jvmacross Posted February 7, 2022 Share Posted February 7, 2022 Some fighter mode pics....KitzConcept VF-1S Roy Fokker V 2.X.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stampeed Valkyrie Posted February 7, 2022 Author Share Posted February 7, 2022 2 of them arrived today. I would expect the other 2 Fokker 1S and Cannon Fodder to show up anyday now. I kind of miss the fact that there is no Janky 80s style art on these boxes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenius Posted February 7, 2022 Share Posted February 7, 2022 "I miss the janky art" isn't something you hear very often... but custom boxes are fun. I'm getting jealous, I just heard something by my door and ran out hoping it would be mine... but alas, just ta neighbor closing their car door. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvmacross Posted February 7, 2022 Share Posted February 7, 2022 27 minutes ago, Stampeed Valkyrie said: 2 of them arrived today. I would expect the other 2 Fokker 1S and Cannon Fodder to show up anyday now. I kind of miss the fact that there is no Janky 80s style art on these boxes. Congrats.... I asked about that as well, sadly only the Fokker received new art....in the form of a slip sleeve cover no less....worked for Bandai I suppose. Hoping for a return of the 80's style artwork for the Max and Millia Super combo sets....time will tell.... Oh, btw...apparently they also decided to ditch those white shipping boxes too...I was a fan of those too...oh well... One other thing....not sure if I was doing something incorrectly, but getting the legs attached to the rear swivel bar in battroid mode seems to have become trickier...so watch out....again, could just be me but I do not remember it being as tricky with previous releases.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Convectuoso Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 They posted this video with transformation tips https://fb.watch/b1x6vVntTL/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvmacross Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 Heheh....easier said than done...at the end of the video when they take it from fighter back to battroid they skipped that part...lol The rest of the transformation is pretty easy....tucking the heat shield is also a bit of a pita....but looks like this is definitely a V 2.x...the tabs securing the intakes/legs to the main body in gerwalk alone are a vast improvement over v1 and v2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKT Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 34 minutes ago, Convectuoso said: They posted this video with transformation tips https://fb.watch/b1x6vVntTL/ Something he said in the video: the whole toy is painted. Does that mean even the base white is paint? I have the v1 Dark Gold, and the base black look almost certainly to be colour moulded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh9000 Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 I don’t like how KC designed the intakes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corrinald Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 My Standard and Max 1As arrived today. Very nice looking colors and they have definitely made some design improvements. The intakes attaching to the body tightly is a very welcome change. I also had some trouble with the hip joints in battroid mode as others mentioned above. Once they are in there it's solid. Unfortunately getting the brownie into fighter mode was a chore. There's a lot of binding issues where the chest plate and everything closes up behind the cockpit and I could not get it to all sit flush and tight (same with the backpack hinge). My original Roy 1S is like this but the gold and red ones were better. Going to try the Max and see if it's the same deal or a fluke. All of the paint means chipping could be an issue. I scraped a little off fiddling with transformation. Interestingly in this bright office lighting the brownie shows a few different shades of tan. Also, I really hate the neck. Overall though it's nice to see these figures continually improving. I appreciate the smaller, slightly simpler packaging too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvmacross Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 (edited) My Standard VF-1A was the "stiffest" of the 4....I actually have not taken it out of Battroid because of it Edited February 8, 2022 by jvmacross Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corrinald Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 I had a little better success with the Max. The various joints and hinges definitely weren't as tight as the brown one. Still can't get the backpack hinge to sit where it's supposed to. It always ends up with the back end up in the air too much. Overall looks pretty good though. I will run both of them through transformation again at a later time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tekering Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 8 hours ago, sh9000 said: I don’t like how KC designed the intakes. Well, they clearly prioritized Battloid mode, at the expense of the fighter profile. No amount of tampo or panel-lining can hide that. 5 hours ago, Corrinald said: I mean, it's much better than Toynami's efforts... ...but I think Yamato was doing it better twenty years ago! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
no3Ljm Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 On 2/7/2022 at 6:32 AM, jvmacross said: Can I ask what's the leg's inner tabs for? I don't see it connected to the backpack's side in Fighter mode like YamArcadia's. Is this to be used for something else like Fast or Armored Packs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolf-1 Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 3 hours ago, no3Ljm said: Can I ask what's the leg's inner tabs for? I don't see it connected to the backpack's side in Fighter mode like YamArcadia's. Is this to be used for something else like Fast or Armored Packs? It's not for the Fastpacks, at least not on the old versions. Still awaiting the Armored set; and haven't transformed mine from Battroid to Fighter/Gerwalk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvmacross Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 2 hours ago, no3Ljm said: Can I ask what's the leg's inner tabs for? I don't see it connected to the backpack's side in Fighter mode like YamArcadia's. Is this to be used for something else like Fast or Armored Packs? The Fokker is the only one I have transformed into fighter mode from this new batch....as @Corrinald pointed out....the backpack in fighter mode seems to sit too high and those tab are too "long"... As you can see from version 1....that area sits flush and was never an issue in terms of the tabs holding that area securely....here is a pic of the V1 VF-1S.... I have a bad feeling that the position of the "hole" on the backpack was molded in a different spot with this most recent release... Here is the same area on the VF-1J... I think the problem is with the backpack hole's position...I think the leg tabs are in the same position, just longer for some reason on the v 2.x.....of course, it could be mistransformation on my part, so I want to double check when I get a chance....if there is nothing that can make the tail section flush with the legs like in v 1 and v 2.0....then KC has some explaining to do... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
no3Ljm Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 So it's the locking tabs for the backpack. Thanks @jvmacross @Wolf-1! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvmacross Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 1 minute ago, no3Ljm said: So it's the locking tabs for the backpack. Thanks @jvmacross @Wolf-1! Yep....and there is something definitely wrong...thought it was just mine... As I mentioned...even if you were to shorten the tabs enough so they are no longer visible....the position in which they tab into the backpack seems too low....which does not allow it the flush appearance as shown in the V1 and V 2.0... If anyone has the time and you own a V1 or V2 and a V 2.x....it would be great to snap a pic to compare where the backpack hole is positioned in each version... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvmacross Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 (edited) So looks like the tabs on the legs are the problem... V2.x.... V1.... V2... The new mold at least for the legs...seems to have placed the tabs right on the edge of the back of the leg.... In V1 and V2...the tab is more towards the center of the leg.... The hole in the backpack is the same across all versions.... The new location of the leg tabs forces the backpack to sit higher in fighter mode, instead of flush as in V1 and V2.0.... Basing this on my older pics...will confirm once I have a chance to look at the valks up close.... Edited February 8, 2022 by jvmacross Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvmacross Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 (edited) Two steps forward...one giant leap backwards.... I have had a chance to examine my V1, V2, and V2.x....unfortunately, it seems that KC made a change to their leg mold that has had a drastic effect to fighter mode... Here you can see the difference between a V2.x VF-1A "Ben" leg tab vs the leg tab on a V2.0 VF-1J.... For whatever reason....the tab position was moved further towards the edge of the rear of the leg...the consequence of this raises the height of the backpack when in fighter mode.....the backback actually did not receive any modification and thus it is unchanged between the V1, V2 and V2.x.... Here are some additional pics that support this "error" as being the cause for the change to the profile of the V2.x VF-1's profile in fighter mode... V2.0 leg tab position (Left leg).... Leg tab position for the V2.x (Left leg).... V2.0 leg tab position (Right leg).... V2.x leg tab position (Right leg).... Once transformed to fighter mode...this is how close the tabs are to the arms tucked underneath on a V2.0.... ....This is how apart they are on a V2.x once transformed into fighter mode....also note that on the V2.x, the tab is a bit longer, which could have been a good thing if they had been molded into the correct position.... Positioning of the backpack once extended on a V2.0..... Positioning of the backpack on the V2.x....the tab position yields a backpack that sits much higher than it should....note how the detail on the backpack is fully visible on the V2.x, but only "half" visible on the V2.0 (same with the V1)... Fighter mode profile for V2.0... Fighter mode profile for V2.x.... Finally, just as further proof that the leg tab position has been changed on the V2.x....here is the position of the leg tab on the original V1..... I considered swapping the legs from the V1 VF-1S Fokker, but they are so floppy that it would just irritate me further.... I will be sending KitzConcept my info. Their customer service has been great so far and at this point the only fix I would want would be for them to re-tool the legs, go back to the original V1/V2.0 leg...at least for that part....or offer a replacement leg once they have corrected the issue.....I will post their response as soon as I have it.... Edited February 9, 2022 by jvmacross Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tekering Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 Fabulous pictures, @jvmacross! I hope your observations don't fall on deaf ears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvmacross Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 Well, what sets KC apart from all other purveyors of Macross is there amazing customer service....this is pretty bad and it will really push their willingness to make things right to the limits...but they have not dissapointed me yet, in terms of correcting issues.... After looking at the pics I posted...I was thinking that maybe, at least for the VF‐1S Fokker, that I could unscrew that side of the leg with the crappy new tab and replace it with the part from my Fokker V1....hmmmm? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenius Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 Huh, it seems like they genuinely wanted the backpack to sit up higher. If they wanted the backpack to sit up higher, that also explains why the pegs are so big as they'd have to reach farther to nest. Maybe they intended to modify the backpack mold to move the slot higher. The good news is, it seems like modifying the backpack part would be an easy fix for KC to implement later if this is not what they intended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jodokast Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 Stumbled on this yesterday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvmacross Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 9 minutes ago, jenius said: Huh, it seems like they genuinely wanted the backpack to sit up higher. If they wanted the backpack to sit up higher, that also explains why the pegs are so big as they'd have to reach farther to nest. Maybe they intended to modify the backpack mold to move the slot higher. No idea....but it seems that making the backpack sit higher takes it further away from the way it is depicted in the lineart....if anything, the only real tweaks it needed were to slim down and stretch out the intakes, especially the profile of them and find a way to tuck the head further into the underside when in fighter mode....we'll find out what happened soon enough... Still, seems like a bad decision to have released it with a modification that actually ruins something that actually was not deficient on earlier releases....did they really think no one would have noticed? LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sanity is Optional Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 Honestly, the old version the legs were pointed upwards, which looked a bit odd. They may have done this to have the legs sit more horizontal compared to the backpack/tail. But the downside is now they're too low compared to the backpack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKT Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 Quite a bummer to see the backpack on this new version to be raised by quite a bit. But now I'm looking across at the Bandai DX in my room, and Bandai's also have the backpack raised to about the same level. Yamcadia v2 backpack is somewhere between both in terms of height. It does look that much more jarring for KC, because they have just about the lowest backpack in their v1, therefore the most line art accurate in that section, to now probably the highest. I would insert some of the pics from @jenius website to illustrate, but somehow there appear to be lots of broken pic links today. Not sure if its my browser.. I'm thinking, will KC's higher backpack now allow for the arms to be raised higher, therefore allowing for more clearance for the gunpod with the landing gear down? All their previous versions have the gunpod dragging on the ground.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvmacross Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 2 minutes ago, MKT said: I'm thinking, will KC's higher backpack now allow for the arms to be raised higher, therefore allowing for more clearance for the gunpod with the landing gear down? All their previous versions have the gunpod dragging on the ground.. No....the arms are still in the same position as previous versions...the easy solution is just to make the landing gear a bit longer...plenty of room in the landing gear bays Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corrinald Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 (edited) @jvmacross please let us know what they say about it. I am trying to put the Super Parts on my 1A standard now. The arm parts are difficult to get on because the tan paint is so thick. Also worth noting that the new leg tabs interfere with placement of the Super Parts equipped arms. The tabs are too long and too high...maybe even a little bit too far forward. Edited February 9, 2022 by Corrinald Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvmacross Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 9 minutes ago, Corrinald said: @jvmacross please let us know what they say about it. I am trying to put the Super Parts on my 1A standard now. The arm parts are difficult to get on because the tan paint is so thick. Also worth noting that the new leg tabs interfere with placement of the Super Parts equipped arms. The tabs are too long and too high...maybe even a little bit too far forward. Yeah...when I took out my V1 Fokker I considered removing it's Fast Pack parts and dressing up one of the V2.x...It should not affect Gerwalk or Battroid...right? However, you bring up a good point....one of my PO's is for a Super VF-1S Hikaru....and as you pointed out....using the same Fast Pack parts (V1?) will be a problem for the V2.x in fighter mode... Incidentally, they had mentioned in a previous email that the factory that they had been using in the past had actually damaged their mold for the Fast Packs....I did not think much of it at the time, other than it being an opportunity to make some tweaks to them and releasing them as V2.0 Fast Packs... Just going to wait and see what they say...but imo they really should not move ahead with further batches of these before fixing the issue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corrinald Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 An updated version of the Fast Packs would definitely be nice. Maybe raise the main boosters a little bit and bring them closer together. Would also be great if the light switches were easily accessible. Curious to see what they say about everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corrinald Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 Issues aside, not too shabby looking! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenius Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 3 hours ago, MKT said: I would insert some of the pics from @jenius website to illustrate, but somehow there appear to be lots of broken pic links today. Not sure if its my browser.. Which pics were you trying to open? Things seem to be working fine for me but it's hard to tell if it's just because things are cached. You can see in this pic that the big issue in fighter mode was the gargantuan intake which we know is because of the emphasis on other modes and articulation. The minor geometry issue that was causing fighter mode to look like it would naturally ascend (nose pointed up if thrusters were horizontal) is so minor it's barely noticeable. Here you can see that the original mold also did very well: Of course, when I update the review I'll do a V1.0 to 2.1 comparison of the VF-1S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKT Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 36 minutes ago, jenius said: Which pics were you trying to open? Things seem to be working fine for me but it's hard to tell if it's just because things are cached. Responded in other tread: https://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/topic/49791-anymooncom/?do=findComment&comment=1611544 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvmacross Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 (edited) 8 hours ago, jenius said: Which pics were you trying to open? Things seem to be working fine for me but it's hard to tell if it's just because things are cached. You can see in this pic that the big issue in fighter mode was the gargantuan intake which we know is because of the emphasis on other modes and articulation. The minor geometry issue that was causing fighter mode to look like it would naturally ascend (nose pointed up if thrusters were horizontal) is so minor it's barely noticeable. Here you can see that the original mold also did very well: Of course, when I update the review I'll do a V1.0 to 2.1 comparison of the VF-1S. The biggest takeaway from the profile pics I posted and the ones you posted is that in none of these representations does any part of the backpack become visible when transformed into fighter mode.... In terms of the toys, I think most would agree that the Yamato/Arcadia and Bandai DX VF-1's are the benchmark for lineart accuracy....with that said, the KC at least had that going for it on the rear of their VF-1... I know I have told them before and now and I am sure other customers have told them that their biggest opportunities for improvement were the tabs and how they need to hold everything firmly, the re-design of their intakes, and to re-design the ability for the head unit in their VF-1 to tuck further into the body of the VF-1 when in fighter mode... Unfortunately, KC has responded and have doubled down on their belief that the alignment of their VF-1 was off and that the problem was where the backpack was sitting in fighter mode....they said that they felt that the legs in fighter mode had too much of an upward angle, while this may be technically correct, their solution simply overcompensated and to be honest, the angled position of their VF-1's legs really did not change much...as you had stated, the issue was barely noticeable They have not offered any kind of solution other than to wait and see what feedback they receive from other customers....so if you think the change has taken their design backwards, now would be the time to make your view known to them.....if not, the design change will stay for all upcoming releases... They also admitted that the changes to the tabs will have an impact on the mounting of the Fast Packs, which at this point is just the attachment points for the arm fast pack parts to the legs.....they fit very poorly and also now have an extreme angle to them that also affects the position of the gunpod when mounted between the arms....BTW, just remembered, the other design tweak they should do is to elongate the landing gear just enough to provide adequate clearance for the gunpod when mounted in fighter mode....that should not be that difficult to accomplish.... As for me, I will keep what I have, but will be considering whether or not to cancel my Super VF-1S Hikaru PO. If the changes are not reversed or somehow improved, I think I may need to pass on future releases as well.... Of course, there is always the possibility for a mod, which would remove the current tab and replace it with another one in the original position found in the V1 and V2.....but not sure if it is worth it, as two of the other modes are just fine.... Edited February 9, 2022 by jvmacross Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKT Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 I was slowly getting hyped up for these newest version of KC VF-1s as they were being posted up for PO/sale over the past few weeks... I thought the paint and panel lines were the main thing going for it, and it would be a nice line to collect with their Regult and the upcoming announced destroids. But so far, I only managed to PO v2 Roy's VF-1S, and I think it will stay that way for now because I recall ThreeZero are making their own 1/72 VF-1 too.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.