I would say that argument is very strong! PNSO has quality, detail, paintjob... seems like they are going to be a very hard competitor for other mass produced figures like Safari and CollectA. I hope that Safari and CollectA don't fall by the wayside, as I have a real fondness for these two companies!
@@thedapperdibble3622 Safari is really good and the quality of their sculpting is beyond contestation. Sadly however, their paintwork has left much to be desired. Out of their 2021 offerings, the only one I feel compelled to get is Daspletosaurus.
@@DinosDragons Honestly, I love Safari's 2021 lineup. I was skeptical on the spinosaurus at first cause the gold looked weird on the promo images, but it looks far better in some in hand images I've seen.
Another great review! A much nicer piece than I’d expected. I think the scalation is PNSO’s best yet-especially on the ventral side. I’d love to see a Triceratops.
Actually, I just heard about the latest paper where Rubeosaurus is not a separate genus, but part of the frill variability of Styracosaurus ( along with some others that I don't remember just now ). Acording to this paper, Styracosaurus frills were very variable and there were hardly any that looked the same.
Yes indeed! Perhaps you might be thinking of the Holmes 2020 paper? "Morphological variation and asymmetrical development in the skull of Styracosaurus albertensis" 🙂
Thank you! I am glad you like the informational aspect in addition to the purely show-and-tell side! 😁 I try to be accurate as I can though apologies if I do slip up occasionally!
@@DinosDragons haha! Yeah, lighter wallet and less space in the house. As for how to decide, for me it often has to do with scientific accuracy and uniqueness of the species.
Great review of a lovely figure. This will be my first PNSO model. I'll be ordering it together with the Miragaia, I just wish the colouring on the bodies wasn't so similar.
Congratulations! Just be prepared that once you start with PNSO, there's no looking back! I'm not a completist, buying only what look the best and most scientifically accurate, but this recent run from PNSO I have gotten everything, which is a first for me!
@@DinosDragons Thanks! I ended up going with the Miragaia and Lambeosaurus (also watched your review!) as I wanted two figures with different colouring, and because I don't have any hadrosaurs yet. I might get this one later.
I left a review of the CollectA Mercuriceratops on their Facebook page and left the same opinions regarding the artistic interpretation due to lack of any physical evidence. But, like you I purchased the figure only because I realized it will no doubt require an updated sculpt once more fossils are uncovered. CollectA is to be lauded for producing new and obscure species however, in their haste to be first they should exercise patience, because releasing figures that are scientifically accurate since that is part of their mission statement. I find it disappointing that Mercuriceratops gets a figure based on so scant material yet, Centrosaurus apertus has yet to have a figure released despite the abundance of fossils and having been named over one hundred years ago.
With Centrosaurus maybe they didn't think one nasal horn exciting, regardless of how much it might mean to many serious dino fans. With Mecuriceratops I guess they wanted to quickly capitalize on that unusual frill, and perhaps with two main competing companies each wants to be first. But it's really quite a puzzle as to how some dinosaurs get a figure while others just begging for it don't seem to get any love. For example as far as I know, not a single Zuul has ever been produced!
Nice thing you always estimate the scale of the figures. Would prefer something closer to 1/35, but even 1/40 is good enough, specially if it matches the pachy. Hope the sinoceratops scales well with both.
I try to include in a review what I would want to hear as well, and scale is definitely one of them! Still, I can't swear I'm 100% accurate, as measuring with string is always tricky especially without another pair of hands! I too prefer 1:40 and 1:35, but PNSOs are so good I find it convenient to not be too fussy! I think more models are gravitating towards your preferred 1:35 though, especially EoFauna and Rebor. PNSO larger models tend to be 1:35 too.
@@DinosDragons Yes, in invicta times it was 1/45, then it changed to 1/40 and, some years ago, the trend changed again to 1/35. I would prefer the 1/40th scale, it would save a lot of space. I've even nagged Eofauna a lot when they changed from 1/40 to 1/35 and they were polite enough to try to explain (in fact, due to requests from the collectors community... damned collectors!), but ultimately i would take any scale, if only it was one and one alone. Scale is also a matter of scientific accuracy. But between /35 and /40 is ok, we must expect variations in sizes, it's only right. Sadly enough, some pnso's are simply out, like the new Miragaia seems to be, and it's even worse since i'm Portuguese and all...
I look at this species, and I can’t help but think that it’s either probably just another unique individual Diabloceratops or maybe Diabloceratops is an individual of this (basically both are the same I think)... why? Not only are both their horn ornamentations almost completely identical, maybe this one just grew with a bend in it or something else made it that way, but both species were also discovered in the exact same fossil formation. I just can’t help but question that...
Good thinknig! I actually talked a bit about this but I thought it made the video too long so I took it out. Your comment makes me wish I hadn't taken it out! There are a few autapomorphies that differentiated Machairoceratops from Diabloceratops: 1. In Machairoceratops there’s a posteromedial sulcus (i.e. a groove in the back and towards the midline) which results in a comma shaped cross-section. 2. The terminal apices on Diabloceratops come to a point, but in Machairoceratops it’s a flattened tongue-shaped end. 3. The squamosal in Machairoceratops is more fan-shaped, while that of Diabloceratops is more rectangular. Of course if we had more skulls it would be better confirmation, but there are a couple of ceratopsians with a similar horns, for example Spinops.
Love this figure, PNSO is probably the best manufacturer of this year.
I would say that argument is very strong! PNSO has quality, detail, paintjob... seems like they are going to be a very hard competitor for other mass produced figures like Safari and CollectA. I hope that Safari and CollectA don't fall by the wayside, as I have a real fondness for these two companies!
@@DinosDragons Indeed! Though Safari will be hard to beat, considering how good their 2021 lineup is.
@@thedapperdibble3622 Safari is really good and the quality of their sculpting is beyond contestation. Sadly however, their paintwork has left much to be desired. Out of their 2021 offerings, the only one I feel compelled to get is Daspletosaurus.
@@DinosDragons Honestly, I love Safari's 2021 lineup. I was skeptical on the spinosaurus at first cause the gold looked weird on the promo images, but it looks far better in some in hand images I've seen.
Another great review! A much nicer piece than I’d expected. I think the scalation is PNSO’s best yet-especially on the ventral side. I’d love to see a Triceratops.
You said it! I only hope that the more PNSO produces models of this sterling quality, we won't start to become jaded thinking this is the norm!
Actually, I just heard about the latest paper where Rubeosaurus is not a separate genus, but part of the frill variability of Styracosaurus ( along with some others that I don't remember just now ). Acording to this paper, Styracosaurus frills were very variable and there were hardly any that looked the same.
Yes indeed! Perhaps you might be thinking of the Holmes 2020 paper? "Morphological variation and asymmetrical development in the skull of Styracosaurus albertensis" 🙂
Love your channel! Keep it up. Very informative review
Thank you! I am glad you like the informational aspect in addition to the purely show-and-tell side! 😁 I try to be accurate as I can though apologies if I do slip up occasionally!
Thanks! I actually had no intention of buying this one until your review.
Glad my review helped you lighten your wallet! 😁
What makes you decide to get a figure or not?
@@DinosDragons haha! Yeah, lighter wallet and less space in the house. As for how to decide, for me it often has to do with scientific accuracy and uniqueness of the species.
What an amazing end of the year from pnso
PNSO seems to be intent on not just making up for lost time from the pandemic delays, but also emptying us of our wallets before Christmas! 😂
Great review of a lovely figure. This will be my first PNSO model. I'll be ordering it together with the Miragaia, I just wish the colouring on the bodies wasn't so similar.
Congratulations! Just be prepared that once you start with PNSO, there's no looking back! I'm not a completist, buying only what look the best and most scientifically accurate, but this recent run from PNSO I have gotten everything, which is a first for me!
@@DinosDragons Thanks! I ended up going with the Miragaia and Lambeosaurus (also watched your review!) as I wanted two figures with different colouring, and because I don't have any hadrosaurs yet. I might get this one later.
Sergio Perez won the previous f1 gp and I guess this dinosaur is named after him. Cute
Thanks for that! I have no idea about F1 so it would have been cool to have known this before I did the review!
I left a review of the CollectA Mercuriceratops on their Facebook page and left the same opinions regarding the artistic interpretation due to lack of any physical evidence. But, like you I purchased the figure only because I realized it will no doubt require an updated sculpt once more fossils are uncovered. CollectA is to be lauded for producing new and obscure species however, in their haste to be first they should exercise patience, because releasing figures that are scientifically accurate since that is part of their mission statement. I find it disappointing that Mercuriceratops gets a figure based on so scant material yet, Centrosaurus apertus has yet to have a figure released despite the abundance of fossils and having been named over one hundred years ago.
With Centrosaurus maybe they didn't think one nasal horn exciting, regardless of how much it might mean to many serious dino fans.
With Mecuriceratops I guess they wanted to quickly capitalize on that unusual frill, and perhaps with two main competing companies each wants to be first. But it's really quite a puzzle as to how some dinosaurs get a figure while others just begging for it don't seem to get any love. For example as far as I know, not a single Zuul has ever been produced!
Great channel!
Thank you Rik!
Nice thing you always estimate the scale of the figures. Would prefer something closer to 1/35, but even 1/40 is good enough, specially if it matches the pachy. Hope the sinoceratops scales well with both.
I try to include in a review what I would want to hear as well, and scale is definitely one of them! Still, I can't swear I'm 100% accurate, as measuring with string is always tricky especially without another pair of hands! I too prefer 1:40 and 1:35, but PNSOs are so good I find it convenient to not be too fussy! I think more models are gravitating towards your preferred 1:35 though, especially EoFauna and Rebor. PNSO larger models tend to be 1:35 too.
@@DinosDragons Yes, in invicta times it was 1/45, then it changed to 1/40 and, some years ago, the trend changed again to 1/35. I would prefer the 1/40th scale, it would save a lot of space. I've even nagged Eofauna a lot when they changed from 1/40 to 1/35 and they were polite enough to try to explain (in fact, due to requests from the collectors community... damned collectors!), but ultimately i would take any scale, if only it was one and one alone. Scale is also a matter of scientific accuracy. But between /35 and /40 is ok, we must expect variations in sizes, it's only right. Sadly enough, some pnso's are simply out, like the new Miragaia seems to be, and it's even worse since i'm Portuguese and all...
I look at this species, and I can’t help but think that it’s either probably just another unique individual Diabloceratops or maybe Diabloceratops is an individual of this (basically both are the same I think)... why? Not only are both their horn ornamentations almost completely identical, maybe this one just grew with a bend in it or something else made it that way, but both species were also discovered in the exact same fossil formation.
I just can’t help but question that...
Good thinknig! I actually talked a bit about this but I thought it made the video too long so I took it out. Your comment makes me wish I hadn't taken it out! There are a few autapomorphies that differentiated Machairoceratops from Diabloceratops:
1. In Machairoceratops there’s a posteromedial sulcus (i.e. a groove in the back and towards the midline) which results in a comma shaped cross-section.
2. The terminal apices on Diabloceratops come to a point, but in Machairoceratops it’s a flattened tongue-shaped end.
3. The squamosal in Machairoceratops is more fan-shaped, while that of Diabloceratops is more rectangular.
Of course if we had more skulls it would be better confirmation, but there are a couple of ceratopsians with a similar horns, for example Spinops.
@@DinosDragons well at least you gave an elaborate explanation, thanks. :) But yeah I’m gonna hope we find more fossil material soon
This is so cool
It is an amazing dinosaur and I'm glad one company finally decided to do it and do it so well!