JoeDeclassified.com

The Hidden World of G.I.Joe
It is currently Wed Apr 22, 2026 8:01 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Original Vs 30th Skystriker
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 2:27 pm 

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 1:50 pm
Posts: 26
I was over the lack of a two seater before they mentioned it was a two seat; it is The Freakin Skystriker (You have to say with the same gusto that they say "The Catalina Winemixe" in Steppebrothers). Sadly, for me that didn't translate to the ROC Night Raven; I just wasn't happy with that toy (I get side tracked easy). I have three opened (still need to post POC pics) and put together. I have problems with super loose missles on all three; I find one or two every now and then on the shelf that just drops off on their own.

On a side note, is it me or does the new helmet not seem deep enough?


Top
   
 
 Post subject: Re: Original Vs 30th Skystriker
PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 5:11 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 3:14 pm
Posts: 192
Location: Greensboro, NC
Yeah, Ace's eyes seem to be peeking out of the neck of the helmet. I think the head might be too thick to reach all the way into the helmet. I wonder if Wild Bill's head would work better (It's smaller)

_________________
Image


Top
   
 
 Post subject: Re: Original Vs 30th Skystriker
PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 8:54 am 

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 1:50 pm
Posts: 26
I could be WAY wrong, not that I will admit it, but it seems the helmet isn't deep enough. Which sucks because I don't know if taking a Dremel to the helmet would turn out to nice being it is kind of rubbery and translucent.


Top
   
 
 Post subject: Re: Original Vs 30th Skystriker
PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 8:54 pm 

Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 9:31 pm
Posts: 8
Location: Charlotte, NC
Southzen wrote:
I could be WAY wrong, not that I will admit it, but it seems the helmet isn't deep enough. Which sucks because I don't know if taking a Dremel to the helmet would turn out to nice being it is kind of rubbery and translucent.

Yea, helmet is not deep enough. Your hangup about dremeling it out is the same as mine. I'm afraid the dremel would make it cloudy on account of roughing up the translucent plastic.


Top
   
 
 Post subject: Re: Original Vs 30th Skystriker
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2011 6:25 pm 

Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 12:26 pm
Posts: 97
Location: Northeast Boondocks
Fantastic post, Shogi. I'm psyched the pre-prod Skystriker went to a worthy home. :)

_________________
GeneralsJoes | G.I. Joe: Renegades | Pursuit of Cobra


Top
   
 
 Post subject: Re: Original Vs 30th Skystriker
PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 1:14 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 1:16 pm
Posts: 33
Sandstorm wrote:
seems like a lot of good to compensate for the few negatives about this new incarnation.

and i liked seeing the Robotech/Macross Valkyrie at the tail end of your Flag. we need a Joe fitting version of those that is highly detailed and still transforms to all 3 modes.


I heard a rumor once that the VF-1S that was released by Matchbox was supposed to transform but the idea was scrapped after they realized the cost was to high. I know some people have modded the toy to transform but that's all. Anybody know if the new Skystriker can disassemble for storage?

_________________
Image


Top
   
 
 Post subject: Re: Original Vs 30th Skystriker
PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 1:10 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 3:14 pm
Posts: 192
Location: Greensboro, NC
chuckdawg1999 wrote:
Sandstorm wrote:
seems like a lot of good to compensate for the few negatives about this new incarnation.

and i liked seeing the Robotech/Macross Valkyrie at the tail end of your Flag. we need a Joe fitting version of those that is highly detailed and still transforms to all 3 modes.


I heard a rumor once that the VF-1S that was released by Matchbox was supposed to transform but the idea was scrapped after they realized the cost was to high. I know some people have modded the toy to transform but that's all. Anybody know if the new Skystriker can disassemble for storage?


I think I heard something along those lines as well. At the very least I believe I heard that it was originally going to be transformable but the idea was scrapped (I don't remember why though)

As for the Skystriker, the tail fins and stabilizers can pop off (The vertical fins are a little tough to take off but they do come off) I haven't tried the main wings yet, but you'll have to cut the red, white and blue stickers on the wing at the connector seam anyway. I've tried taking the nose off a couple of times with no luck, I haven't forced it off for fear of breaking it.

_________________
Image


Top
   
 
 Post subject: Re: Original Vs 30th Skystriker
PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 1:27 pm 
Booth Staff
Booth Staff
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 11:02 pm
Posts: 49
Location: PA/OH
The transformable VF-1s is actually shown on one of the Robotech DVDs. It makes me sad that it didn't end up being able to transform.

The video is actually a product demonstration to promote the toyline before it was released. And the items are clearly prototypes. It really hurts to see the guy showing the items not only have no idea how they work, but to also break one. I can't recall which one it was the he broke. It make have been the VF-1S.

And I also couldn't get the end off my Skystriker once I put it on. That thing is sturdy.


Top
   
 
 Post subject: Re: Original Vs 30th Skystriker
PostPosted: Sun Aug 07, 2011 10:41 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 3:14 pm
Posts: 192
Location: Greensboro, NC
OK, this should be the last update :) I found my vintage missiles and did a comparison of all three (Vintage, Preprod & Retail. There's more differences than one would think) Also added a few more bits I should have had from the beginning (Blame my 32 year old senility or my laziness :) )

Anyway, for those who may not want to wade through the 80 some odd pictures in the first post, here's what was added:

Here’s a closer pic to show the length difference of the Missile pegs on the Phoenix missile attachments. You can also see how it’s wider closer to the fuselage on the retail version than it is on the pre-production version.

Image

The length issue continues with the Sparrow missile attachments…

Image

…and the front most Sidewinder missile attachments. Here you can also see that they added a little bit of plastic in the corners where the pegs attach to the fuselage making less room for the missile to sit on the peg.

Image


The Missiles themselves also had some changes from vintage and from pre-production.
All Missile pictures are as follows:
Vintage – Far Left/Top
Preprod – Middle
Retail – Far Right/Bottom

Phoenix Missiles
The peg hole on the preprod is a little thinner in the middle than the vintage and the retail is wider with a soft plastic insert instead of just a shaped hole. You can also see that the lines on the missiles are thicker on the new ones than on the vintage one.

Image

Looking at the rear of the Phoenix missiles you can see that the new ones have slightly different seams where the two halves join together at the base of the tail fins. Also there have been two bumps added to the exhaust.

Image

Sparrow Missiles
Just like the Phoenix missiles, the peg hole on the preprod version is a little thinner in the middle than the vintage one and this time the retail version has a beveled edge inside the peg hole. You can also see that the ridges on the body of the missile are more squared off on the new versions than the vintage one.

Image

The tail fins are shorter than the vintage version and there is now a bump in the center of the rear of the missile.

Image

The nose cone is very close to the same but now it extends a little further past the start of the body ridges. You can also see that the fins are a little more squared off just like the ridges are on the new ones.

Image

Sidewinder Missiles
Just like the Sparrow missiles, there is a beveled edge on the retail one, but you can also see that the area around the peg hole is more squared off on the new ones than on the vintage version.

Image

The tail fins are also smaller than the vintage version and there is that bump again.

Image

The nose cone on the new missiles is a little blunter than the vintage one and again we can see that the fins are also squared off more.

Image


The rear underside of the fuselage has gained all the typical legal company information and a new screw hole when it went to retail. The preprod version on top just has the vehicle details molded on it.

Image



The attachment pegs for the rear tail fins was changed from preprod to retail. The preprod version had alternating ridges (outer pegs had ridges on bottom while middle peg had one on top) The retail version now has a little tab in place of the ridges.

Image

Also, the starboard tail fin has the code “WL2B” stamped/burned into it. There is nothing stamped/burned into the retail version and I’ve heard other preprod versions do not have this either

Image

The main wing attachments were also slightly changed from pre-production to retail. The preprod version had two vertical reinforcement bars on the underside of the two outermost horizontal bars and there was a third horizontal bar in the middle. The retail version has done away with the reinforcement bars and the middle bar was changed to an L shape part.

Image

_________________
Image


Top
   
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group