jackdaniels Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 It looks as though the 1/100 is missing the landing gear doors on the legs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted August 30, 2008 Author Share Posted August 30, 2008 I think the threads will be kept separate, as we have actual samples for the VF-25, but not even drawings for the others. When the 1/100 VF-171 etc have something to actually show/discuss, they'll probably get their own threads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 The GA article lists what will be the swapping parts. 1. the head 2. the shoulder-joint area 3. the crotch area block 4. the rear fins (Not too bad IMHO) The general transformation system itself (the folding areas and whatnot) is unchanged. Thanks man, that actually reminds me of the 1/100 Macross 7 variable model kits they made years back. If all the parts have some place to store on the body in each mode, then I will pick these up, if not, maybe I won't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dobber Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 Don't worry we are only comparing the 1/100 against the 1/60 from this pic from the link David provided We are still under the legal boundaries LOL! we're fine over here, it's just in that other thread, someone was talking about the Ozma 1/60 fighter proto. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignacio Ocamica Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 LOL! we're fine over here, it's just in that other thread, someone was talking about the Ozma 1/60 fighter proto. Chris Are we going to see Dobber's scheme? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dobber Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 LOL!!!!! MY GOD I HOPE SO!!!! I need to get off my lazy Arse and paint my 51 still! Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante74 Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 LOL!!!!! MY GOD I HOPE SO!!!! I need to get off my lazy Arse and paint my 51 still! Chris Quoted For Truth! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twoducks Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 The GA article lists what will be the swapping parts. 1. the head 2. the shoulder-joint area 3. the crotch area block 4. the rear fins (Not too bad IMHO) The general transformation system itself (the folding areas and whatnot) is unchanged. Thanks for the info! And yep, it doesn't sound bad at all. I like the take on the proto and being part of a whole line of other valks is a nice plus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 After some thinking and looking at the pics, I think the 1/100 maybe more accurate and articulated than the 1/60. The swap parts provide what might be a cleaner, sleeker look in fighter and gerwalk modes, and the elbows definitely look double jointed. The knees might be as well. There is a thigh twist on the intake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted August 31, 2008 Author Share Posted August 31, 2008 Along that line of thinking: One of the many articles I've google-translated from the Chara Hobby show said something along the lines of "The 1/100 is supposed to be line-accurate, while the 1/60 is designed to look like a sturdy typical Chogokin". Honestly, with how fat the 1/60 is looking lately, I wouldn't be surprised if Bandai purposely is making it chunky like the 1/55. Which would suck, as the VF-25 is the skinniest valk ever and is DEFINED by how thin it is compared to others. I mean, we've seen the 1/100 and 1/72, there is NO need to have legs that thick on the 1/60. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 I mean, we've seen the 1/100 and 1/72, there is NO need to have legs that thick on the 1/60. The only other reason I can think of, is to incorporate the retractable rear landing gear and the swinging doors, unless Kawamori decided to have changes to areas aside the head, which he requested changes on months back. The new 1/100 definitely looks sleek in fighter mode, no visible gear door hinges or gaps, which is good. It may look the best and move the best of the VF-25 toys set for release. It could be toycrack. That would be cool. Depending on range of motion, a Revoltech version might not even be needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted August 31, 2008 Author Share Posted August 31, 2008 I don't have a problem with the fighter mode of any of them, but the 1/60 is fat in BATTROID, which is its most distinctive look. The VF-25 looks pretty typical in fighter mode as valks go, no sleeker than an Sv-51. But battroid mode? Its anorexic compared to many. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kensei Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 I don't think that it would look so bad if it weren't for the squashed head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fort Max Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Well you got what you wanted, a whole line of 1/100 Valk toys from every version of Macross. If the compromise is a few swap parts here and there then really that's a small price to pay imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Valkyrie Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Well you got what you wanted, a whole line of 1/100 Valk toys from every version of Macross. If the compromise is a few swap parts here and there then really that's a small price to pay imo. Indeed , I wonder how the VF-1 and the YF/VF-19 turns out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danth Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 I still think the parts-swapping is a cop out. Hopefully they only make the VF-25 this way, and after lukewarm sales and fan bitching, the rest are made PT. So are the VF-25 tail fins just supposed to fold down? That's the simplest thing to do, and it's not like you need an ugly hinge -- they could do it just like the Yamato VF-1 tail fin. Or is there some other problem? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 The GA article lists what will be the swapping parts. 1. the head 2. the shoulder-joint area 3. the crotch area block 4. the rear fins (Not too bad IMHO) The general transformation system itself (the folding areas and whatnot) is unchanged. That is a heck of a lot of parts swapping if you ask me and quite a lot of parts to keep track of. The amount of parts to swap is quite similar to the old Yamato 1/100 VF-0S. I'm wonding if the 1/100 VF-25 will come with 3 different crotch area blocks, 1 for each mode, a bit like the 3 different hip bars supplied with Bandai's old 1/100 VF-2SSS kit. On the positive side, the 1/100 VF-25 Battroid is so far looking much better than Bandai's DX 1/60 VF-25. Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 When I think about it, back in 7th grade when I had my Fire valkyrie kit, I thought it was awesome and would bring it to school with me sometimes. It was 1/100, and the sculpt was amazing, as was the intricacy. Well, as most of you would predict, it broke(after some handling too, I treated it like a toy). It was inevitable. Shoving a 1/100 plamo in your backpack is not a good idea! For the upcoming 1/100 VF-19, I see it as a replacement for my broken 1/100 model, one that can actually be played with, and survive. Overall, I would still want a durable, perfect transformation toy, but the great articulation and sculpting is slowly winning me over. I still think the parts-swapping is a cop out. Hopefully they only make the VF-25 this way, and after lukewarm sales and fan bitching, the rest are made PT. From the translation vifam7 gave us, the prototype was PT, but it the hinges were too fragile. That is a heck of a lot of parts swapping if you ask me and quite a lot of parts to keep track of. This can be alleviated by: 1-having all the swapped parts store elsewhere on the toy or 2-including a stand/base/factory diorama like the SHCMpro/EVA HCMpro models have that stores all the part Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonely Soldier Boy Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 I don't like either version. Fighter is nice in both toys but Battroid looks silly with those shoulders floating. Maybe the problem is K's design and not Bandai's rendition. Anyway, no 25's for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danth Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 From the translation vifam7 gave us, the prototype was PT, but it the hinges were too fragile. Seriously? I didn't know that. All the more reason to demand PT valks, if they already had it working! And they don't even need separate hinges on the fins; they could be built-in like the Yamato tail fins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 Maybe the problem is K's design and not Bandai's rendition. Thats what I'm thinking too, its definitely one of the designs that slowly grew on me(battroid mode), fighter mode was a neat VF-1 derived design, but the battroid mode is completely different from any other battroid Kawamori has designed. Like the Turn-A Gundam, it grew on me after seeing it in action. Seriously? I didn't know that. All the more reason to demand PT valks, if they already had it working! And they don't even need separate hinges on the fins; they could be built-in like the Yamato tail fins. I am all for PT, but in this case, at that size(there is a pic at GA graphic that shows the size compared to a hand), the joints may have been far too fragile and small for a toy. Having handled a 1/100 Fire valkyrie plamo kit when I was younger, which later broke, I remember the parts swap transformation, and if perfect transformation for the 19 is used at that scale, well something's gotta give. If not, then better for us, but I would not be surprised if the VF100 19 is parts swap transformation. I am dissapointed that PT is not being utilized, but at the same time, do not want something easily broken. Bandai is known for good qc and durability overall(sure there are some stinkers, like the first SOULSpec EVA-01 hips), so maybe this decision was for the best. Who the hell knows. It looks good so far. There aren't any obvious indicators in any mode that give away the fact that it transforms, and thats always good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 Keeping lineart accuracy, durability and perfect transformation is a big challenge at 1/100 scale. I can understand why Bandai is going with parts swapping from a durability aspect. While I'm sure they could make it perfect transformation if they wanted to, durability would likely suffer unless parts of the design were bulked up and strengthened, but then lineart accuracy would go out of the window, i.e. you'd end up with a chunky monkey. My main concern at this point is that they minimise the use of PVC. I do not want a toy with floppy or warped wings, tailins, weapons etc. I've owned a boat load of MSiA and GFF PVC dog poo toys over the years and every single one of then ended up with warped, floppy or bent parts. Or armour that fell off if you looked at it wrong (yes, Sentinel GFFs, I'm talking to you!) Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 My main concern at this point is that they minimise the use of PVC. I do not want a toy with floppy or warped wings, tailins, weapons etc. The only PVC seen on the prototype are the head lasers, I think those will be the only parts comprised of it. I understand the concern over PVC as well, and I think Bandai might too, they are completely replacing their MSIA lines with Robot Damashii, which is mostly ABS/POM with some PVC parts. Even their FIX lines are getting more releases in the 1/100 metal/ABS/POM category(the ones that came in that huge box and had internal diecast frames and were predominantly ABS with a good amount of metal). Hey come to think of it, thats the same scale as the valkyries! With more FIX releases in larger scale and in metal, Robot Damashii replacing MSIA, and the upcoming valkyries, I think Bandai is steadily kissing PVC goodbye as a predominant part in their action figures. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 With more FIX releases in larger scale and in metal, Robot Damashii replacing MSIA, and the upcoming valkyries, I think Bandai is steadily kissing PVC goodbye as a predominant part in their action figures. I sure hope they are kissing PVC goodbye. Shin, just curious why do you keep spelling it "Damashii", when AFAIK, all of Bandai's online and print literature spells it "Tamashi". Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 Shin, just curious why do you keep spelling it "Damashii", when AFAIK, all of Bandai's online and print literature spells it "Tamashi". I've read it both ways for the new line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vifam7 Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 (Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 @ Aug 31 2008, 11:02 PM) * From the translation vifam7 gave us, the prototype was PT, but it the hinges were too fragile. Seriously? I didn't know that. All the more reason to demand PT valks, if they already had it working! And they don't even need separate hinges on the fins; they could be built-in like the Yamato tail fins. Um, I don't think I wrote anything like that. Did I? If I did, what article did I translate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danth Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 It's funny how we all thought a CAD-designed valk would mean a PT toy. Instead it means a valk with a transformation way too complex for a PT toy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 Um, I don't think I wrote anything like that. Did I? If I did, what article did I translate? Go to the top of the pageReport Post Ah, sorry man, I think it was actually GGemini. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badboy00z Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 The VF-25's transformation doesn't seem anymore complex than say a YF-19. IMO it's less complex than the 19. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anime52k8 Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 The VF-25's transformation doesn't seem anymore complex than say a YF-19. IMO it's less complex than the 19. but the YF-19's transformation has fiewer parts/joints that would break if you look at them funny when it's built at this scale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firefox Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 (edited) Not 1/60 but 1/100 DX though. Not sure this has been posted. If this is not the right thread, please move it. http://ga.sbcr.jp/mgangu/010962/ Edited September 8, 2008 by Firefox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegas Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 (edited) thanks man. i wasnt expecting a PT for these little valks Edited September 8, 2008 by Vegas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonely Soldier Boy Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 Thanks Firefox. The landing gear bay doors have some nasty hinges on the 1/60, whereas the 100 doesn't seem to have any landing gear at all, at least not yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carzooyah Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 (edited) Maybe nonPT means taking out the landing gears only? (is hopeful) edit: Just noticed that the ears in battroid are different from the plane mode. Hmmmm.... swapping ears? Edited September 8, 2008 by carzooyah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 The landing gear bay doors have some nasty hinges on the 1/60, whereas the 100 doesn't seem to have any landing gear at all, at least not yet. It will most likely be swappable. Maybe nonPT means taking out the landing gears only? (is hopeful) Its more than that, vifam7 confirmed it when he translated one of the articles(I'm sure you translated this one man). It was the head, shoulder parts, and I think the groin area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.