Jump to content

Anyone seen the new Hot Wheels Trek ships?


Jangonate
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 247
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hell we might see an old Romulan bird of prey instead

 

In my opinion the warbird is much cooler than the bop. Another reason why the warbird is better is because it's the rarest alien ship toy wise, they've only made a couple warbird toys over the years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have GOT to be kidding me.

 

 

I bought the Enterprise-A today (Target had 2 & one definitely had the saucer angled upwards) and I opened it up to find there's literally a thimble's worth of metal on this thing, and none of it is in the struts/pylons where it's needed the most! What the hell is this BS? I saw the Reliant's entire saucer is die-cast, did Mattel use up all it's metal allotment on that ship?

 

I mean, the Enterprise-A LOOKS really good, the detail's great on a model this size, but wow what a poor choice of material distribution. I honestly wouldn't be surprised it the pylons broke if it falls off the stand. Seriously, the LEGO Enterprise I made is more structurally sound & it's 2/3 the size of this toy.

 

The other ships look like they'd be fine even if they were 100% plastic, I'll probably put this back in the box & try to exchange it when the new Enterprise is available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Picked up the A and D this weekend. After never finding most of the JLs I wanted, I'm glad for Mattel to step up to the plate, even if they are a different size.

 

I just hope they release unique ships, and not go the battle-damaged or cloaked route with the same four ships that JL did. I hated that.

 

While I like these, I'd flip for some Micro Machine-sized Trek ships again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Picked up the A and D this weekend. After never finding most of the JLs I wanted, I'm glad for Mattel to step up to the plate, even if they are a different size.

 

I just hope they release unique ships, and not go the battle-damaged or cloaked route with the same four ships that JL did. I hated that.

 

While I like these, I'd flip for some Micro Machine-sized Trek ships again.

 

Mattel will never do cloaked versions of the ships unless they made them 100% plastic and I don't think they would anyway. JL did have a prototype of the cloaked aston martin vantage for die another day but thats all they produced.

 

 

You have GOT to be kidding me.

 

 

I bought the Enterprise-A today (Target had 2 & one definitely had the saucer angled upwards) and I opened it up to find there's literally a thimble's worth of metal on this thing, and none of it is in the struts/pylons where it's needed the most! What the hell is this BS? I saw the Reliant's entire saucer is die-cast, did Mattel use up all it's metal allotment on that ship?

 

I mean, the Enterprise-A LOOKS really good, the detail's great on a model this size, but wow what a poor choice of material distribution. I honestly wouldn't be surprised it the pylons broke if it falls off the stand. Seriously, the LEGO Enterprise I made is more structurally sound & it's 2/3 the size of this toy.

 

The other ships look like they'd be fine even if they were 100% plastic, I'll probably put this back in the box & try to exchange it when the new Enterprise is available.

 

The top half of the Reliant's main hull including the saucer is diecast, the bottom half is plastic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi all!

 

Firstly, I actually registered to reply to this thread, although I expect I'll be participating elsewhere here as well. This looks like a nice place. :)

 

Now, I wish I saw this thread before I went and bought the first Hot Wheels wave, but I think I would have anyhow. That doesn't mean they are perfect, however. There are some significant issues with these that I want to address. Let me start with some replies (My apologies for the formatting. You can only quote so many times, and I didn't want to post 5 times in a row. Assuming I could do that):

 

SkyBuzz:

Ir's weird. If you look in the BigBadToystore.com site...

 

That retailer seems to have the only info on future waves. They list the Saratoga as upcoming in set 3 or 4, which is a personal fave.

 

jedimaster-c:

A 5 1/2 inch ship for 14.99,forget it.At that price it should be 15 inch with no electronics.What a rip off.

No. I don't have room on my desk for those, and for that size, there's no way a basic model should ever be made. Apologies to model builders, but when the tech exists for Diamond or Playmates to manufacture highly detailed and functional replicas of that size, the need for model kits is over. In fact, the niche decal and resin kitbash/conversion part makers should shift to producing them for these toys instead. Hell, I'd love to buy a conversion kit to make a Johnny Lightning or even Hallmark Reliant ornament into a Bozeman. :)

Mavdayvaas:

Ever Notice they keep making the same damn ships in the first wave?? has anyone ever thought, hey lets try using the Defiant of the station of a runabout or hey what about the Promethsis? I mean come on. I will admit I like when Johnny lightning did do a varient of a ship and used a different name. but where is my defiant??

It's the molds, obviously. It's easy for them to do a Constitution Defiant and Excalibur since they have the Enterprise. The same is true of the Majestic and Yamato, and to be honest I'm glad they did. I like having a more obscure ship of the same class, and especially if it's a variant. In fact, they learned from this and actually added an aztec pattern to the Majestic which makes it ten times better than the Reliants they did. I only wish they issued a similar Saratoga, non-damaged Majestic, or updated the Reliant.

 

Jmacq1:

They're not diecast at all, but a few years ago Furuta released a line of ST ships in Japan as a series of "candy toy" boxes, meaning you had no idea of the ship inside until you opened the box. They're all very basic plastic "models" but fully painted and detailed. I actually own the Defiant pictured (I totally lucked out as it was the only one I wanted & I only bought one box) and while it's not a solid chunk of PVC like I'd prefer, it's probably the most accurate Defiant I've seen in such a small scale (just under 4" long from front to back.)

Furuta is not the only fruit...

 

Romondo (aka Yamato)

Furuta

Konami

F-Toys

 

All of those produced these candy trading toys. Furuta may have produced the most waves, but there were others before and since.The Romondo ones were of the lowest quality (IMO), althought they often came with an accompanying Micromachine scale chase version. The Furuta ones are much better, but pale in comparison to the Konami ones, and both compared to the more recent F-Toys versions. The Furuta's started to go downhill with their third and last (split) wave of "alpa" and "beta". Those were far smaller than the previous scale, and the pedestals dwarfed them (They look like three dimensional chess pieces). Good detail, but not as good as the bigger ones and some parts were badly molded. (The Excelsior neck piece needed significant whittling down to fit)

 

The Hallmark ornaments are even better than these too.

 

Geof7609:

There's a number of these ships (including the Prometheus) available through Amazon but they're pretty ridiculously overpriced (and no, I'm not the seller.) But at least it's a starting point to see what was made & you can try whatever online sources you know of.

The prices have come down (a bit) on eBay, albeit they are not just opened boxes, they're unboxed and shipped in mailers without candy. I wish full cases with an extra were still out there, but short of the F-Toys series, I see none. At best, you can find opened unboxed sets of Volume 2, 3 (alpha and beta) and bits of Vol 1. Eeven the Konami ones seem to be opened at best.

Jmacq1:

Johnny Lightning was great to start, but died off when they went to repaints ad-infinitum (though in hindsight maybe they found out early they were losing the license so didn't put any more money into it).

 

Sadly, some of the ships I'd really like to see are probably too obscure to see made anytime soon (Prometheus, Nebula class, Akira-Class).

I'm not on top of the license holders, but are you certain JL no longer has a license? That's a tragedy, if true. They showed everyone that fine detail and paintjobs can be done on small toys that size. Hot Wheels is no comparison on that front.

Wheeljack35:

Well we got in a case this morning

 

there are 4 per case and this shipment had

 

2x Enterprise A's

1x Enterprise D

1x USS Reliant

 

I grabbed the Reliant and a movie Emterprise

 

Calling it the Enterprise A isn't right because it only has NCC 1701 on it

 

The movie Enterprise is totally plastic and the Reliant has die cast on the top while the underside is all plastic

Yup, after asking around, several retailers stated they heard from their sales reps that this was in error. One said he thought set two (same set with an "A" swapped out for a Klingon BOP) might be a "make-up" for it by reversing the mistake and putting a properly decaled "-A" as the 1701, but it would seem that will be the current Abrahmsprise.

Jmacq1:

Saw these at Toys R Us today. They had the Enterprise - D, Original Movie Enterprise (Enterprise-A), and the Reliant. Ultimately, I was disappointed, and did not purchase them.

 

Observational review:

 

They're about two times the size of the Johnny Lightning versions (pro), and have more use of actual die-cast metal (pro). However despite being twice as large, the detail on the ships is less than that visible on the Johnny Lightning ships (big con), and the paint applications are lathered on so thick that it obscures and softens some of the molds detail (big con). Additionally, there are few paint applications overall (The Reliant was a particularly egregious offender in this regard, with no details whatsoever painted on the centerpiece of the above-saucer arch), leading to an overall lack of detail compared to the older JLs. Ultimately, I did not feel they were worth the $14.99, especially as I have all the ships they had available in smaller, yet superior in detail Johnny Lightning forms. If you don't have the JLs, they might be worth a look. I can't compare them to the Furutas as I don't own any, but I'm told the Furuta snap-kits are quite good.

 

I hold out hope that the product line will continue and the level of detail will improve, but as it stands at the moment, I was very much not impressed.

 

They did not have the Klingon Bird of Prey or the "new" Movie Enterprise available, so I can't tell you if they're any better.

Specific to the Reliant, I disagree overall on quality, but not by much. I actually agree with the emboldened comments, and will say that the multi-coat enamel on the alloy pieces would be tolerable if THEY DID NOT KEEP USING THE OLD GRID PATTERN on the primary hull. That's an infuriating throwback to the old (and now hated for this reason) Franz Joseph technical manual designs for TOS.

 

IF YOU MAKE A TOS SHIP, MAKE IT SMOOTH. IF YOU MAKE A FILM (+) SHIP, USE AN AZTEC.

Period.

 

The lack of paint to other areas (most amazingly to the tops of the shuttlebays!) is tolerable to the extent that it could be added, but it puts me near, if not on, the fence about the Reliant.

 

IronMan1:

I have all 3, they are a mix of metal and plastic as would be expected. I don't know why people feel the need to #$#@# about everything. Hot Wheels have always been a mix of both materials. If they were completely diecast that would indeed be cool but we know that ain't ever happening so complaining won't do any good. Heck the Corgi ships weren't 100% metal. Whoever said the JL Reliant has more detail is wrong no offense. First the torpedo launcer has alot of detail, everything on the ship looks accurate to me. The 1701 refit box label is VERY misleading, calling the pre 1701-A refit by it's successor's name.

 

As I heard, that box issue is supposedly an actual error, not an intent to mislead, but I'm annoyed all the same. As for the mix of plastic and metal, to call them die-cast might be more misleading considering the ratios between the materials. There really ought to be a regulation, or advertising law specific to this (like there is for food products: 10% juice, etc) to state whether this can be labeled as "Die-cast". The "A"' is mostly plastic (to its detriment, as I'll address below) with a secondary hull that need not be metal AT ALL, considering its makeup. The Reliant has a nice and necessary mix for stability, and the "D" is actually perfect, which surprised me most of all.

Jmacq1:

Unless I saw a defective model, the torpedo launcher on the Reliant I saw had no paint on it whatsoever besides the base coat. The "face" of the launcher was completely white.

 

I also noted that the materials were a "pro" not a "con."

 

Given that the JLs have things like running lights, phaser banks, panel lines, etc.... all painted on, these really are extremely lacking in paint apps. Maybe you feel differently, but quite frankly at the size they are, they should blow the JLs out of the water, particularly for $13-$15 bucks a pop.

 

Painting the shield generators, phaser emitters and running lights would have been a plus, but the real glaring mistakes are the lack of aztec, unpainted shuttlebay roofs (awful mistake) and, as you say, the back and front of the torpedo bay. Also, while not as bad, of note is the too thin red running lines on the primary hull, and the mismold of the impulse core, which along with the shuttlebay doors, is apparently one piece of blue plastic (it shifts as one in the chassis). It's missing the silver paint to the outer ring above (would have been better white if not silver, like the outer ring on the bottom) and since they painted all the metal white, that bottom part has the outer ring as part of the metal, and is also white.

 

Considering the "A" has the same impulse core, leaving that totally unpainted is unacceptable, but since they are in different scales to begin with (!), it's not surprising.

 

IronMan1:

I'd say you got an error one then because even my battle damaged JL Reliant has painted shuttle doors. They didn't paint running lights if he means the yellow things those are phaser implacements. On the bottom the yellow things on the rim of the saucer are the reaction control thrusters like on the space shuttle they control the angle of the ship.

As I mentioned above, I think those are supposed to be shield generators (gold triangles on my Majestic), but maybe someone else can solve that.

 

Mavdayvaas:

Well, The Majestic does have the shuttle door numbers but the ship is plastic and battle damaged.

 

Why they are sky blue, I don't know. That's weird.

 

IronMan1:

Yeah the hot wheels 1701-D is smaller than the corgi one. The HW version does saucer seperate.

 

Wheeljack35:

Oh I didn't know that and here I was not going to get it

 

Isn't it great??? :D

 

Seriously, the "D" is the best of the bunch, and the Galaxy class isn't even my favorite design. However, this may be the most detailed "D" there is, short of the upcoming Diamond 17" one. Yes, the JL Yamato has the most impressive paintjob (especially for its size, and an aztec pattern too!), but Mattel had the forethought to make the primary saucer of a more rigid plastic in two pieces. Something they were stupid NOT to do on the "A" and Reliant. It allows for the bezeling and mold details not possible on those soft plastics, nor the Galoob or Applause die cast (real diecasts). It's underpainted, but otherwise fantastic. In fact, I alsmost wish the secondary hull were plastic as well, because this might lend it self to some kitbash conversions to Nebula and other variants. It shuldn't be hard for someone to upbuild from the saucer and nacelles to do those.

 

That's a hint, if anyone didn't notice. ;) (Just post the pics if you do it)

 

IronMan1:

The JL galaxy class is prone to breaking too, I actually ended up breaking one of the yamato's trying to saucer seperate it but the other one seperated just fine. This thing is thicker plastic so it shouldn't break and there are three prongs that connect into the dorsal on the stardrive versus the one fragile prong on the JL ship. The ships have alot of detail but the detail just isn't painted. The Reliant's equipment strips are painted blue on the JL version but they aren't painted any other color on this one plus the torpedo launcher has a ton of detaill too just not paint. Like the torpedo ports that stick out have the notched structure like they do on the filming model. I'll probably end up taking pics just to show yall. Both enterprises have translucent blue plastic for their engines and deflectors. The Reliant's impulse deflector crytsal is translucent blue too, actually the top and bottom deflector crystals and shuttle doors are all part of the same piece of translucent blue plastic I think. The Reliant's shuttle doors in the movie had deep blue lighting surrounding them as it approached ceti alpha 5.

 

Ah, "impulse deflector crystal". Knew there was a name somewhere. :)

 

The translucent blue plastic is on the inside of the nacelles, but not the outside, unless those are frosted. Those just look different. Also the Miranda doesn't have the forward facing deflector.

 

SkyBuzz:

The NEW Reliant doesn't look very detailed for the size it's suppose to be... I got THIS one along w/a few other JL ships (Refit ENT, Ent-TWoK, and Reliant) a few years ago at KBs @ 2 for $5.00! The Enterprises hulls have diff paint apps. One has the 5 windows near the front of the Dish, and the other (Battle Damage) has none.

 

These are all plastic. I put these up to show what these older ones look like. Hope that's ok.

 

Thanks, and I wish you could have picked some more up for me at at that price. :)

 

There is another issue that has been overlooked in regards to the JLs. There are limited variants called "White Lightnings" which were supposedly mixed into cases and on standard cards/blisters, but had different paintjobs. They had what was called a more "pearlescent" white color and a Star Trek chevron watermark on the bottom somewhere. That doubles the number of variants on the Reliant, making 4 versions, and probably six of the Miranda overall, including the Majestic.

Wheeljack35:

I have the battle damaged Reliant

 

Are the saucer sections removable or did you break them?

SkyBuzz:

I packed these in a plastic container surrounded by tissue. I guess the "shock" of moving my boxes around loosened them. At first I thought they were broken, but once I put them back on, they will stay until you pull them off. So I just leave them alone packed until I decide to bring them out for display again. What's cool, is ONLY the Saucers came loose! Unfortunately, the TOS Battle Damaged Enterprise saucer section WON'T come off. Now THAT would be cool!

 

IronMan1:

Looks to me like the glue disintegrated enough for the saucers to fall off.

 

I have a perfect Majestic, but I saw some auctions for them with the explosions loose in the blister pack at the bottom. I thought that was like the removable torpedos launces and phaser blasts of other JLs, but no, these are glued on, and I guess it does dry out after a time.

IronMan1:

I see some people complaining about lack of detail, mattel just didn't paint extra places like the large grooves on the rollbar and the surface detail under the rollbar on top of the main hull. Maybe someone can paint those themselves. The filming model has darker gray paint detail in those areas. I'm glad they are making them at all, I'm not gonna complain I'll be greatful.

 

I see myself doing that someday, but I shouldn't have to. At least not the shuttlebay roofs. That's most noticeable as being missing.

 

Jmacq1:

So even though we think it's substandard product, we should be happy about it anyway?

 

Sorry, but no.

 

It's not "painting extra places" it's putting the proper detailing on the things in the first place. It's pure laziness and cost-cutting on Mattel's part, and we shouldn't support it if we want a product that meets our standards. Maybe your standards are lower. I was really looking forward to these when I heard about them, hoping we'd get something that would at least match if not exceed the detail of the JL ships. We didn't.

 

"Detail" also INCLUDES the paint applications, not just the sculpt of the vehicles themselves.

Yes, and no. Boycott the product, and in this climate, we won't see more. I know that sucks, especially since you need to pay for your voice to be heard, but I'd rather have these than nothing. Remember, there have been campaigns to have new and different products commissioned from Trek mfgrs, and those who did had their effect because they bought product, not for holding out. (Hallmark ornaments, for one)

 

Again, it would be a tragic loss if JL has truly lost the license since they DID produce overall better detailed products than these, but for most there is a critical scale at one is comfortable with models like these. MicroMachines are damned cool, but too small for my enjoyment, just as the Playmates or Diamond Select ones are too unweildly. JL, Furuta, Konami and F-Toys were successful to the point they had been for producing a size that was more acceptable for most, and even those are a bit small.

 

These Hot Wheels ones, for all their faults, are the closest to what I would call an ideal size for quality and detail. Yes, Mattel didn't totally meet the challenge so far, but for what should be, these are the closest attempt.

 

IronMan1:

A warbird would do very nicely, since corgi has canceled their star trek line a hot wheels warbird would be more welcome. I haven't heard crap about the corgi star trek wave 2.

 

Have they lost their license too? I'd love to know who holds what now. All I know is that Playmates has the current film license for some of the large scale models, but the figures too, or are the current film ones with Diamond too?

 

Plus, is the Mattel license the same as was with JL and the Japanese companies?

 

Wheeljack35:

I'm not picky I like these.

 

IronMan1:

Me too and I'm sure any people who have the detail complaint can just paint the friggin detail themselves. In fact hotwheelscollectors.com has the color paint application code images for such a project. The charts that show all angles and what color goes where.

Jmacq1:

It's supposed to be a complete toy, not a "paint by numbers" art project. Mattel should give us a finished product. Not a half-painted piece of junk.

 

I love Star Trek too. It deserves better treatment than this, and no, I didn't buy these, as I already said. That doesn't make me any less able or entitled to express my opinion on them. Even if it's different from yours.

Junk, I wouldn't call these, but I agree with certain exceptions as I explained above. It's nice that they went to the point of showing how to complete the paintjob, but to have that forethought means they consciously knew they weren't meeting expectations. Almost a confession. I hope the shortfall is something they don't repeat.

 

hoganvibe:

Personally I like it when they sculpt in the detail but don't paint it. The quality control on many toys have gotten worse over the years and I find it easier to paint in a little detail instead of trying to find a good one in the store. I'm guessing that I am in the minority on this one, but I think it's fun.

 

Yes, you are. Although, if you construct models regularly, this should be hardly be an inconvenience. It is, for those of us that don't.

 

IronMan1:

If anyone wants to go the online route try here. The guy who runs this site is cool.

 

http://www.milezone.net/bStar-Trek_c_68.html

 

They don't seem to have cases, like some other dealers. I went to diecastalley.com and got the first case at even cheaper a per piece price. (Grabbed some JLs there too)

Now, let's get to the "A"....

 

Geof7609:

I came across 3 Enterprise-As (and 2 Reliants) in two Targets today, but 2 of the Enterprises had the saucer tilted up way too much & the 3rd had pretty messy paint globs on the top. Is the saucer adjustable or something? I just don't wanna blow $15 if it's not something that can be fixed. Again this is the Enterprise A, not D.

IronMan1:

One of mine is that way, I think it's an error on mattel's part.

 

Wheeljack35:

I don't have that problem with my Enterprise

 

IronMan1:

I don't know if my other one has a slightly angled doral and saucer I'll have to look, it's so minor it's barely noticeable.

 

Geof7609:

You have GOT to be kidding me.

I bought the Enterprise-A today (Target had 2 & one definitely had the saucer angled upwards) and I opened it up to find there's literally a thimble's worth of metal on this thing, and none of it is in the struts/pylons where it's needed the most! What the hell is this BS? I saw the Reliant's entire saucer is die-cast, did Mattel use up all it's metal allotment on that ship?

 

I mean, the Enterprise-A LOOKS really good, the detail's great on a model this size, but wow what a poor choice of material distribution. I honestly wouldn't be surprised it the pylons broke if it falls off the stand. Seriously, the LEGO Enterprise I made is more structurally sound & it's 2/3 the size of this toy.

 

The other ships look like they'd be fine even if they were 100% plastic, I'll probably put this back in the box & try to exchange it when the new Enterprise is available.

 

@#$%^&*!!!!!! This is not isolated. They actually released many, if not MOST of the "A"s with mismolded saucer pylons. TWO of which I now posess. I even saw others at local stores with the same issue. The bottom of the pylon where it meets the metal secondary hull is curved to meet the curved bump on the top of the torpedo bay. The problem, is that the cut of the curve is not level, leaving it higher on the back end than the front. This pitches the entire saucer up by several degrees to the point it's even noticable from forward and above angles with the nacelles and secondary hull level. YES, the pylon should be metal, or supported, as you say. That would have meant a plumb fit between the two.

 

This is pissing me off. To the point, that I think I might try to pop and cut the saucer pylon curve back (ugh), or try heating it, bending it and vycing it to hold the new angle. The risks involved are not low, and I shouldn't have to do it.

 

*breathe*

 

The Reliant saucer isn't all diecast either, just the top, and the next 1701 will likely be the Abrahmsprise, which is nice short of the nacelles with the boob job.

 

So, I'm betting we're stuck with these. Again, I'm not pleased about this, and other aspects, but considering the total price I paid, I'm not complaining too much.

 

Anyhow, that's quite a first post, I think. @loll@

 

Thanks for the opportunity!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having had these ships for a while now, I noticed a few odd details. On the Enterprise-D, I noticed on the top of the Saucer that a few of the lifeboats are missing. They are near the same level with the ship's registry number, and should be in clusters of 2. However, a couple from some clusters are missing, but you can tell they should be there because there are indentions in the hull where they should be. Also, on the captain's yacht, there is a missing arc segment (the 2 arcs that surround the circular protrusion [engine?] from the middle of the yacht).

 

On the Enterprise(not)-A, they added a fourth phaser bank to the top of the saucer that faces aft. It is on the same level as the rest of the saucer phasers. Also, the ship is missing the 2 single phasers above the shuttle bay, and the group of 4 belly phasers (but those might be hidden by the stand hole).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BigBadToyStore lists waves up to series F with that one listed as coming in Dec '09. Of course, they could cancel.

 

Ok lets clarify this, the yellow-orange modules on the edge of the saucers are not shield generators. They are the RCS(Reaction Control System) thrusters for controlling the pitch of the ship.

 

OK, I wasn't married to that, but I had heard it mentioned as what they were. Either way, it would be nice if they were painted.

 

Wow. That WAS quite a post. I had to get up and stretch my legs... get something to eat before I finished it.

 

Welcome to the board.

 

Thanks for taking it well. @smilepunch@

 

Having had these ships for a while now, I noticed a few odd details. On the Enterprise-D, I noticed on the top of the Saucer that a few of the lifeboats are missing. They are near the same level with the ship's registry number, and should be in clusters of 2. However, a couple from some clusters are missing, but you can tell they should be there because there are indentions in the hull where they should be.

 

Also, on the captain's yacht, there is a missing arc segment (the 2 arcs that surround the circular protrusion [engine?] from the middle of the yacht).

 

Good eye. Those are odd. There's not even symmetry in the amount of missing ones. (Looks like 3 are missing) Because there are faint remnants of the missing ones, I wonder if the lifeboats were movable within the die or the mold the die was made from. (and someone forgot to pop these in)

 

On the Enterprise(not)-A, they added a fourth phaser bank to the top of the saucer that faces aft. It is on the same level as the rest of the saucer phasers. Also, the ship is missing the 2 single phasers above the shuttle bay, and the group of 4 belly phasers (but those might be hidden by the stand hole).

 

The fourth looks like evidence of cut and paste wedge thinking from whoever did the mold. In the actual schematics of the refit, and "A" (Yorktown, Ti-Ho) are those differences present?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I know there isn't a fourth group of phaser turrents on the top of the saucer and the two phaser turrents on the secondary hull are just aft of the warp pylon by a few feet. They could have molded the aft phasers. I agree painted rcs thrusters would have been nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I found these today at Target. Actually, there was only a Reliant and 2 Ent-A's. I picked up the Reliant, and am happy with it, though , yeah, I think it should be priced more like 9.99, but whatever.

 

But something seemed 'off' about both the Enterprises. I wasn't looking for a superior product, but the more I looked at both of them, the more it seemed the warp nacelles were 'not quite right'. Both ships had the oddly upward-angled saucer, which I was willing to overlook, but it looked to me like the nacelles were on an opposite angle, one being lower than the other. Has anyone else noticed this, and is it real or just the packaging playing a trick on my eyes?

 

The packaging did not help, either. Aside from actually taking the ship out in the store, I could not get a good enough head-on view to see if it was all my imagination. Needless to say, I left both behind in hopes of finding more at another Target for comparison. If they're all the same, then I guess it's just a mind trick on me, but I'd rather get one that at least looks straighter than the 2 from today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just hope they release unique ships, and not go the battle-damaged or cloaked route with the same four ships that JL did. I hated that.

 

Looking at the future waves listed on Entertainment Earth, it seems like practically every ship released will have a "battle damaged" version released at some point, which is disappointing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know I was looking at my Enterpirse A, I guess if I needed to nitpick I would say the decals are a bit small. The NCC 1701-A on the saucer section seems to small, but overall it doesn't bother me that much. I look at these much like i did the old Micro Machines line, (which I loved) only a bit bigger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I finally found these today at Toys R Us.

 

I collected the Furuta line and the Johnny Lightning line (whenever I could actually find those!) and I'd been very curious about these ...particularly with that 14.99 price tag that TRU has them at. TRU had an Enterprise A and a Reliant. I icked up the "A" and decided I would pick up others depending on how I felt about the "A." I'm pretty satisfied with it. It's a nice size, it displays very nicely, and it's got a great looking base. I recommend them and I intend to buy others.

 

I'm hoping they continue this line. The fun part of these "ships of Star Trek" lines is when they clear the obvious essentials like the Enterprise A, D, the Reliant, etc, and get into ships like the Excelsior, the Enterprise C (one of my favorite models) and the oddly configured Grissom. I do hope they stay away from the Johnny Lightning route of doing "battle damaged" versions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But something seemed 'off' about both the Enterprises. I wasn't looking for a superior product, but the more I looked at both of them, the more it seemed the warp nacelles were 'not quite right'. Both ships had the oddly upward-angled saucer, which I was willing to overlook, but it looked to me like the nacelles were on an opposite angle, one being lower than the other. Has anyone else noticed this, and is it real or just the packaging playing a trick on my eyes?

Doesn't surprise me, those pylons are made of pretty thin plastic & I suppose a misshaped one is bound to happen somewhere along the production line. Mine appear to be properly aligned, so I doubt the packaging was distorting your view in this case (though I have to admit it took me several moments to realize the saucer was tilted on that 1st one I found, haha.)

 

I didn't realize there's actually a 1701-A correction out there, and I think I may just keep my A-less one after all. It's still a very good looking model, I just have issues with the materials used for this particular ship. The Enterprise-D looks particularly sturdy, and that may be a future purchase.

 

IN THE MEANTIME... here's a few pics of my LEGO ship, the USS Bitchslapper. I just used what parts I had, haha.

 

0429092016.jpg

 

0429092017.jpg

 

0429092014.jpg

 

0429092015a.jpg

 

:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't realize there's actually a 1701-A correction out there, and I think I may just keep my A-less one after all. It's still a very good looking model, I just have issues with the materials used for this particular ship. The Enterprise-D looks particularly sturdy, and that may be a future purchase.

 

The "D" is great. Best of the bunch.

 

However, I didn't explicitly state they will release the "A" correction, just that a retailer said they would. So far, all set info I see (BBTS etc) is the same as before set A hit the street, so who knows.

 

IN THE MEANTIME... here's a few pics of my LEGO ship, the USS Bitchslapper. I just used what parts I had, haha.

 

0429092016.jpg

 

0429092017.jpg

 

0429092014.jpg

 

0429092015a.jpg

 

:P

 

That's cute. :)

 

I did some Daleks a few years back, but I don't know where the pics are. I just wish Lego could get an actual license like they did for Star Wars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not buying the battle damaged versions at all, forget that. I noticed my open 1701 does have slightly misaligned warp nacelles the port(left) nacelle is a couple of milimeters higher probably due to improper glue application. I'm not nitpicking though, a little thing like that doesn't take away from the ship's "magic". The only worth while battle damaged version of a star trek ship is the electronic wrath of khan enterprise battle damaged since it has battle specific sounds which is when the reliant hits the port side torpedo launcer docking hatch in the nebula toward the end of the movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I bought the Reliant today at Target and I have to say, I am impressed. But, I have not opened it up yet, I will display him at work. But, So far so good.

I would like to see different versions of this ship but I would like to see more new molds. I would be happy with a Nebula class vessel, Endeavor anyone? Defiant? DEEP SPACE NINE? oh count me in on that one!!

Oh quick question, does the Enterprise D separate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Find Action Figures on Ebay

×
×
  • Create New...
Sign Up For The TNI Newsletter And Have The News Delivered To You!


Entertainment News International (ENI) is the #1 popular culture network for adult fans all around the world.
Get the scoop on all the popular comics, games, movies, toys, and more every day!

Contact and Support

Advertising | Submit News | Contact ENI | Privacy Policy

©Entertainment News International - All images, trademarks, logos, video, brands and images used on this website are registered trademarks of their respective companies and owners. All Rights Reserved. Data has been shared for news reporting purposes only. All content sourced by fans, online websites, and or other fan community sources. Entertainment News International is not responsible for reporting errors, inaccuracies, omissions, and or other liablities related to news shared here. We do our best to keep tabs on infringements. If some of your content was shared by accident. Contact us about any infringements right away - CLICK HERE