Hey hd, would you be able to add a poll to this thread? :)
Printable View
Hey hd, would you be able to add a poll to this thread? :)
I am not saying that they are bad by any means. I am satisfied enough with the Encore seekers for example. What I am saying is that there is a noticeable quality decrease from the previous reissues.Quote:
Originally Posted by 5FDP
The Seekers may have experienced mould degradation between TFC and Encore. Encore Bruticus would be the worst case of a mould degraded reissue IMO (they really should have reissued that toy back in 2000 - but I guess reissues had just started then and maybe Takara weren't too sure if there would be sufficient demand for Bruticus at the time?). But while the Devastator mould may not have been over-used (well, it hasn't been used since 1993), could the mould have deteriorated through the passage of time?
I'm pretty happy with Encore - the only set I was really disappointed with was Bruticus (but not surprising given the history of that mould). If I want to see/handle Devastator in his original colours and plastic quality, I'll handle my original G1. But to me, the reissues will be my "play set." :D Getting a MISB reissue to play with would be cheaper and easier than getting an original 1985 G1 MISB Devastator gift set... I imagine that the latter would be so expensive than even if I did buy it, I probably wouldn't want to play around with it. So for me, getting the reissue suits me fine. :)
Sure. What would you like?Quote:
Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime
Did TFC have seekers other than Starscream?Quote:
Originally Posted by kup
Or were you referring to the eHobby reissue seekers during that era?
I just received mine in the mail today and am very happy with him. I have no QC issues at all and even don't mind the colour. Maybe when he is standing next to the original you notice the colour more but i don't have an original so i don't really care. Overall, he is solid, well made, doesn't feel like a KO or even looks like a KO.
My only gripes are that i think he may be a little more expensive than he should have been and while, as stated, i don't mind the colour, i do have an issue with the difference in the shade of green used with some of the parts. Eg Scavengers shovel/arm and hooks extender arm which the hook is attached to.
They are a different shade of green...WHY????
Did the originals come like this??
Would anyone be able to post side-by-side comparison pics between the original G1s and Encore? (please :))
Referring to starscream and hasbro's. Despite the giant missiles, the hasbro reissue Thundercracker to me feels more sturdy than encore. I believe that putting the child safety modifications aside and chrome, hasbro's reissues had the same more solid build as the TFC book reissues which to me are better than Encore in that regard.Quote:
Originally Posted by heroic_decepticon
Yeah but the Commemorative reissues came well before Encore, thus less mould degradation.
In the past decade I can think of the following uses of the 1984 Seeker mould:
+ 2001: Reissue Starscream
+ 2001: black Starscream
+ 2001: ghost Starscream
+ 2001: Collectors Edition Skywarp
+ 2001: Collectors Edition Thundercracker
+ 2003: TFC Starscream
+ 2003: Commemorative Series Starscream
+ 2003: Sunstorm
+ 2007: Encore Starscream
+ 2008: Encore Skywarp
+ 2008: Encore Thundercracker
+ 2009: reissue Sunstorm
So that's at least 12 different uses of the 1984 Seeker mould that I can think of. And if Takara used the same "core body" mould for the CE Dirge, CE Ramjet, CE Thrust and CS Dirge, that'd bring the mould count up to 16. So that's 8 uses before Encore Starscream and 9-10 uses before Encore Skywarp & Thundercracker.
With that many possible reuses of the Seeker mould, it's not surprising that there would be some level of mould degradation - and obviously the more recent reissues of that mould would be more degraded -- as you pointed out, Hasbro's CS Starscream & Takara's TFC Starscreams seem to be of better quality than the later reissued Encore Starscream.
Remember that Encore Devastator is at least the fourth main reuse of that mould. Previously we had:
1. 1985: Original G1 Constructicons
2. 1992: "New" G1 Constructicons
3. 1993: G2 Constructicons
And it's been 18 years since G2 Devastator. So it's not entirely surprising that there may be mould degradation issues. Should TakaraTOMY have done something to restore the mould degradation? Sure. I feel that this is something that pre-TOMY Takara would have done (we know that Takara did extensively repair/restore the 1993 G2 Optimus Prime mould when they first reissued Convoy in 2000); I just get the feeling that pre-TOMY Takara would have done something to address the mould issues with Bruticus and so on... and it would have been rather surprising in the old Takara days if something like missing Mixmaster heads or incorrect guns frequently got passed Takara's QC checks. But unfortunately TOMY doesn't seem to apply the same level scrutiny as Takara used to. :(
I honestly dont think it's just mold degradation. To me it's the use of cheaper materials.
I think so too.Quote:
Originally Posted by kup
These industrial grade metal molds are made to cast thousands if not millions of pieces, not easy to degrade. It's the plastic that they inject into these molds that make a difference.
molds affects --> joints, how parts fit together, etc
materials --> colours, density, strength of plastic, etc.
That's my view anyhows