DX Chogokin VF-17S

[Chronocidal]

6 hours ago, PointBlankSniper said:

The thing is, I don't think these toys have much of a skeleton to speak of. A lot of mechanism and structure is already molded into the underside of the outer shells. They do have some separate pieces of internal braces, tracks, ratchets etc, but even those must be tabbed in or glued to the outer shell, so they mostly have to be new parts to conform to the new shell. And those really only make up a minor fraction of the total parts, compared to the externally visible parts, including exposed undersides, insides, and extensions etc. Even identical looking parts to the old ones need to be new parts accomodate the changes caused by the other new parts. Otherwise, the parts are just hollow appendages.

Take for example, the VF-19's chest. The lack of chest cannons means that whole shell needs to be a new piece just to fill the hole, despite having identical details to the YF. All the associated swinging and sliding mechanism would then be deleted for the new chest because they serve no purpose. Then theres the head change, and the way the head needs to conceal without the old shields fancy features, you basically have nothing left of the old torso, other than the spine thrusters and the pilot egress hatch.

Sure they save on a lot of guess work with transformation, but they need to mostly make new parts nonetheless, especially when everything from hips down/backward of intakes were intended to look different regardless of proportions.

I'm not talking of a skeleton in the physical sense, since no, these toys don't have those, and they don't share many physically molded or machined parts, because the individual connections and shapes are different.

I'm talking about the idea that if you took an x-ray of the figure, and drew a connecting stick figure diagram of all of the major transformation and mobility joints inside the valk, you would have very similar results for both.  The "skin" of the valk is where all of the unique features would lie, and that's where all of the parts you're talking about would attach.

This is really rough, but for a better diagram, I'd need to draw all of the essential connecting joints of one of the actual figures, because animation is funky, but imagine this skeleton connecting all of the major transforming components.  You draw connecting lines between linked parts to come up with something that just shows the relations between them, and where they connect.

Maybe a better way to explain it is actually comparing it to how skeletons work for game character animations.  You have an invisible skeleton that exists to link the essential moving parts of a character, and that skeleton may not change, while the actual characters can be wildly different.  Long video here, but it shows a pretty clear example of what I'm talking about.

The YF-19 and VF-19 are similar enough to share that same basic connecting skeleton stick figure.  They're basically the same aircraft with different exterior panels.

You can't really do that with the VF-17 and VF-171, since the proportions and transformation are so different.  Some of that comes down to the exterior body panels and details of the 17 just being much bulkier, but it also means the locations of the key transformation joints have to be adjusted significantly to accommodate those bigger components.  Bandai also added extra joints and steps to the transformation compared with the Yamato VF-17, so the skeleton of that transformation stick figure is a lot more complicated.

Anyhow, sorry to drag the thread off on this weird tangent, but it's actually kind of fascinating to see the differences between the 17 and 171 when you dig into the structural relationships, and how the two toys were approached so differently.

Edited September 26 by Chronocidal

[PointBlankSniper]

2 hours ago, Chronocidal said:

 

 

I know what you are tolking about. I even acknowledged that it saves them work from coming up with transformation articulation.

But my original comment was very much replying to this comment that was specifically about toy production and not about design work.

Quote

 

M7 is pretty much looks like a Redeco line up. TF generation 2 toys.

Minor alterations to the 19 to make a fire valk.

and the laziest Redeco, slap on a new head and some arms on a 171.

So I'm just pointing out that the 19Kai can't be made with "minor alterations". Unless you guys consider building a majority of new plastic injection molds to be a minority of the work in manufacturing the toy, then I have nothing left to debate on the 19.

[PointBlankSniper]

 

7 hours ago, kajnrig said:

Isn't the 171 explicitly an almost ground-up redesign that only superficially resembles the 17 and is canonically smaller and slimmer? Like the real world Hornet to Super Hornet but in reverse.

Well, I just watched the morita guy's deep dive into VF-17 design lore, literally the day before this toy was announced. Unless that channel is all fanfic and lies, or I'm tripping out, the lore is supposedly contrary to what you and others are saying.

IIRC, the lore goes that, the nose/cockpit was changed on the 171 to favor avionics because they no longer needed conventional passive stealth geometry after VF-19 and 22 introduced active fold stealth. Then the EX changed it some more to accomodate EX gear tech that LAI backported from the VF-25. The elbow guns weren't needed because the gunpod became external. The gunpod became external because because its storage compartment got cannibalized by retrofitting it with the larger and more powerful VF-19's engines inside the same old legs. But it was fine to move the gunpod outside because once again, stealth geometry was no longer needed.

None of this suggests going from a 3 storey gargantuan stealth bomber to a modest 1 storey playground replica of it. Especially not with the engine swap going in the opposite direction. That's why I don't understand why they are considered vastly different sized aircrafts with no parts commonality around here.

[treatment]

4 hours ago, 505thAirborne said:

By recycling the parts/molds of the 171 to use with this VF-17 release, that makes it way more cost-effective vs a team to design & engineer a completely new mold like a properly proportioned VF-17 or a VF-11B/C.

Frankly, I would be way more excited to see a DX VF-2SS+SAP or an HMR VF-2JA, but that's just me. 

I dunno if "cost-effective" is the term to use with this Bandai decision of badly cosplaying a DX-171 mould into a DX-17.

I reckon the more cost-effective and more common-sense thing for Bandai to rather do is to re-paint DX DYRL-1A Kaki into DX DYRL-1A Hikaru or DX DYRL-1A Max.

oh, well...

 

[Chronocidal]

13 minutes ago, PointBlankSniper said:

None of this suggests going from a 3 storey gargantuan stealth bomber to a modest 1 storey playground replica of it. Especially not with the engine swap going in the opposite direction. That's why I don't understand why they are considered vastly different sized aircrafts with no parts commonality around here.

Basically, you're up against a wall of trying to reconcile the fact that the two look nothing alike in their respective series.  They can draft up any harebrained lore explanation they like, it doesn't change what we see on screen with our own eyes.

Reality is just that the aesthetics of the two series are incompatible.  Writing it into the story doesn't change that for the viewers.

If Bandai really was intent on retconning the size of the original, they shouldn't have renamed it in the first place, because it drew a dividing line between the designs, marking them as distinct craft. 

Trying to backpedal on that retcon now is a losing battle, and one of the major issues is just that the blended aesthetic is so schizophrenic.  Doing a selective resize of the components to try and pass the 171 off as an original VF-17 just gives us a misshapen caricature like the doodle in the previous page, because the separate components are now all out of proportion with each other, and it fails miserably at actually giving the same aesthetic as the original in M7.

Edited September 26 by Chronocidal

[PointBlankSniper]

1 minute ago, Chronocidal said:

Basically, you're up against a wall of trying to reconcile the fact that the two look nothing alike in their respective series.  They can draft up any harebrained lore explanation they like, it doesn't change what we see on screen with our own eyes.

Reality is just that the aesthetics of the two series are incompatible.  Writing it into the story doesn't change that for the viewers.

Well, it's not me up against the wall since I'm not the one trying to reconcile it. I've stated more than once that I don't agree with them doing things that way.

I'm just pointing out their rationale, what they've done with it, and just the fact that they do have such a rationale on their cards to play.

[jenius]

In a way, we're getting the best of both worlds from an aesthetic protective. If you want something more like the show, track down the Yamato. If you want a more "realistic" approach, get the DX. If you were let down by the Yamato and want something like it but better, tweet Arcadia... But I think it sold like a turd for Yamato so don't hold your breath. 

[Chronocidal]

You forgot the third option...

You could also track down the old Bandai 1/65, because it's probably much cheaper.

I don't know if I can call the DX a "realistic" approach though, the weird shrinking/resizing/rearranging of the components just makes the entire torso look like it has no substance to even connect the legs to.  I think that's more impactful than the skinny legs, really, since I feel like they managed to make the legs look decent on the 171.  Reducing down the nose to the older style stub really feels like it breaks the design of everything below the chest, and the legs are just dangling, attached to nothing at all, because the nose section isn't there to give them something to connect to.

It's just weird trying to blend the two.

Edited September 26 by Chronocidal

[505thAirborne]

2 hours ago, treatment said:

 

I reckon the more cost-effective and more common-sense thing for Bandai to rather do is to re-paint DX DYRL-1A Kaki into DX DYRL-1A Hikaru or DX DYRL-1A Max.

oh, well...

 

[Scyla]

19 hours ago, jenius said:

In a way, we're getting the best of both worlds from an aesthetic protective. If you want something more like the show, track down the Yamato. If you want a more "realistic" approach, get the DX. If you were let down by the Yamato and want something like it but better, tweet Arcadia... But I think it sold like a turd for Yamato so don't hold your breath. 

As I said earlier, I want a slim VF-17 but this is just wrong. It would be the same if Bandai released the VF-19Kai by painting the YF-19 red and gave it a different head turret.

It also doesn’t help that Frontier had a totally different animation style compared to 7. Because the Valkyries in Frontier were computer generated they had a lot more details than the ones in 7 ever did.

Things like the details on the intakes, the additional surface detail on the back of the plane. Where do the micro missile launchers in the legs come from, where is the opening for the gunpod in the legs?

The problem is that this is not realistic VF-17, it is a VF-171 cosplaying as a VF-17. I really want to like this, because it has all the markings Yamato omitted (and I had to apply myself) and it is a sleek fighter mode but I can’t.

I think Bandai could have made something really cool, even reusing the "skeleton" (i.e. same transformation design, same joint engineering, same internal parts) of the VF-171 (which I don’t hate for the record).

Bandai showed with the VF-19Kai that they can do it but this is just halfhearted.

Maybe Bandai didn’t want to invest in such an extensive re-shell because they knew how bad the Yamato had sold and don’t want to commit to that.

Poor Gamlin, just can’t get a leg up against Basara.

[nightmareB4macross]

What this release feels like.

Edited September 27 by nightmareB4macross
Borrowed Sky Angels artwork.

[davidwhangchoi]

On 9/25/2025 at 9:55 PM, PointBlankSniper said:

To put it differently, if 171 was drawn in M7 style, it would be just as chonky as 17. 

I haven't looked up the 171 lore so i don't have a dispute with you there,

but comparing the CG valks found in Frontier/Delta vs. M7, I'm going to call B.S. on this specific point. 

the VF-1 in Frontier and Delta that is done in CG looks exactly the same vs. M7,  specially, the legs of the valk between Frontier, Delta and M7 are drawn identically.

If that's the case in point I would think the vf-1 would be more chonky or see a difference between M7 and the later CG models.

for reference:

• M7 Ep. 14
• MacF Ep.1 
• Delta Ep.3 

  

[jenius]

5 hours ago, Scyla said:

As I said earlier, I want a slim VF-17 but this is just wrong. It would be the same if Bandai released the VF-19Kai by painting the YF-19 red and gave it a different head turret.

It also doesn’t help that Frontier had a totally different animation style compared to 7. Because the Valkyries in Frontier were computer generated they had a lot more details than the ones in 7 ever did.

Things like the details on the intakes, the additional surface detail on the back of the plane. Where do the micro missile launchers in the legs come from, where is the opening for the gunpod in the legs?

The problem is that this is not realistic VF-17, it is a VF-171 cosplaying as a VF-17. I really want to like this, because it has all the markings Yamato omitted (and I had to apply myself) and it is a sleek fighter mode but I can’t.

I think Bandai could have made something really cool, even reusing the "skeleton" (i.e. same transformation design, same joint engineering, same internal parts) of the VF-171 (which I don’t hate for the record).

Bandai showed with the VF-19Kai that they can do it but this is just halfhearted.

Maybe Bandai didn’t want to invest in such an extensive re-shell because they knew how bad the Yamato had sold and don’t want to commit to that.

Poor Gamlin, just can’t get a leg up against Basara.

Valid points. If Bandai insisted on reusing the 171, and I'm sure we discussed this 15 years ago when the 171 debuted, they should at least get all the different details of the 17 right. Had they started with the 1/65, we could have had one where the gun actually tucked into the leg! Unfortunately, I don't think the 17 has a huge following so half-hearted was as much as Bandai was willing to invest. 

[nightmareB4macross]

If Bandai was capable of makes the legs thicker on the YF-21. Why wouldn’t they have just reengineered the legs on VF-17?

I get the whole “save money” mantra but this is pure laziness.

When have we not purchased high end items? This is Macross, buying expensive toys and related items is all we do. Saving money is not an option. Put out something great…we will buy it without a second thought.

C’mon Bandai, you can do a WHOLE LOT BETTER.

[treatment]

16 minutes ago, nightmareB4macross said:

If Bandai was capable of makes the legs thicker on the YF-21. Why wouldn’t they have just reengineered the legs on VF-17?

I get the whole “save money” mantra but this is pure laziness.

When have we not purchased high end items? This is Macross, buying expensive toys and related items is all we do. Saving money is not an option. Put out something great…we will buy it without a second thought.

C’mon Bandai, you can do a WHOLE LOT BETTER.

Me thinks Bandai is quite capable of such.

Unfortunately, they're just actively and deliberately not willing to do so.

 

 

[nightmareB4macross]

18 minutes ago, treatment said:

Me thinks Bandai is quite capable of such.

Unfortunately, they're just actively and deliberately not willing to do so.

 

 

It could possibly be that the engineers are younger and appreciate an anorexic aesthetic versus or desire of a THICC Valkyrie.

Just a thought.

[Chronocidal]

As fun as it is to paint them as the villain for all sorts of reasons, I think it just all comes down to them doing everything in their power to min-max their profit margins.

If they can make a quick-turn reboxing of the 171 with minimal new parts molding, and pass it off as the companion to their Fire Valk?  You bet they're going to do everything they can to minimize the effort and expense involved.

I frankly would have rather had straight repaints of the 171, but it is what it is, and if Bandai can be trusted to do one thing, it's that they'll never backtrack or admit their mistakes or bad decisions, no matter how obvious or stupid.  

[Duymon]

I think I'll nab one just because it's a 17 and I love my 17 / 171's, just sad it's a franken valk between the two instead of a completely new toy.

I still want the CF Brown 171's from delta

[Chronocidal]

For all they get transformed, I wound up picking up a few of the 1/72 kits.  Can leave the posable ones in battroid, and display the fighters in flight without any worries about the legs dropping off.  

I'll definitely spring for a Millia if they make it, but we'll see how the first one sells.  If it starts getting dumped into the bargain bin, I'll probably grab one on amazon in case it just turns into a one-and-done.

Edited September 28 by Chronocidal

[PsYcHoDyNaMiX]

OH OH OH, I know what Bandai is going to do... they'll make correct thick leg fast pack add-ons available through PBJP! LOL... 🤣🙄

[PointBlankSniper]

2 hours ago, davidwhangchoi said:

I haven't looked up the 171 lore so i don't have a dispute with you there,

but comparing the CG valks found in Frontier/Delta vs. M7, I'm going to call B.S. on this specific point. 

the VF-1 in Frontier and Delta that is done in CG looks exactly the same vs. M7,  specially, the legs of the valk between Frontier, Delta and M7 are drawn identically.

If that's the case in point I would think the vf-1 would be more chonky or see a difference between M7 and the later CG models.

for reference:

• M7 Ep. 14
• MacF Ep.1 
• Delta Ep.3 

  

I don't wanna check all the eps, but I'lll take your word for it. I'm assuming those didn't transform into battroid, which makes it easy for them to not care about proportions in CG. Dropping legs for gerwalk that might have happened in Delta did is not an issue. I've caught satellite straight up clipping, morphing, and camera blocking during transformation in the recent red ranger isekai anime with the CG megazord. It goes to show that CG doesn't mean much for correct proportions with full transformationa and articulation when it's still in animation.

It's like how there's a VF-22 in delta, but everyone knows that thing can't transform in CG with the canonical designs. If it did, it would morph just as much as it was hand drawn.  I'm even requested a check on the in game models in another thread. Even the games have to cheat and clip the shoulders inside the belly plate and make invisible the bits sticking out, and then have the whole assembly detached and fly out magically to reach the intake sockets while the yellow bits just disappear. CG doesn't mean it's a correct and realistically working depiction.

What's at hand here is not a matter of how it's depicted in animation. It's that Kawamori or some supplementary magazine or some other product blurb invented some lore and set the stage for Bandai to be lazy here.

[PointBlankSniper]

12 minutes ago, PsYcHoDyNaMiX said:

OH OH OH, I know what Bandai is going to do... they'll make correct thick leg fast pack add-ons available through PBJP! LOL... 🤣🙄

I'd honestly like to see them try. It would be a technical marvel, starting with crazy instructions to teach the customer to detach the old waist/lower fuselage, because I don't see fat legs fitting without dropping the hip pivot to stay centered with their thickness.

TBF, the leg packs might already work, with some ugly bracing using the armor pack's plugs to hang the pack up against the wing, or they invent an external layer of armor as the brace.

Wait, they could just make the original thick legs as the armor, and that armor could have the correct connection to the leg packs. It might actually work. Free idea for bandai. Just come preassembled with armor in the shape of the anime accurate legs, and pretend the intake/thigh gap from wearing armor isn't there, or cover it with extended armor. Nobody will know the 171's legs are inside 😁. I'm sure bandai won't have the balls to do it, but maybe someone with a 3D printer can figure it out

The real magic is actually with the backpack cannons that come with the pack, because the cockroach shell has no connection slots and can't be latched on with hooks around the edges because they have to leave clearance for the arms and wings on all sides. Those will need double sided tape, or tossing out and replacing the top half of the plane.

[PsYcHoDyNaMiX]

7 minutes ago, PointBlankSniper said:

I'd honestly like to see them try. It would be a technical marvel, starting with crazy instructions to teach the customer to detach the old waist/lower fuselage, because I don't see fat legs fitting without dropping the hip pivot to stay centered with their thickness.

TBF, the leg packs might already work, with some ugly bracing using the armor pack's plugs to hang the pack up against the wing, or they invent an external layer of armor as the brace.

Wait, they could just make the original thick legs as the armor, and that armor could have the correct connection to the leg packs. It might actually work. Free idea for bandai. Just come preassembled with armor in the shape of the anime accurate legs, and pretend the intake/thigh gap from wearing armor isn't there, or cover it with extended armor. Nobody will know the 171's legs are inside 😁. I'm sure bandai won't have the balls to do it, but maybe someone with a 3D printer can figure it out

The real magic is actually with the backpack cannons that come with the pack, because the cockroach shell has no connection slots and can't be latched on with hooks around the edges because they have to leave clearance for the arms and wings on all sides. Those will need double sided tape, or tossing out and replacing the top half of the plane.

Yea... a 3d printer and also a scanner (would help). I have the first release 171EX and the re-issue from a few years ago, but idk if I want to put the leg work in for something Bandai is probably going to or already has lined up. 

Yup not sure about the backpack cannons either, but Bandai can also change that part (the cockroach shell) of the mold up to include connection slots with minimal effort. That's a lot less work that modeling a part up from scratch (ie. the thick legs).

I only modeled up a VF22S conversion because I fanboyed hard, lol.

[recon]

Looking back at the promo shots. Still cant get over how skinny the VF-17 is as compared to the VF-19 Fire Valkyrie

Really hope that this is a mock up and bandai will do some changes to beef up the legs of the VF-17S

[Mog]

4 hours ago, Chronocidal said:

. . . and if Bandai can be trusted to do one thing, it's that they'll never backtrack or admit their mistakes or bad decisions, no matter how obvious or stupid.  

Hopefully, Bandai doubles down on that "mistake" prototype they showed years ago and releases that TV-Style SDF-1.

Maybe even compound the bad decisions by adding a Macross city in the legs and adding magnets and solid locking mechanisms for the main guns.

That would sure show us!!!!111!11!!!!!1!!1!!

[davidwhangchoi]

3 hours ago, PointBlankSniper said:

What's at hand here is not a matter of how it's depicted in animation. It's that Kawamori or some supplementary magazine or some other product blurb invented some lore and set the stage for Bandai to be lazy here.

we're digressing, the whole point is what it looks like in the anime. 

 I was responding just to one point of your comment to Chronocidal.

I agree with some of your points but I wanted to debunk just one specific point.

You brought up a point of the 171 and 17 have the same leg sizes and it's the CG  vs. M7 art style the reason the proportions look different.  I was responding that it isn't the reason the 171 looks thinner than the vf-17 by comparison of a CG VF-1 compared with M7 and SDF-1 TV/DYRL Macross depicts the VF-1 consistently, CG or not. Kawamori at the helm of all these shows he's going to make sure the VF-1 are proportionately the same CG or not. So the 171 being done in CG is not a great reason for the difference in leg size between the 171 and 17. 

 

 if you can link me to the source of the material that says the 171 and 17 legs are identical in size, I'd appreciate it. (i'd like to read up and crappy General Galaxy designs)

but yes, I agree with you, Bandai sucks with this one.   

[pengbuzz]

1 hour ago, recon said:

Looking back at the promo shots. Still cant get over how skinny the VF-17 is as compared to the VF-19 Fire Valkyrie

Really hope that this is a mock up and bandai will do some changes to beef up the legs of the VF-17S

Right? The VF-17 is supposed to be a heavy battroid. Looks like Gamlin skipped leg day at the gym...

[PointBlankSniper]

13 hours ago, davidwhangchoi said:

 if you can link me to the source of the material that says the 171 and 17 legs are identical in size, I'd appreciate it. (i'd like to read up and crappy General Galaxy designs) 

Think it was this one. He credited master file and some other publication.

 

[nightmareB4macross]

17 hours ago, pengbuzz said:

Right? The VF-17 is supposed to be a heavy battroid. Looks like Gamlin skipped leg day at the gym...

Yes.

[nightmareB4macross]

Looks like Spiritia got sucked out of it..

[davidwhangchoi]

5 hours ago, PointBlankSniper said:

Think it was this one. He credited master file and some other publication.

 

Thanks @PointBlankSniper, really appreciate the link. i remember watching this youtube channel and may have posted another one of the channels video on here in the past.

[davidwhangchoi]

@PointBlankSniper @Chronocidal

Images of the VF-17 and VF-171 from the same video that claims the legs are the same.  I can't understand Japanese so you'll have to re-confirm if you can understand native Japanese  or if it's possible it was misunderstood (as i can't confirm it one way or the other with the link you provided).

Anyhow, the scale comparison in the video displays the 17 and 171 vall side by side and i found a video just for the 17 and screen grabbed further images.
 

[Marcion]

Bandai will just released it and after a few years release renewal one what you guys wanted. Bandai is lazy to be correcting expensive DX toy Compare to model kit they just do it right.

[Graham]

For further comparison of the VF-17S vs the VF-171, here's the 'detall-up' VF-17 lineart showing full panel lines and other details.

IIRC, these pics were first seen in the "Macross 7 Animation Materials" book, published in 1995. 

Credit to macross2.net for the pic, saves me having to scan the page from my book. 😅

Interestingly, despite their simplified transformation and limited articulation, the old Bandai 1/65 scale VF-17D/S toys from the 90s actually feature most of the panel lines from the detail-up lineart.

There is so much detail difference and proportional difference between the VF-17 and the VF-171. You just cannot use VF-171 legs and most other parts of a VF-171 and call it a VF-17......sigh.

Being a huge VF-17 fan, the more I look at the Bandai DX photos, the more depressed I get.

[Graham]

At a bare minimum I hope Bandai may consider the folloing changes before releasing the 1/60 DX VF-17S, to make it slightly more acceptable:

1. Shoulder armour resculpted to add the VF-17's characteristic twin micro missile launchers, which were priminantly featured in the anime
2. Complete leg resulpt to get rid of the VF-171's leg micro missile launchers, add the VF-17's gunpod port, make the legs slightly more chonky and add correct panel lines.
3. Make the crotch piece in Battroid mode angle straight down instead of forward.
4. Beef up the arms as much as possible.
5. Remove the hard points from the wings (VF-17 never used external hard points).

The above is probably just wishful thinking and may not even be possible.

To be honest, being a huge VF-17 fan I'd prefer a clean sheet of paper design, rather than them basing it on the VF-171 toy, but I'm enough of a realist to know that is not likely to happen, given the VF-17 is not a fan favourite design.

Hopefully one day we get a better VF-17 sculpt in from either the HMR line or the HG Shortcut Change model kit line.