Lynx7725

Arms and hands mostly; the rest is mostly die-cast (legs and torso), if you can break those you really shouldn't be handling toys... Hands you have to be really careful not to catch on the edges; they don't fold very well into fists, so turning them into the compartments can be quite hairy, especially when you are in fear of the hands crumbling. Really, I have to find an alternative to those hands... Have to be a bit careful with the canopy; it opens, but you need to squeeze it a bit, so, yeah, it can break. Watch out for the chest compartment where you store the cyclone, it's just a sliding piece, so yeah, it can open and then your cyclone would be "airdropped"... Then the missile covers, they shouldn't open by themselves but if they do, be careful not to get them caught on anything; the covers are plastic so they can rip. Same applies for the "canards", they tend to catch on things unintended, especially when you are transforming from Robot/ Battroid to Fighter/ Diver. Then you have to watch out for the cover of the sensor, you need to open/ close it at a specific point in the transformation or it would jam/ require a reverse. Then there's the rear landing gear, the cover might stick a bit but that's ok, the problem is with the gear itself. Because the space there is so tight (and the feet so big), sometimes it gets hung up on the ankle joint, so don't force it, just wiggle the ankle a bit to see if it loosens up. You shouldn't need too much force on it. The shoulders might give you a bit of problem during transformation -- it might "stick" at a wrong place, which is annoying, but rarely fatal. The head too might give some issues -- the paint on my neck joint has already been abraded off through the transformations -- but generally shouldn't be that bad. The torso joint, you need to watch out for because depending on your luck the sliding joint might be "sticky", so might need a bit of force. That's about all that I can remember, maybe someone else has other tips.

Sure they can land, I'm just not sure the mechanics can get underneath to fix the skid marks. They got model-thin mechanics, must be. Come to think of it, didn't the Fighter mode have a VTOL mode too? Back to the toy.. You can tweak the transformation until the "strung bow" syndrome disappear.. mostly; it can be done and I have done it. But even with the arched back gone, the clearance is really in millimeters. Even then, the whole Alpha feels a bit under tension. As for the ease of transformation between Fighter and Diver mode, I agree, in theory the Alpha is one of the easiest to transform. Toynami's rendition though, somewhat complicates the matter. In particular, the weight of the die-cast feet is of concern; transforming in to the split-foot configuration for Diver places additional wear and tear on the joint and makes it more likely to sag in Fighter.

I'm not in CONUS. No way it's going to be +$10 shipped...

No kidding. The ability to VTOL on demand and land/ takeoff where you want while keeping a low profile is one big useful thing. The Gerwalk/ Diver mode looks like a bird looking for worms, but it's a darn useful mode. $40 is decent for the Alpha, IMO. Personally, I think it should be a bit cheaper than that, but we sort of have to pay for the box (ok, that was a cheap shot.. but the sentiment's there). I am heavily comtemplating the Shadow Alpha, but at the current eBay price of $60+ and up, it's hard to commit knowing that most of the teething problems -- except the hands -- are going to be present.

Depends on product. I'm using a NetGear router now, and it tends to fail mysteriously. It'd drop the ADSL modem, or hang and reboot itself.. annoyance really. The talk on the net seems to indicate it's heat related, but that's really hard to say in my climate. When it worked it worked well, but mean time between failure is a carp shoot. OTOH, my older router, which is also Netgear, was pretty sweet until eventual obsoletence caught up with it.

Where did they get the bodies from? Just curious really, 'cos I don't recall any Toynami Robotech product in 1/6...

Now that's a good idea.

Putting them at 1/6 won't be a good move, even though as consumers we might be happier. 1/6 scale would mean added cost which would be passed to the consumer, but more importantly, 1/6 scale would also invite comparison to other, more established products (such as Dragon, Takara etc.) that would inevitably go unfavourably for Toynami -- simply because Dragon/ Takara oozes experience with 1/6 dolls while Toynami doesn't. Sure, I suppose Toynami can work out a deal with existing doll makers and adopt their base bodies, but that's added cost and they still have to develop the Cyclone as well as the body armour. If Toynami is just developing accessories for 1/6 bodies, then yeah, it makes sense. But Toynami would want to sell entire products (mainly for appearance's sake IMO), so it doesn't make much sense to go with 1/6 scale for Toynami.

Hmm, been meaning to post some thoughts on the EMSiA and HCM-Pro Sazabi. Overall Appearance The Sazabi-Pro is a nice tidy package made of mostly styrene -- it has a plastic model feel to it, a solidly-built and detailed piece that looks great posed on a shelf. The colour is a deeper red than the Sazabi-E, which makes it look better. The Sazabi-E is built out of a more yielding, but equally tough plastic, and the detailing is quite good too. It's more aimed at the "play" group -- it doesn't look quite as good as the Sazabi-Pro, but handles and wears well. Like what Grumpy-G says, the paint application on the Sazabi-E was a bit off, but only in that I got a tiny green spot of paint (from the monoeye) on the edge of the head. It's not a big spot, but on that colour scheme, stands out like a sore thumb. Gimmicks and Stuff The Sazabi-Pro comes with a head that opens up somewhat. It's fairly secured when close and does need a bit of effort to open (which is good, no flopping head just because you shook the body), and it does look good.. but also somewhat gimmicky. I like it, but it's not a big deal. The Sazabi-E doesn't -- it comes with a spare head for that. What I dislike about the Sazabi-E's head is that it has cables running out underneath around the neck which is supposed to sit in the neck recess, but occassionally rides above the recess, making it look a bit ugly. The funnel holders are nice on the Sazabi-Pro but the opening covers were a bit blocked by the main thruster unit -- nothing major. The funnel holders handles better on the Sazabi-E simply because of size, but the Pro version feels better constructed; I feel awkward handling the Sazabi-E's backpack, perhaps it's just a bit too big. The shield on the Sazabi-Pro is attached via a connector piece, which is nice and long -- the big and long shield is adequately supported, which allows the shield to be posed well. The shield on the Sazabi-E, however, is a major weak point. It connects directly to the forearm via a small tab, and the tab isn't quite long enough to support the whole weight of the shield. That the forearm is a curved surface just makes it easier for the tab to be worked out as the shield is manipulated, means that the shield often dropped out from the hole. One big major minus point. However, the good news is that the tab is in turn mounted on a movable joint, which allows the height the shield is held to be adjusted, which makes it quite posable. The Sazabi-Pro's gun is well proportioned and easy to pose with, but the wrist on the Sazabi-Pro is a bit weak and would need to be looked out for. The gun on the Sazabi-E is beefier but looks off, but the wrist is good and sturdy, though the forearm design makes it difficult to pose in certain positions, and the thrusting chest area of the Sazabi-E get into the way when you are posing a cross-body shot, more so than the Sazabi-Pro. The leg armour on the Sazabi-Pro is a bit cute, as the front armour can actually be lifted up revealing all the technical grubbins underneath. This is significantly different from the Sazabi-E, which don't have this. The foot unit is also substantially different; the Sazabi-Pro had a split foot (toe-and-heel) which gives it better stability, whereas the Sazabi-E has a single foot unit with pivoting toe and heel (you can say it's a three-part foot) that allows it to grip odd surfaces but in normal circumstances doesn't quite give it the stability of the Sazabi-Pro. Also, a bit of strangeness. My Sazabi-E's left hip armour cannot seat properly because the left hip unit is blocking it (the right hip doesn't though). Anyone experiencing this? Articulation Articulation overall for the Sazabi-Pro is a bit impressive but a weak point is the upper-arm joints -- this joint is just a tad short and would fall off under repeated twisting. Nothing too bad, it's just annoying. The shoulder pads are also the prone to coming off, but since it's relatively rare for the entire shoulder structure to be upside down, the pads don't come off so quickly. The Sazabi-E just beats the pants off the Sazabi-Pro in this area. The EMSiA frame system is very well worked out and the Sazabi is very posable. Added the fact that the Sazabi-E is build for play makes it hold up very well. The Sazabi-Pro isn't that far behind in terms of posability, but its styrene construction meant joints would be loose eventually, and the loose wrist and disconnecting upper-arm that came out-of-box really hurt it in this area. Solid points to the Sazabi-E on this area. Summary Overall, the Sazabi-Pro is an excellent display piece and I heartily recommend it for people who like a good looking piece that they occassionally repose. Just don't play too much with it -- one, the styrene construction makes it feel that it can shatter if very badly mishandled; it's well-constructed but it's a base material issue. Two, the joints wear easily on styrene-on-styrene joints and it can become a floppy mess. The Sazabi-E doesn't look as good on display (mostly because it's a matt, somewhat brighter red), but for those of you who like to play with the toys (like I do), this is an excellent piece. It may suffer somewhat from looks, but the sheer size makes a difference (it is imposing in its own way, for a 1/144 toy!), but the playability and posability, as well as the longevity of the build, makes it a favourite with me. EDIT: I'll see if I can get pics. It's the CNY period so I'm kinda busy, but on the plus side, the camera's already out....

For crying out loud. Why is there even a question of "Interest"? Fans of Mospeda/ Robotech NG have a high probability of wanting a Beta. Alphas and Cyclones are still somewhat available on the third-party markets, but a Beta is impossible to find. It's a silly question, the interest is there to be tapped. The real question that should be asked is how cheaply Toynami can make it while sustaining value for money. $150 USD is a lot to ask for, even factoring in for the size, so the functionalities/ features of the Beta had to be fairly complete and accurate. If Toynami is not capable of doing it -- and by no means am I saying they can't at the moment, I hope they can -- then they really have to think seriously about their marketing strategy. Frankly speaking, I wish Toynami would just stop the "high end toy selling for $$$" approach. I would even settle for a cheaper, less accurate Alpha/ Beta somewhat along the line of Banpresto stuff. This is even more so when we are talking about the enemies, especially the "hive/ horde" mentality that Inbits and say, Zentradi had. Speaking of which, just when is anyone ever going to give the Inbits some love? We got good human stuff, but they still need something to fight. I'd love to see a properly scaled Gurab to pose with the Alpha..

Been some time since I last touched them, but I'm fairly sure they are -- I do note these things and I sort of make it a habit to tap those regularly. Hmm, inspection tour tonight.

Speaking of which, I find that nowadays, everything is so streamlined and budgy and bumpy here and there, there's really no "sexy" planes anymore. Nothing like the simple brutality of the F4U Corsair, or the ride-the-rocket of the F4 Phantom II, or the rarin'-to-go of the F-14 Tomcat, or even the big-badness of the Flankers. Just sleek lines and bumps and budges nowadays.

Because you added a smiley at the back, I shall answer the question... I've got 3 Yammie 1/60s. I don't have a single actual problem with them aside from chipping paint -- I handle them about equally initially, nowadays they are just displayed in Battroid (because I got no room to display them in Fighter). I got one Alpha. I don't have any actual problems with it either. I handled it about the same way I handle my Yammies. It's also displayed now in Battroid. I don't have problems out of box for either companies. I don't go out of my way to twist it or turn it in a way that stresses the product. I handle my toys reasonably (IMO, of course). In terms of out-of-box-ness, both products from both companies basically are similar in quality. The difference is this: I pick up my Yammies, and I play with them. The only concerns I have is whether I'll chip more paint off, or to watch out for the lasers (which every VF-1 toy have to be careful with). It's a bit annoying to do leg swaps, but I can transform them without fear. Sure, some quirks exist, but it's not too bad. I pick up my Alpha, and I worry about it. I worry about whether the upper arm would break when I extend it. I worry about whether the fist would crack when I wrap the gunpod in it. I worry if the telescoping torso would jam when I transform it into Fighter -- it did previously, and I had to apply oil to get it loose. In short, I have to be quite careful when I play with the Alpha. To the extent where I didn't get a Shadow Alpha (which I was considering) because I didn't want to deal with the hassle. FWIW, I didn't get the Masterpiece VFs because I already had the 1/60s at the time they were produced. I didn't like the look of pics posted so I didn't pick any up, and I certainly don't need another additional line of VF clogging up my shelfspace. I got the Alpha because it's the only game in town. I don't think I got a lemon, because it's actually ok... now. But the one sample I got is so worrisome that I rather not continue with the series, barring an actual Red Beta release.

Err, I don't know man. The Alphas are cool crap. The Alpha isn't really that bad in terms of design.. you do need to know how to maximize its transformation (to get a decent fighter mode), but overall it was ok. Some parts of the sculpt are not good (the 6J head, for example) but overall it's ok. It sort of helps/ makes things moot that they are the only company that is producing this line. But the material chosen, man it just feels so fragile... Since this is a mechanical toy, material and design must go hand in hand. Overall, it felt like the Alpha was designed for a significantly better plastic (like POM or simply a better grade of plastic), but was given lesser material to work with. Smacks of cost-cutting, but that's paranoia.. And like others said, improvements don't seem to be a major priority for Toynami, they don't seem to want to hear what fans and customers are saying. On semantics, as an end consumer, I don't really care for what kinds of quality controls Toynami might or might not have. I do care about the overall quality of the toy itself, and in the case of the Alpha, it came down over more on DND's "crap" side of the equation. Like I said, it's cool crap, but still a bit crappy. On a more personal note, I really dislike seeing Toynami and Yamato compared side by side. I'm not that much of a Yamato fanatic, but you got to admit, Yamato does do toys better than Toynami -- better design, engineering, material usage, and openess to feedback. They do have their issues -- QC being one of them -- but IMO, they do deliver more perceived quality for money than Toynami. Yes, I do realise this could be the fanboy talking, but really, Toynami and Yamato has dramatically different attitudes towards quality of product.

Heh, be nice. The enemy was aiming. It's also a bit weird in that most of the bullet strikes are 90 degrees to the plate. Strikes me that in a bullet-flying-everywhere situation, most rounds would be striking the armour at an angle, which would leave a different mark than a full-on impact.

Graham, why should it be surprising? Toynami had a reputation more for packaging then for quality -- both MPC VF and MPC Alpha -- and they had promised more than they delivered previously; such track records are not good things. The 1/100 line is more an exception than a rule, really. It's really a case of "Fool me once".. I'm more than willing to sit and wait, but I'm not going to react to this the way I might to a Yamato product.

Whaaat? I don't recall the Beta being this squared off.. a little less right angles, a little more curved around the corners please? Seriously, I'm having second thoughts on the Beta. Thankfully I've only gotten a Red Alpha..

Ah, that's why you've been missing from the boards. Where's the GU-11? Congrats!

Meh, I don't know. I got an red Alpha because I like the 6J's head, but Toynami's sculpt wasn't to my liking.. tempted to do one myself. The engineering's quite scary, it works but it feels like it would rattle apart if I try too hard, and the diecast is in all the weird places.. I won't mind having an all plastic Alpha, really. In other words, yes, I have an Alpha, but it's an Alpha I don't really want to play or touch for fear it would disintegrate. With that track record in mind, and given that the Cyclone is actually much more challenging as a transforming item, I'm not too sure whether I want to put down money for it. Particularly at the prices they tend to charge.

Err, it's certainly a lot of work, but IMO requires quite a bit of suspension of disbelief.

No arguments there, they are a bit backwards. But really, what's the issue? A copied aircraft is still a flying aircraft; without having the original and the copy compete with each other, you can't really tell which is the better aircraft. Could be the copy might have improvements that makes things better, etc. I think the important thing here is to recognize that the needs are different; PRC military doesn't really rely the cutting edge aircraft, not when they can put up lots of aircraft based off ground bases, so not being SOTA isn't a big issue (I think.. might be wrong there). The US military however, tends to rely on the quality and technological edge, and that made it critical for US aircraft to be innovative. And while reverse-engineering, they are slowly oh so slowly gaining the experience necessary to build their own. It's odd to say this, but it's really the Chinese way; take apart somebody else's work, understand the concepts, then start building and improving on the original design. It ain't sexy, I admit, but it gets the job done. It's true that the PRC aeronautical industry had stagnated over the years, but now it seems that they are keen to get it going again. Who knows, maybe another 2 decades we would see original PRC aircrafts...

That's my point really. It's just progress, You copy things back and forth until you are confident enough to build your own designs. Sure, it's underperforming, but it's slowly gaining the experience needed to do things -- recall that both the US and Soviets had very good motivations to bring things up, both a shooting war and the growing Cold War. The PRC doesn't really have that impetus. Iran is quite innovative in this area, but also recall that they had a shooting war with Iraq "recently", and their always strained relationship with the Western World -- even Russia -- give them good motivations to be innovative. PRC's a bit backwards perhaps because the rest of the world has always been a bit wary about confronting them, Nonetheless, they are still one of a handful of nations/ coalition that are actually capable of creating their own aircrafts. No matter how much we might scoff at imitations, the capability isn't something to sneeze at.

Uhm, really, what's the issue with the Chinese copying a design? The greater concern (IMO) is that their industries are now capable of creating aircraft from scratch (even if it's a copy). That's a certain meaningful threshold in capabilities. Looking back, both the US and Russia really got their starts in the Jet Age with the Sabre and the MiG 15 -- which were copies/ extensions of technologies off German prototypes, if memory serves.

Dude, that's a comment that's already 6 months gone and that had been other replies that are more relevant to the current situation. Just let it lie. EDIT: Realised it wasn't so buried..

While what you say is true, it's also true that they didn't and PRC did. That, along with the on-off love-hate relationship the world generally have with the PRC, makes PRC a potential threat. And what you said is also true -- it'll be interesting. True, didn't quite see them until after my post.. my bad.