1/6 1/6 DIECAST Iron Man 2 WAR MACHINE

[rocbolt]

Agree 100% the detachable weapons were such a letdown and a step backwards for Mk III in terms of quality and engineering, especially since the Mk I (a previous incarnation) was able to incorporate the weapons into the actual suit.

I think it just boiled down to HT being lazy. I'm almost certain they went the detachable route because it's totally easier. Sad to see them take a shortcut.

In short, Mk I > Mk III

They had to completely change the Mk3 once the movie came out, none of those weapons were in the original proto (and presumably the concept art they were using), so yeah they had to find ways to add them to an otherwise already designed figure

 

[TimothyR]

They had to completely change the Mk3 once the movie came out, none of those weapons were in the original proto (and presumably the concept art they were using), so yeah they had to find ways to add them to an otherwise already designed figure

I actually prefer the extra parts. I rather have them since they'd probably wind up looking more accurate. I don't think it's a step back whatsoever. When they're able to integrate them, cool. But if they're not, it'd definitely not a drawback in my opinion.

Now that I've had both for a bit, I definitely prefer the 3 over the 1. The one is great, don't get me wrong, but I like the beefy but sleek look of the 3, and its weaponry.

I'm just excited to display the 1 and 6, 2 and 45, and the 3 and 46 together.

 

[C0L0SSUS]

Wait, so you sold one for $424 to a buyer in Australia?

Sorry, I meant to say I bought one for $424 shipped. I thought the cheapest out there would be over $500, so I was hoping to encourage others to keep an eye out for something better is all.

 

[bebe13junior]

I don't know that the fact the weapons are detached or intact really affects my opinion on the figures. I think you aren't going wrong with either. For me, if I had to chose just one, Mark 1 all the way. But they are both stunning 10/10, figure of the year, best diecast and IM figures for me.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gmoney5000]

I don't know that the fact the weapons are detached or intact really affects my opinion on the figures. I think you aren't going wrong with either. For me, if I had to chose just one, Mark 1 all the way. But they are both stunning 10/10, figure of the year, best diecast and IM figures for me.

The fact that they went from integrated weaponry to rudimentary attach/detach weaponry is, without a doubt, a step backwards. They absolutely could have engineered a way for those weapons to fit inside the actual figure like they did with Mk. I but they chose not to for whatever reason, whether it be time or money or sheer laziness.

All I'm saying is if you were able to incorporate a function in a prior item, but can't or won't for the subsequent item then that to me is a letdown. That doesn't take away from Mk. III being awesome, but it definitely does lose a few points from a quality/engineering standpoint.

That's my opinion at least.

 

[bebe13junior]

The fact that they went from integrated weaponry to rudimentary attach/detach weaponry is, without a doubt, a step backwards. They absolutely could have engineered a way for those weapons to fit inside the actual figure like they did with Mk. I but they chose not to for whatever reason, whether it be time or money or sheer laziness.

All I'm saying is if you were able to incorporate a function in a prior item, but can't or won't for the subsequent item then that to me is a letdown. That doesn't take away from Mk. III being awesome, but it definitely does lose a few points from a quality/engineering standpoint.

That's my opinion at least.

Maybe it was difficult to do who knows.
They are different armours. The effect is the same. You have weapons retracted or extended. I mean I prefer it to be all included and intact, the Mark 1's engineering is impeccable.

But maybe they had trouble with that design who knows. I mean they just made a suit with the mechanics to have it intact...maybe the MK3 and those particular weapons made it tricky.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gmoney5000]

Maybe it was difficult to do who knows.
They are different armours. The effect is the same. You have weapons retracted or extended. I mean I prefer it to be all included and intact, the Mark 1's engineering is impeccable.

But maybe they had trouble with that design who knows. I mean they just made a suit with the mechanics to have it intact...maybe the MK3 and those particular weapons made it tricky.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm sure it was probably a pain to design integrated weaponry with Mk. I, but they did it didn't they? If there's one thing I can't excuse it's regressing in design/quality in subsequent releases.

For instance the Iron Man Mk. 46 utilizes snap-on parts instead of magnets? Why?! You've had prior IM figures that utilized magnets for detachable parts, why then go back to snap-on parts? It's a step backwards!!!

We are paying top dollars for quality figures, so I don't think it's too much to ask for functionality that was already provided in the previous iteration. Don't tell me it was difficult and not possible cause based on past releases it clearly was possible!

 

[bebe13junior]

I'm sure it was probably a pain to design integrated weaponry with Mk. I, but they did it didn't they? If there's one thing I can't excuse it's regressing in design/quality in subsequent releases.

For instance the Iron Man Mk. 46 utilizes snap-on parts instead of magnets? Why?! You've had prior IM figures that utilized magnets for detachable parts, why then go back to snap-on parts? It's a step backwards!!!

We are paying top dollars for quality figures, so I don't think it's too much to ask for functionality that was already provided in the previous iteration. Don't tell me it was difficult and not possible cause based on past releases it clearly was possible!

No I'm pretty much in agreement with you. Just playing the other side. We obviously never knew every minute decision made in conceptualizing and bringing to reality these figures. But I totally agree that you'd think things wouldn't regress and yet prices still rise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gmoney5000]

No I'm pretty much in agreement with you. Just playing the other side. We obviously never knew every minute decision made in conceptualizing and bringing to reality these figures. But I totally agree that you'd think things wouldn't regress and yet prices still rise.

Well glad we're on the same page then!

 

[Brett Banner]

The whole detachable parts vs integrated parts thing is a complete non-issue. No one is not buying the Mk 3 because it doesn't have the retractable parts. Also, there's no way all the arm bits would fit inside the forearms anyway (HT doesn't do it on the regular Iron Man figures either) so you're left with 3 shoulder pieces that have to be swapped out instead of being hidden inside the armor. Pieces that were added well after they had the actual prototype figure designed.

Also, the right shoulder missile array piece on my Mk 1 is literally impossible to position without touching/scraping the helmet, no matter how far I move his head over to the other side, so personally I am quite glad for the change on the Mk 3. That is probably my one main complaint about my Mk 1.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Skillerwhale]

The whole detachable parts vs integrated parts thing is a complete non-issue. No one is not buying the Mk 3 because it doesn't have the retractable parts. Also, there's no way all the arm bits would fit inside the forearms anyway (HT doesn't do it on the regular Iron Man figures either) so you're left with 3 shoulder pieces that have to be swapped out instead of being hidden inside the armor. Pieces that were added well after they had the actual prototype figure designed.

Also, the right shoulder missile array piece on my Mk 1 is literally impossible to position without touching/scraping the helmet, no matter how far I move his head over to the other side, so personally I am quite glad for the change on the Mk 3. That is probably my one main complaint about my Mk 1.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Uh.... I didn't, for that reason.

 

[loki2371]

They did the same thing to the DC MK3. On the original BD MK3 the shoulder missiles pop in and out as does the hip flares, the forearm missiles are built in as well as the forearm shield. But on the redone DC MK3, it has magnetic swap out attachments. That was cheap engineering as well. Nothing new on this guy.

 

[gmoney5000]

The whole detachable parts vs integrated parts thing is a complete non-issue. No one is not buying the Mk 3 because it doesn't have the retractable parts. Also, there's no way all the arm bits would fit inside the forearms anyway (HT doesn't do it on the regular Iron Man figures either) so you're left with 3 shoulder pieces that have to be swapped out instead of being hidden inside the armor. Pieces that were added well after they had the actual prototype figure designed.

Also, the right shoulder missile array piece on my Mk 1 is literally impossible to position without touching/scraping the helmet, no matter how far I move his head over to the other side, so personally I am quite glad for the change on the Mk 3. That is probably my one main complaint about my Mk 1.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I wasn't referencing the forearm weaponry, just the attachable/detachable shoulder weapons. I also never said that people won't buy the Mk. III due to the shoulder components being a regression in terms of engineering design, more so just a step backwards.

I own both the Mk. I and III and think they are both amazing, but Mk I def takes the cake when it comes to being best WM.

Also the shoulder missile on the Mk I. is def avoidable when positioning the head. I am able to do it. It's very, very close, but it's not touching. Maybe you just need to finesse yours a bit more?

 

[TheBatman]

I also never said that people won't buy the Mk. III due to the shoulder components being a regression in terms of engineering design, more so just a step backwards.

Do you even know what regression means? Your usage in that statement says otherwise...

 

[blinguskahn]

They did the same thing to the DC MK3. On the original BD MK3 the shoulder missiles pop in and out as does the hip flares, the forearm missiles are built in as well as the forearm shield. But on the redone DC MK3, it has magnetic swap out attachments. That was cheap engineering as well. Nothing new on this guy.

OMG, please don't even mention that horrible release. That figure took so many steps backwards. To me, the fact that the feet didn't extend, which were being used since the Mk. VII, was a huge negative. Also, don't forget the nonexistent pull out shoulder barrels!

 

[gmoney5000]

Do you even know what regression means? Your usage in that statement says otherwise...

Sigh...syntax/grammar nerd alert.

 

[gmoney5000]

OMG, please don't even mention that horrible release. That figure took so many steps backwards. To me, the fact that the feet didn't extend, which were being used since the Mk. VII, was a huge negative. Also, don't forget the nonexistent pull out shoulder barrels!

WOW! You are totally right!!! Thanks for bringing that up to!!!

 

[TheBatman]

Sigh...syntax/grammar nerd alert.

Its not a grammar issue, its a usage/definition issue. The fact you resort to name-calling says a lot already.

Look, I dont mean to pick on you but if you're going to try and argue with big words, least you can do is use it correctly.

I don't think HT took a step back at all.

With MkI, you had to attach his back weapons too.

Given the scale, there not much HT can do to fit those weapons in the forearm so detachable is a no-brainer.

 

[bebe13junior]

Man I hate when this happens haha


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gmoney5000]

Its not a grammar issue, its a usage/definition issue. The fact you resort to name-calling says a lot already.

Look, I dont mean to pick on you but if you're going to try and argue with big words, least you can do is use it correctly.

I don't think HT took a step back at all.

With MkI, you had to attach his back weapons too.

Given the scale, there not much HT can do to fit those weapons in the forearm so detachable is a no-brainer.

Lol name-calling? You fo real, brah?

Also, I am using it correctly, perhaps your simple mind just can't comprehend it. Re-read it again. Maybe like a few more times since you're obviously slow.

Anyways, jay kay. Upon closer inspection perhaps I should have re-phrased it. It does come off as confusing...

"I also never said that people won't buy the Mk. III due to the shoulder components being a regression in terms of engineering design, BUT IT IS STILL a step backwards IN QUALITY/DESIGN."

There. Better.