Evolution Toy - VF-2SS Valkyrie I 《MACROSS II ~LOVERS AGAIN~&#1

[jvmacross]

Looks great.....

In order of anticipation:

1) hi-metal r line

2) vf-2ss

3) Arcadia's next new mold announcement

[valhary]

the only detail that not like me is the nose cone but I suppose that not is a big deal in battroid mode that is most important to me

[Lonely Soldier Boy]

Unlike Ignacio, I'm a big fan of the VF-2ss and that's the problem: Had this be released in the late 90's, it would've been an instant buy for me. Now, I just can't get over all the liberties taken with the sculpt and crudeness of the design. Maybe if the toy happens to be rock solid and easy to transform a la Chunky Monkey, but even those had Fast Packs.

[lechuck]

For a prototype it looks fine to me. Maybe it is just the photo, but it looks way bigger than a VF-1.

And I don't really understand the standards we are applying on this toy?

There is no T-bar in a VF-1, but the Yamato toy uses this antiquated solution, which creates a gappy battroid and introduces the collar.

But it is considered the "perfect" toy by the majority?

[valhary]

that's right the most exact transformation on a macross toy vf 1 is the big head bandai model kit 1/72 perhaps it can be applied in a vf 1 v3

[Mechapilot77]

For a prototype it looks fine to me. Maybe it is just the photo, but it looks way bigger than a VF-1.

And I don't really understand the standards we are applying on this toy?

There is no T-bar in a VF-1, but the Yamato toy uses this antiquated solution, which creates a gappy battroid and introduces the collar.

But it is considered the "perfect" toy by the majority?

there is no better solution out there yet, and its visuually very minimal. i also don't understand "gappy battroid"....in comparison to what?

[no3Ljm]

Found a better image.

Thanks for sharing CF18. Not as much as I'm expecting but it looks sweet. Though it needs more panel-lines. Hope to see more photos soon after the Evolution Toy event.

[Bobby]

Still can't believe this is actually happening!

...

So unbelievably excited!

...

I photochopped out the masking tape, landing gear, added in some color, panel lines, etc. just so fans can get a quick glimpse of this valk's incarnate potential (at least to hold us over until the event)!

[jvmacross]

Still can't believe this is actually happening!

...

So unbelievably excited!

...

I photochopped out the masking tape, landing gear, added in some color, panel lines, etc. just so fans can get a quick glimpse of this valk's incarnate potential (at least to hold us over until the event)!

Great job! Bring on the pre-order!

You may as well indulge us and do the other variants!

Edited June 29, 2015 by jvmacross

[Scyla]

I have to ask. Do we have line-art for the VF-2SS landing gear?

[xrentonx]

Wonder if it's possible to make those hinges recessed into those intakes...anything to minimize them...

[505thAirborne]

I have to ask. Do we have line-art for the VF-2SS landing gear?

Couldn't find anything in my Mac II book or online, but I sure wish the landing gear looked like this!!

Edited June 29, 2015 by 505thAirborne

[zulu]

Wonder if it's possible to make those hinges recessed into those intakes...anything to minimize them...

I agree...the huge hinges look aweful imo.

[Reïvaj]

Wonder if it's possible to make those hinges recessed into those intakes...anything to minimize them...

It should be possible if they only had a look on the line art.

[mechaninac]

Comparing the line-art with the prototype, Evolution Toys placed the hinge too high; it's not that they're too big, it's the location that is wrong. The hinge's size/geometry is about right, and if it was placed in the correct location it would completely eliminate the obtrusive looking box-section arm.

This: _______

| |

| |

| |__

| |__|

| |

Not This: _______

| |__

| |__|

| |

| |

|___ _ _|

Edited June 29, 2015 by mechaninac

[dodiano]

Dude!! Amazing work!!! I still think is a cool toy!! It is not an easy desing... My brother and I had a project of making one... He is a Toy Designer and well I have all the machinery needed to build mould and the parts.... But it is a very difficult design... There is space for improvement but Phisically bring that line art is not easy...!!

[Goobermunch]

Comparing the line-art with the prototype, Evolution Toys placed the hinge too high; it's not that they're too big, it's the location that is wrong. The hinge's size/geometry is about right, and if it was placed in the correct location it would completely eliminate the obtrusive looking box-section arm.

This: _______

| |

| |

| |__

| |__|

| |

Not This: _______

| |__

| |__|

| |

| |

|___ _ _|

That simple change would address one of my biggest concerns.

[xrentonx]

The other thing I don't like is how it's just a big clunky right angle connecting from right below/behind the LERX/chestplate to the main intakes. I can live with most everything else besides this and those hinges.

Edit: Maybe also the way the arms look in B mode.

Edited June 30, 2015 by xrentonx

[aceoftherebellion]

The problem with the hinges is the actual lineart breaks physics and the transformation as indicated by the lineart simply does not work without severely deforming the engines. I've tried (albeit crudely compared to some of the masters around here) solving how the transformation would work in a 3D rendering program before and it's just not possible without severe clipping, the engines would have to be able to go through the fuselage with the hinges as they're placed in the lineart. Putting them up higher is a convenient workaround, even if it's not really true to the lineart itself. I'm not sure what the solution would have been, maybe a slide-joint? But there already has to be a slide joint in the other direction, and I think having some sort of rotation or swing arm would be even more glaring and obvious, so IDK. Simple solution works for me.

Frankly, again, I'm desperate. I love the VF-2SS, and very few other people seem to agree with that, and I had all but given up on one ever being made. I'd gladly take one at 1/55 chunky monkey quality if it just meant having one in my collection. Hell, I'd take one at Toynami quality if it was the only choice. I'm pretty optimistic about this one. It looks resoundingly 'good enough' to me. At least on par with Yamato's middle offerings (YF-19, VF-0, etc), and that's all I'm asking for.

[Graham]

Same here.

Exact hinge placement be damned, it looks good enough for me.

But seriously, that photoshopped, colorized pic looks "shut up and take my money" awesome.

Graham

[Hazuki]

on the balance, this appears a reasonable realization of a seemingly Anime-Magic ridden design. MACROSS II was one of my first Anime back in the mid-1990's,

and, while i happen to personally prefer the VF-2JA "ICARUS" i have always had a soft spot for the -2SS, and had always wanted the old BANDAI 1/00 parts forming kit.

as such, i expect this new effort to leave the old model kit in the dust, and look forward indeed to how this promising design fleshes out.

hopeully this prottype is merely but an early build, and this design sees refinement before final pre-production samples show up...

[no3Ljm]

Still wish with the price range they were going, a little bit of 'Arcadia/Yamato' quality feel than Bandai's would be nice. Like it's more of a collectible than playable.

By the way, Bobby, that's a good photoshopped VF-2SS.

[IIymij]

I believe the hinge has to be that high in order to flip all the way around to transform into gerwalk/batroid mode? I think someone did a kit bash of the old bandai one and it was the same thing. I think the very first pick has an illustration of this.

Still think it could be a tad lower though, maybe mid point.

Edited June 30, 2015 by IIymij

[mechaninac]

^ A telescoping pylon, made of POM and/or metal, would get around any reach or pivot range limitations, and solve the visual issue of the exposed arm. Durability should not present any problems either as the pylon is not supporting a heavy or structural part... just the scram-jet pod. I'm just not sure how feasible, from a manufacturing/assembly line point of view, such a solution would be in 1/60-ish scale.

[Tochiro]

There seems to be yellow tape holding the thing together. :S

Exactly as Save pointed out during our podcast about it a month ago.

But apparently no one listens. (p_-)

I have to ask. Do we have line-art for the VF-2SS landing gear?

Try the last episode of SpeakerPODcast. We discuss landing gear and lineart for at least 20mins. f^_^

[Graham]

Tape holding parts together is pretty common on resin toy sculpts.

[aceoftherebellion]

I wouldn't fret too much over the tape. All we've seen is a resin prototype, which in all likelyhood just doesn't have the tolerances or durability to hold itself together without some help. That's common on most prototypes in this phase and shouldn't be seen as an indicator of anything quality-wise for the final toy. All it means is that we're seeing a very early prototype. It also means that virtually everything about it is still subject to change, although it's release date makes me wonder how much if anything will be changed.

[no3Ljm]

Exactly as Save pointed out during our podcast about it a month ago.

But apparently no one listens. (p_-)

Try the last episode of SpeakerPODcast. We discuss landing gear and lineart for at least 20mins. f^_^

I, for one, did listen to it which I already mentioned it before. And I'm still going to get it. Yeah.

[Bobby]

Great job! Bring on the pre-order!

You may as well indulge us and do the other variants!

...

I believe the hinge has to be that high in order to flip all the way around to transform into gerwalk/batroid mode? I think someone did a kit bash of the old bandai one and it was the same thing. I think the very first pick has an illustration of this.

Still think it could be a tad lower though, maybe mid point.

That is correct. After the scram-jet pods flip over 180 degrees, if the hinge was lower, then they would not sit flush on the battroids back. Instead they will be protruding outwards at a slight angle (ref A).

^ A telescoping pylon, made of POM and/or metal, would get around any reach or pivot range limitations, and solve the visual issue of the exposed arm. Durability should not present any problems either as the pylon is not supporting a heavy or structural part... just the scram-jet pod. I'm just not sure how feasible, from a manufacturing/assembly line point of view, such a solution would be in 1/60-ish scale.

^ This would solve this issue. The hinge could then be placed just like the line art (much lower) since the arm could now telescope up and away (ref B) to allow full 180 degree rotation of the scram-jet pods.

Something that would be great to implement would be being able to slide the pods hinge arms forwards/backwards (ref C) which would eliminate the opening on the rear slit of the pod. The pods overall final position in battroid mode after it's flipped would still result in matching the line art and being visible from the front since it needs to be up high behind the battroid's head (ref D) .

Another thing would be telescoping wings (ref E). That would probably be the most significant improvement. The problem I noticed when building my custom years ago was that short wings look great in battroid mode but appear too short for the fighter. Now compare that to the custom Sera Hobby Labs did (see post #279) where he extended the overall wing length and in fighter mode it looks great but in battroid mode it looks like this valk is about to conduct Beethoven's Symphony No. 5. You could have the best of both worlds if the wings could be pushed in for battroid and slide out for fighter to complete the "anime magic".

[Jefuemon]

One nit-pick:

In Mac II they didn't use the "standard" US Spacy kite.

That's OK, though, since that's what I put on the kit that I built.

[mechaninac]

^ But that is the UN-SPACEY kite emblem. It's just that it is M2's version of it; as in, the emblem's design was changed over the intervening years between DYRL? and M2. It's certainly much less of a change than what we see in Frontier's change to NUNS and its complete drop of the kite in favor of that generic looking diamond.

Edited July 4, 2015 by mechaninac

[jvmacross]

...

Edited July 4, 2015 by jvmacross

[mechaninac]

Something that would be great to implement would be being able to slide the pods hinge arms forwards/backwards (ref C) which would eliminate the opening on the rear slit of the pod. The pods overall final position in battroid mode after it's flipped would still result in matching the line art and being visible from the front since it needs to be up high behind the battroid's head (ref D) .

It seems to me that Evolution did incorporate a sliding function on their hinge design. Note what looks like a track right behind the hinge on the inner side surface of the pod. That slit suggests a substantial amount of travel to have the pods sit higher up the back in battroid; incidentally, this detail would also visually benefit from being moved to the lower half of the scram-jet pod, along with the hinge assembly, as we've been discussing.

Great job with those Photoshops, BTW. It's amazing how much adding color to the prototype improves its looks so much, and ameliorates a lot of the less pleasing aspects of Evolution Toy's rendition of the Valkyrie II, even without any changes/corrections to the prototype.

[Bobby]

Great...glad everyone can (at least) enjoy the possibilities

One nit-pick:

In Mac II they didn't use the "standard" US Spacy kite.

That's OK, though, since that's what I put on the kit that I built.

Yes, thanks for pointing that out. There are indeed some nuances that Evolution will need to make a determination on...one being the UN Spacy emblem.

- The licensed Bandai kit that originally came out in the 90's and then re-released in '08 for the 25th anniversary celebration hit the shelves with the asymmetrical blue "kite" as you probably know. When the licensed Bandai 1/250 scale Macross Fighter Collection Set #1 was released shortly after in '09, however, it came already stamped with the traditional symmetrical red "kite". Somewhere in all of this it is my understanding that Macross II become (part of the) canon. Bandai's decision to opt for the red kite here on this release is a curious one. I wondered if it was to appease any reluctant parties of the MII canonization or just done out of sheer practical assembly-line convenience? I personally like the blue one, just on this valk w/all of its sui generis, but I went with the red one instead since that's what the powers-that-be had decided for this latest official release-to-date.

- The other nuance is landing gear (but it already looks like they decided on that one). This decision might have been relegated to the age old form vs. functionality debate. No line art exists with it (as mentioned in the podcast) so to stay true to "form" (aka the design) there shouldn't be any. But then plain ol' practicality kicks in and somebody thinks, "meh, might as well give it some 'three down and locked' so you can admire it on your desk!" and voila! there it is. Either that or a stand would need to be provided. Personally, I am indifferent on this one in comparison to the next decision.

- The third nuance is "to stripe, or not to stripe" specifically on the leg. The original "eye catch" sequence on the tail end of the shows opening does not have a colored stripe which was the first sight of the valk many fell in love with.

In "This is Animation Special - Macross II" none of the colored cels or renderings have a colored stripe and most of the time the SAP armor is in place covering it. Renderings over the decades have gone back and forth on this...e.g. the Sept '92 Hobby Japan opted to include the stripe in their customized version w/out SAP (both in blue and in red);

...the PSP release, Macross Ultimate Frontier, the VF-2SS w/out SAP has no colored stripe; Entertainment Bible #51 has colored stripes in red, blue, green, and yellow; B-Club #79 has some with stripes and some without; B-Club #73 has them all with colored stripes; the aforementioned 1/250 Bandai scale fighters have the red stripes for Gena and the blue stripes for Nexx; and perhaps the most relevant (and recent), "Macross Chronicle No.21" documents a red, blue, green and yellow striped VF-2ss with the blue "kite" emblem.

In the end, the design has surely had a chance to age and to be evaluated and be re-evaluated over time. My personal preference would be to include the corresponding color stripes as I think it really adds a unique beneficial character attribute that compliments the design overall.

I am torn on the emblem. The blue one is unique to this valk and also official...while the red one is the emblem that has a full blown Macross heritage immediately associated with it when you lay eyes on it and is representative of the whole Macross universe in some sense. What might be best is if they offered a sticker sheet of the symmetrical red "kite" and asymmetrical blue "kite" for us to choose from!

It seems to me that Evolution did incorporate a sliding function on their hinge design. Note what looks like a track right behind the hinge on the inner side surface of the pod. That slit suggests a substantial amount of travel to have the pods sit higher up the back in battroid; incidentally, this detail would also visually benefit from being moved to the lower half of the scram-jet pod, along with the hinge assembly, as we've been discussing.

Great job with those Photoshops, BTW. It's amazing how much adding color to the prototype improves its looks so much, and ameliorates a lot of the less pleasing aspects of Evolution Toy's rendition of the Valkyrie II, even without any changes/corrections to the prototype.

Yes, totally...and that is the existing slit I was trying to reference for providing an alternative for. What I was trying to get at was saying that if they instead had the hinge arm not only telescope up and down, but also slide back and forth, that that would have eliminated the rather unsightly slit behind the hinge...but perhaps it would also introduce a mega design transformation headache under the backplate to have this hinged arm move in all these different directions.

Edited July 5, 2015 by Bobby

[spanner]

Couldn't find anything in my Mac II book or online, but I sure wish the landing gear looked like this!!

This looks cool but that front landing gear angle just bugs the crap outta me! didn't bother correcting the reflection but you still get the idea!

At least you get to see the difference..