a good point with why stop if they come out well.  I think it would be good if representation was better balanced so CollectA's prehistoric line better represented diversity.  I find it frustrating how they focus on certain groups for years and ignore other animals that would be popular.


Regarding whether Edmontosaurus annectens could have a crest, I think D @Dinoguy2 once suggested it was unlikely E. annectens had a crest since: There's only one E. regalis mummy and it has a crest and there's a number of E. annectens mummies and none of them have a crest.  I couldn't find the relevant post, so Dinoguy2 please correct me if I made any mistake.

Yes, there are several annectens mummies and none have a crest. That being said, I'm not sure how good the head/neck preservation is on them. None have the large oval textured skin either. Unless evidence turns up to the contrary I think it's safer to assume the soft tissue varied between the two species.

Even if annectens did have a crest, it would almost certainly have looked different then the one on regalis. There's a lot of variation between bony crests even in closely related hadrosaur species and I think soft tissue crests would be even more variable.

[suspsy]

Another possibility is that the combs were only found on males and the E. annectens mummies all happen to be female. Or the combs were simply not preserved, as you already noted.

And by the same argument, the combs on the two species might have remained similar. We may never know.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

Given the size of the figure, I think it will do nicely as Edmontosaurus annectens. It is larger than the Safari Ltd representation. For some reason I usually see E. annectens as depicted with a more arched back and E. regalis with a flatter back, but I'm not sure if that's just people wanting to differentiate them or indeed how well preserved E. annectens is.

Of course as I have said elsewhere, CollectA had me at Hadrosaur with hooves. Not to mention Edmontosaurus is one of my favourites anyway.

A shame the Triceratops is saved for last as that's the only CollectA 2022 figure i won't he buying, but at least I can see what the line up will be.

[Bread]

I find it disappointing when CollectA makes lots of species from one group of closely-related animals and ignores other groups.  Before it was allosauroids which I'm glad CollectA isn't making any of this time, now it's ornithopods...  Why does CollectA neglect deinonychosaurs so much?

I love their ornithopods. If CollectA continue to produce solid and beautiful pieces for this group, why stop? Although I do agree that they should dish out some deinonychosaurs, plus their Allosaurids were pretty weak glad they slowed down on producing those.

@Bread I agree that CollectA's allosauroids aren't great.  You also make a good point with why stop if they come out well.  I think it would be good if representation was better balanced so CollectA's prehistoric line better represented diversity.  I find it frustrating how they focus on certain groups for years and ignore other animals that would be popular.

Oh yes completely agree. A more balanced and diversified prehistoric line would be nice. I just hope CollectA continue what they are doing by producing unique animals. I don't mind their attempts at popular ones as they do need to produce what sells whether us members like it or not and those are generally the popular species that sell.

[stargatedalek]

I just realized, is the Smoke a digitrade? Shouldn't it (especially if it's being reconstructed as a raisuchian) be plantigrade?

[Bokisaurus]

Wow, wonderful model! I like it a lot.
I'm really appreciative that despite the production challenges that is creating havoc, that CollectA still made the effort to produce a varied and diverse model for next year!
That's a lot of model when you compare that to others.
Now, bring on the triceratops 😃

[Sim]

I just realized, is the Smoke a digitrade? Shouldn't it (especially if it's being reconstructed as a raisuchian) be plantigrade?

Yes, it is digitigrade.  I thought something looked off about it and now that you've mentioned it it's that.  It's feet/legs just don't look right being held like that.  I don't understand why sometimes CollectA poses the feet wrong, other examples being their digitigrade pterosaurs and tiptoeing theropods.

[suspsy]

I'm kind of surprised CollectA didn't toss in another repaint to flesh out the assortment more. Maybe it's just something they don't want to get into a regular habit of doing.

And speaking of regular habits, I really hope the Triceratops doesn't have filaments running down its tail.

[Bread]

I'm kind of surprised CollectA didn't toss in another repaint to flesh out the assortment more. Maybe it's just something they don't want to get into a regular habit of doing.

I was surprised too, followed by the surprise of a smaller/standard version of a deluxe figure not being present this year.

I just went back and checked 2020 and 2021 releases. 2020 had 18 figures and 2021 had 11, and that's not including minis or tubes.
So far we're only receiving 7 (so far and that includes the rumored Triceratops) and that's quite a reduction compared to the previous years. Let's hope we do have a few more following the Triceratops. I'd be shocked if we don't receive more ammonites and trilobites due to their small size and affordability.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

@Bread CollectA are having a light year due to the current situation, Everything Dinosaur have already said so.

[suspsy]

@Bread CollectA are having a light year due to the current situation, Everything Dinosaur have already said so.

This is true. Another thing to consider is that repaints still cost a lot of money to design and manufacture, albeit far less than brand new sculpts. It's possible that CollectA considered doing a repaint for 2022 prehistoric assortment and then decided it just wasn't in their budget.

[Bread]

@Bread CollectA are having a light year due to the current situation, Everything Dinosaur have already said so.

My mistake. In that case, CollectA still produced a solid line this year, even with the slight downside to variety.

[Shonisaurus]

@Bread CollectA are having a light year due to the current situation, Everything Dinosaur have already said so.

My mistake. In that case, CollectA still produced a solid line this year, even with the slight downside to variety.

Honestly except for the coopoceras, all Collecta figures are Deluxe, standard size. That says a lot in favor of Collecta.

[TheCambrianCrusader]

A bit late to the party but I love that Smok! Given that Smok's taxonomic placement isn't known and its feet haven't been preserved I'm pretty ok with it being quadrupedal, although it having digitigrade hindfeet is a bit weird if they're using a pseudosuchian restoration. Though a digitigrade condition isn't out of the question assuming an ornithosuchian ancestry, however since this model looks like its based off of rauisuchians it doesn't seem super likely. That all said any Smok restoration is really up in the air given how uncertain its placement is.
Also love that Cooperoceras and Edmontosaurus, any more palaeozoic figures are very welcome and while I wish that Edmontosaurus was an annectens rather than a regalis it still looks really nice and will prob pair really nice with the safari.