Sixth Scale Action Figure News, Reviews, & Discussion. Collect, Kitbash, Customize. All Brands, All Eras, All Genres.
WWII, Modern, Sci-Fi, Fantasy, etc. Anything directly related to 1/6th scale action figure collecting. |
|
|
 |
OSW Member
|
? |
Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: North Borneo, Land of the Pygmy Pakaderm
Posts: 1,296
|
|
|
KP02A body review, & comparison with HT's (Noland/BarneyRoss/Whiplash) body var.
KP02A body review, and side-by-side comparison with HT's (Noland/Barney Ross/Whiplash) body variant.Some have requested a direct comparison between the 2. Quote: |
Originally Posted by Kaustic Plastik
I really hope to have your feedbacks, suggestions, critics!!
|
Feedbacks, Suggestions and Critiques... This would be all three. Quote: |
Originally Posted by Kaustic Plastik
It's between the model used in Expendables and T-800
|
More of the former by more ways than one.Review
1. As suspected by myself and few others, KPA02 is "base on" HT Barney Ross/Whiplash body. A more accurate description is: KP used the base HT body and:
a) Adding sculpt to the exterior ot the torso, abs, arms and legs so that it varies from HT's.
b) The pelvis shape (exterior/function) remains mostly unchanged except for the slight shift of the screw holes.
c) The slight changes to shoulder rotation pin that (inadvertently) makes the Arms modular (you can pop it out of the socket).
d) The internals are almost 100% "recast" based on HT's body. Hence, good replacement/swappable parts with HT's bodies.
e) The whole body from the hips/pelvic region to the top of tip of the neck is the same length as the HT's, the upper legs are longer by approx 0.5 cm, while lower legs would be the same/similar to the extended lower legs (together with extended pegs option too) of HT variants, with standard TT lower legs it's approx 1.7cm longer. Proportionally, KP's legs seems too long. The Good/Improvements:
1. Materials used are of good (I'd put it: preferred) quality. It gives some flexing while materials used by HT are more rigid which tends to break.
2. Thick PVC material used for the upper torso (which brings a weakness). HT's very thin by comparison. The Bad/Weakness:
1. The far too thick PVC of the upper torso around the rib area, making it like fat build-up in odd places.
2. The knees bent has far too sharp angles jutting out.
3. The base of the neck is rather loose, so adjustment through a screw at the back would alleviate this, but you can't (which will be discuss in "the ugly").
4. Because of the pin design of the shoulders, it would be more prone to be loose, swinging back and forth over- a-time-course/frequent posing. The Ugly:
1) The claims as a complete in-house KP 3D CAD design.
2) Drill out (Stripping) the "philips" screw head of the 3 screws holding the internal torso together, so no typical screw driver can "expose" further internals. Well, it took me all of 5 minutes dremel, to get the screw to be fully functioning again, I do appreciate a good mental challenge/obstacle. The QUESTION: Why create such an inconvenience? (I'll leave it at that) Personal opinions:
KP did recreate a good alternative body (or duplicate body) with some weaknesses and some improvements. Being a retail product this is bound to be dissected to its basic components and be exposed for what it is. I personally disagree with the claims made. I would call a square, a square. Be it HT or any other companies, they would expect their products to be dissected with appropriate merits/credits to novelty of design. Note on pics, I've used a compact wide angle camera so there will be some perspective distortion.... I could always break out my DSLR with macro-lens
Pictures: Left (KP02A): Right (Noland's body) Pelvis:
Abdomen:
Upper Torso:
Odd sharp knees:
Arms/shoulder joint:
 Proof on concept. The interchangeable parts of KP's and HT's bodies. Note, because of slight difference in sizes you can't by default use Noland's hips and legs on KP02A's pelvis, a minor mod will be needed to do so (as seen, you'll have no problems doing the opposite). Right: Hybrid as indicated by the colour. KP's inner neck peg and Arms/Shoulders on Noland's inner & outer upper torso, connected to KP's abdomen which is in turn to Noland's Pelvic and again to KP's hips and legs: 
Odin's body: KP02A, (arms' obviously different) this is length/proportion comparison:
 Needless to say I disagree with the following comments (with proof), "and why the bias?" is all that I'll add.: Quote: |
Similar, yes, copy, hell no! Give the guy a break, he's just starting out and needs all the support he can get. We all have to start somewhere! CHEERS!
|
Quote: |
People seem to have serious issues of perception that I don't understand. If people can't tell the difference between the Iron Man Mark III and Mark IV designs even when side by side. I am not surprised that they can tell the difference between two similarly sized 1/6 scale human bodies. The Kaustic body is very different from any of the HT bodies in many ways. It's clearly a made-from-scratch body that uses some similar articulation.
|
Quote: |
I don't understand what you are getting at? Wouldn't you expect that 2 simalarily sized body builders to have similar proportions? Yes the side by side pics look similar. Similar in that that they are both muscular and have normal body parts. The design of the body though is vastly different. I don't know how much it cost to design a body but I guess it would be Thousands if not Tens of Thousands. I know if I had a company and spent that kind of money I would be offended if someone came along and said "but it's a recast of Hot Toys".
|
p.s. Take a product for what it is... alot of people do appreciate the availability and variation that KP bodies provide.
|
|
|
 |
Scratchbuilder
|
? |
Join Date: May 2004 Location: Victorville, CA. Yeh, the middle of no where.
Posts: 7,531
|
|
|
Re: KP02A body review, & comparison with HT's (Noland/BarneyRoss/Whiplash) body
Interesting review. The KP-02 is the HT clone or sorts. The one that is sold on eBay for 25.00 right>?
|
|
|
|
OSW Member
|
? |
Join Date: May 2009 Location: SEATTLE!
Posts: 607
|
|
|
Re: KP02A body review, & comparison with HT's (Noland/BarneyRoss/Whiplash) body
Really thorough review, that answers some questions people have had. Kinda imagine this thread might get a little ugly, but thanks for the time to do the review for sure.
|
|
|
|
1:6 Manufacturer
|
? |
Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Rome, Italy
Posts: 502
|
|
|
Re: KP02A body review, & comparison with HT's (Noland/BarneyRoss/Whiplash) body
Well mate, a good review for sure  , but because here you telling (in some way) that I'm a copycat of an other company and a liar too, I think I have to add something to your review.
I will take of course your critics in the proper consideration, and for sure this body can have a lot of improvements and some weakness (so some of your critics are very welcome).. But some of your points, are honestly NOT CORRECT (and I can add also that are unfair)a) Adding sculpt to the exterior of the torso, abs, arms and legs so that it varies from HT's.
How you can prove that? Did you see how our sculptor work? Did you see the material used for the sculpt? Do you have any kind of prove that we "added" something on a base of another company? Sorry to tell you, but this it's totally untrue and honestly unfair. But I will take thinking that not everybody can like me and what I do... So for sure you are not a fan of KP And this is ok for me. Our muscular parts are made on a 100% new cast of the body. And until you cannot REALLY prove your conjectures, I will take as was is: just your speculation.
I like also to add something, that on internet you can find the prove that what I'm saying it's true, and this proof are the sculpture used for this body, where you can see clearly that it's 100% new sculpt. As you can see from the pictures of the first prototype, that at the beginning a lot of mechanism (like shoulder mechanism) was not even added to the prototype, because is something that we added later on a 3D cad study of stability. b) The pelvis shape (exterior/function) remains mostly unchanged except for the slight shift of the screw holes.
If I have to copy something.. why change the placement of the screw holes? And didn't you noticed, (even if from the picture is clear) that the internal part is different, even the number of part used are not the same! Didn't is this clear enough from the pictures? Why spend time changing? Why change the screw hole places? And you know how is possible decided a placement for Screw hole? Studying a model with a 3d cad program. I decided to keep as much similar as possible some parts and function of the pelvis, to keep compatibility with Hot Toys bodies. It's not a secret (because I said too many time) that my target was to make something compatible with Hot Toys, to give customers possibility of change it and make something unique, shifting pieces, etc.etc. c) The slight changes to shoulder rotation pin that (inadvertently) makes the Arms modular (you can pop it out of the socket).
It's something we did intentionally. For the same reason I explained in the previous point. Give you possibility to change easily also the Torso, and interchange it with Hot Toys torso (and new torso as well, that we hope to produce soon) d) The internals are almost 100% "recast" based on HT's body. Hence, good replacement/swappable parts with HT's bodies.
Again this is not true. It's very clear from your pictures, that our internal parts are only COMPATIBLE with hot toys mechanism (except some parts that are universal compatible, so every company uses the same), similar but not identical. You call it "recast", I call it 3d CAD Cast study of material, stability and improvement of technology e) The whole body from the hips/pelvic region to the top of tip of the neck is the same length as the HT's, the upper legs are longer by approx 0.5 cm, while lower legs would be the same/similar to the extended lower legs (together with extended pegs option too) of HT variants, with standard TT lower legs it's approx 1.7cm longer. Proportionally, KP's legs seems too long.
So again you prove two things: 1) that it's not made adding sculpt on an HT body, so otherwise why have it of different length on legs? 2) That our model was carefully studied and designed on a 3D CAD program. How do you think a body can have this kind of stability, even if his weight its quite high? All this things are designed using 3D programs.. And you should know this very well Last thing. I don't think our leg are too long. You can find a lot of GREAT LOOKING bashes on internet based on our bodies.. and they look COOL, not deformed. So I hope it's quite clear now that: a) Our body it's not made adding a sculpt on some other products (different length, and different shape of muscular parts)
b) We never keep secret that we studied a way to make some mechanism as compatible as possible with HT. Why this shock you so much?
c) To arrive at this result, it's CLEAR that we used a 3D CAD design program. This kind of things are impossible to design without the help of a program like that. 
Last edited by Kaustic Plastik; Today at 10:14.
|
|
|
|
OSW Member
|
? |
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,373
|
|
|
Re: KP02A body review, & comparison with HT's (Noland/BarneyRoss/Whiplash) body
Thanks for the review BeastX. I JUST literally bought my first KP2 (already have 2x KP01) an hour ago and found your review. Now I don't have do my own review.Fabio, I say take it easy and relax. There are some things BeastX say is correct and the same for you. There is a mantra in the mass production industry - don't fix what is working. You did improve on the body, made possibly better but was inspired by original HT design. Lots of people do this and there is nothing wrong with that. But saying 100% original proof of concept including internal mechanism without a HT body for reference would be incorrect. It is obvious someone chosed to use what works from HT's body and make similar changes during production. The internal support structure is so close there is no denying this. Screw hole placements to justify originality? That is a weak support argument since you could have even made it snap and hold together without screws in the first place. Maybe BeastX's words were a bit harsh but that is his opinion as a consumer. I am also a consumer and still a fan of yours. But lets call an Ace an Ace and not a Jack.
|
|
|
 |
OSW Member
|
? |
Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Blenheim, ON Canada
Posts: 961
|
|
|
Re: KP02A body review, & comparison with HT's (Noland/BarneyRoss/Whiplash) body
I have been following the developement of KP's bodies very closely since the announcement of the KP01 (I've had 3 of the )!'s and enjoy them immensely) and I don't understand some of the animosity towards Fabio and what he is trying to do for us.
He designed and built a very nice and affordable muscle body when the only option available to us, as collectors, was paying a premium price for a Hot Toys muscle body parted out from a Royce, Dastan, Comedian, Wolverine set. And I really don't think that Hot Toys would have finally got around to offering the TTM 19 if not for KP showing how marketable a carded muscle body would be. Then we ask for a bigger body and he delivers and people start casting aspersions about recasting and copying HT's big bodies.
Really, is the HT mafia so pervasive that we can't be grateful when some other company comes along to give us what we asked for for so long?
Fabio has said repeatedly thaat he intentinally built in compatibility with the HT body to allow people to combine the bodies to come up with something new and original and the OP proved that this is possible. I
I guess I just don't understand what all the fuss is about. If you want a cool , affordable muscle body, buy this one. If you don't, don't. But constantly saying Fabio stole from HT, or is not telling the truth about how he designed the body is counterproductive and unfair.
I own a Ford and a Dodge and other than a slight variation in placement of the ignitions and gearshifts, they are pretty much exactly the same. I start them, put them in gear and steer them to where I want to go but no one I know runs around accusing Ford of ripping off Chrysler or vice versa.
Birds gotta fly, fish gotta swim. And unfortunately some people have to over analyse and find fault where there really is none to be found.
What if Fab and his team said "Screw you ungrateful so and so's. Go pay $100 plus for the HT T800 bodies. I'm tired of the ruckus."?
We all talk about how we'd like this in 1/6 th or that in 1/6th and when someone does there are an unfortunate few for whom nothing is ever good enough and we wonder why we don't get a lot of what we ask for.
I am not targeting the OP with this post but I realise that there has been a lot of rhetoric about this body and in the words of the late, great Rodney King, can't we all just get along?
|
|
|
 |
Procastinatus Excelentus
|
? |
Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: M?xico
Posts: 819
|
|
|
Re: KP02A body review, & comparison with HT's (Noland/BarneyRoss/Whiplash) body
BeastX, thanks for your review.As for beign a "re-cast", I have to say, no. As a hobby recaster, I can tell you that the plastic used in this carded body CANNOT be poured into the traditional molds that can be taken using the Silicon mold / Resin pouring "recast" process much associated with this hobby. It has to be made into a metal mold that can be:
a) negative SAND molded, then metal is poured to form the actual mold
or
b) MILLED from a block of metal, which judging by the shape of the muscle, it was sand molded. Given how the internal pieces are different:
You can see the different torso sockets, KP is a single peg socket shaped like a "T", the HT Noland body has a double peg socket shaped like this: ?) one can also see that each noland piece is actually two, while KP is 1. Thickness is also a factor, but I would ask you to measure the square shaped hole in the pelvis, their different measure indictates that it, too, it's not a direct re-cast of any sort. In the end I wouldn't call it a re-cast, neither 100% original. Perhaps reverse-engineered to maintain compatibility would be a better judgement, which, as stated, was one of the original goals. Again, after seeing the KP02 taken apart bit by bit with such great pictures leave me nothing but good impressions from KP's manufacturing quality, which equals their involvement in the hobby. Thanks again for your review BeastX, as with that knolowedge in hand, I know that if I buy a KP02 body, it will be a great purchase for a better price than HT.
|
|
|
|
OSW Member
|
? |
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 45
|
|
|
Re: KP02A body review, & comparison with HT's (Noland/BarneyRoss/Whiplash) body
I agree with this. Nothing is 100% original, even outside of the hobby, so to expect it within is a tad silly.I can definitely see where some points of design were drawn from HT's, but to be honest, when you have an industry leader marketing in demand items, some constructive borrowing is to be expected if one wishes to compete. One has to look no further than the automotive industry to see this on a daily basis, and very few of us cry "recaster" at every car we see on the road today. This said, recast was not the proper choice of words, Though a 3d scan, and modification in CAD could have been a good place to begin. All in all however, I love the body, and as soon as my lost credit card is replaced, I'll most likely finally pop on one of these. -RW
|
|
|
|
OSW Member
|
? |
Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: North Borneo, Land of the Pygmy Pakaderm
Posts: 1,296
|
|
|
Re: KP02A body review, & comparison with HT's (Noland/BarneyRoss/Whiplash) body
I'll add that the pelvis exterior is of the same shape.... Where the almost uncanny similarity lies within the torso and the mechanics. Compatibility of head, hands and ankles is the norm and was mentioned many times. Compatibility of all the rest of the body components, well that a new level of "compatibility".Only one of 3 bodies that I have, had the screw heads stripped, as Luck has it, it was the first body that I dissected for evaluation, irony.
Additional review and modding of KP02A body to restore base of neck articulation
The double socket of neck that holds dumbles at each ends, have adequate friction for articulation. However, the base of the neck to torso maybe loose and floppy (2 of my 3 are) (Internal 2 piece torso that holds the other end of the dumbbell leaves a gap as shown in B). Grinding the screw hole protrution closes the gap of the socket and tighteing the screw behind in most cased should be adequate. However should your screw hole losses it's threads or other screw socket failure, this is a way to regain your base of neck articulation, groves are created at the front (C), holes are drilled at the back (A) The wire provide adequate tension directly on the socket and restores socket tightness required.
Last edited by BeastX; Today at 10:46.
|
|
|
|
1:6 Manufacturer
|
? |
Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Rome, Italy
Posts: 502
|
|
|
Re: KP02A body review, & comparison with HT's (Noland/BarneyRoss/Whiplash) body
Quote: |
Fabio, I say take it easy and relax. There are some things BeastX say is correct and the same for you. There is a mantra in the mass production industry - don't fix what is working.
|
Sorry mate, and why I have to take it easy and be relaxed?
Did I started a thread with a very unfair, unpolite review and with really harsh words? No it wasn't me.
I'm just answering "harsh to harsh".I never keep secret that our model is made to be compatible as much as possible with Hot Toys, not just here but in several other forums all over the world!!
To do this of course some mechanism has made with a reverse engineering.
Changing when it was possible, adding, improving, etc.etc. BeastX have the proof of his theory, because Hot Toys Torso and Pelvis are compatible with KP02A (what a secret!!!!).
Then he's contradictory himself saying: "Note, because of slight difference in sizes you can't by default use Noland's hips and legs on KP02A's pelvis, a minor mod will be needed to do so"
So if the Noland hips and legs cannot be used on KP02A pelvis.. this means that the two pelvis ARE NOT IDENTICAL.
Or not?
 BeastX why don't tell to everybody HOW MANY body in the market, share SAME mechanisms? Why don't tell to everybody that Hot Toys legs (for example) are compatible with almost of 90% of the Pelvis of other bodies?
Come on! Hot Toys is a STANDARD, so what is so strange that a lot of body have some compatibility of mechanisms? Pegs? Size or whatever? He even arrive at some "Ugly conclusion" writing: "Drill out (Stripping) the "philips" screw head of the 3 screws holding the internal torso together, so no typical screw driver can "expose" further internals. Well, it took me all of 5 minutes dremel, to get the screw to be fully functioning again, I do appreciate a good mental challenge/obstacle. The QUESTION: Why create such an inconvenience? (I'll leave it at that)"
Like saying that KP is hiding some TERRIBLE secrets (A bomb maybe?).. Come on this is just pathetic!!!
Do you think we don't want you open easily the torso so you can discover that the torso mechanism is compatible with Hot Toys? This is seriously the "Ugly" point?
Inconvenience???? Because for you it's normal that somebody open a Torso mechanism to see how is shaped inside? Or maybe to make you happy I have to leave it open?
Do you know why this "SECRET"?
Because somebody reported us that in KP01A some of torso mechanism get loose after shipment, because the internal screw can "jump" outside of the hole with transport or "hit".
In this way we made an EXTRA SAFE assembling.
Yes yes... a very UGLY  I want clear this 100%. I have nothing personal against BeastX.
And some of his suggestion are very welcome (as a lot of other suggestions I received in this months)..
But the general "tone" of his "review" sound more like a "personal attack" to my company. It's more something counterproductive, instead of constructively critic.
This is my feeling, and maybe I'm wrong.
And if I'm wrong (IF) I'm very open to excuse my "harsh" tone against him.
If I'm wrong....
Last edited by Kaustic Plastik; Today at 10:52.
|
|
|
|
1:6 Manufacturer
|
? |
Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Rome, Italy
Posts: 502
|
|
|
Re: KP02A body review, & comparison with HT's (Noland/BarneyRoss/Whiplash) body
Quote: |
Compatibility of head, hands and ankles is the norm and was mentioned many times. Compatibility of all the rest of the body components, well that a new level of "compatibility".
|
Ok for me this is the end of discussion because it's clear that you are a fire-starter (or Trouble maker?)..
So now I copied ALL their components... yes yes.. Very true. 
It's not useful at all continue answering you.What I can say you mate?
If one day Hot Toys will bring me to the court because I "illegally" copied his design, I will come here back writing how this story ended..
But till now it seems that Hot Toys didn't think my body is a copycat of their body (and BELIEVE ME, they knows my body)..
So... I'll leave to you the conclusion.
|
|
|
|
OSW Member
|
? |
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 371
|
|
|
Re: KP02A body review, & comparison with HT's (Noland/BarneyRoss/Whiplash) body
You can't ask Fabio to "take it easy" when his company is being accused of recasting. As for abdomens looking eerily similar, how do reinvent the wheel?
|
|
|
 |
OSW Member
|
? |
Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Lithuania
Posts: 378
|
|
|
Re: KP02A body review, & comparison with HT's (Noland/BarneyRoss/Whiplash) body
|
|
|
|
OSW Member
|
? |
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 117
|
|
|
Re: KP02A body review, & comparison with HT's (Noland/BarneyRoss/Whiplash) body
I don't think there's any doubt that this ISN'T a 100% original 3D CAD designed product. Obviously they stuck HT interiors in there to maintain compatibility. I don't really care, the market demands HT compatibility, KP answers. . . whatever.I wish the market would demand NEW parts that are not HT compatible which would create REAL competition and drive prices down, but again, whatever. But realistically though, this hobby is so niche, competition won't drive prices down, it will just make everything more expensive as each new manufacturer makes more molds for their own parts. So, really, I have no idea what will bring prices down, LOL. Apart from that, we've seen KP's packaging before as well. 
Unless, this was a 100% CAD design too?? Maybe CAD is Italian for Xerox??  A silly thing to copy to be sure, but if they can shave a week off development time by using someone's existing designs, so be it. Kinda _____ thing to do considering Triad's already been ripped off before, but whatever. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
|
|
|
 |
1:6 Junkie/Kitbashin noob
|
? |
Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: UK
Posts: 216
|
|
|
Re: KP02A body review, & comparison with HT's (Noland/BarneyRoss/Whiplash) body
speaking as an owner of the KP body in question, I'm very happy with the build quality and product. I'd say it's a bit harsh to write it off as a copy. Yes its very similar but thats just down to popular demand. I kind of wish KP had brought something totally new to the table in terms of large muscular bodies but hey at the end of the day I managed to get a really nice muscle body that was like half the price of a Hot Toys body.I would sympathise with Fabio on his response, he is only trying to protect the name of his company after reading, to be fair a fairly harshly written post. Ooh if your reading Fabio (which your probably not now lol) KP should totally do a Bane body with large traps n such. Pre-empt Hot Toys releasing their version of Bane and everyone wanting to swap out the body, you'll make a killing ha.
__________________
Personal reviews and collection pictures: Doon's Dungeon
|
|
|
|
1:6 Manufacturer
|
? |
Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Rome, Italy
Posts: 502
|
|
|
Re: KP02A body review, & comparison with HT's (Noland/BarneyRoss/Whiplash) body
Quote: |
I don't think there's any doubt that this ISN'T a 100% original 3D CAD designed product. Obviously they stuck HT interiors in there to maintain compatibility. I don't really care, the market demands HT compatibility, KP answers. . . whatever. I wish the market would demand NEW parts that are not HT compatible which would create REAL competition and drive prices down, but again, whatever. But realistically though, this hobby is so niche, competition won't drive prices down, it will just make everything more expensive as each new manufacturer makes more molds for their own parts. So, really, I have no idea what will bring prices down, LOL. Apart from that, we've seen KP's packaging before as well.
Unless, this was a 100% CAD design too?? Maybe CAD is Italian for Xerox?? A silly thing to copy to be sure, but if they can shave a week off development time by using someone's existing designs, so be it. Kinda _____ thing to do considering Triad's already been ripped off before, but whatever. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
|
I start to be sick of all of this...
KP and Triad share the same blister/packaging company (and not just this).
Do you really think I need to copy someone packaging existing design????
We have to follow a template to stay in the standard of the packaging company.... Nothing else...
Ok... Do I need to give some extra explanations about my products? Because here we are honestly going too much far.. And I feel a bit humiliation be forced explaining even where my company produced his packagings... 
|
|
|
|
Procastinatus Excelentus
|
? |
Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: M?xico
Posts: 819
|
|
|
Re: KP02A body review, & comparison with HT's (Noland/BarneyRoss/Whiplash) body
Fabio, your products speak for themselves, no need to have headaches over this.JMHO. BTW, thanks for chiming in and responding to all of this, I for once, back you up on this.
|
Posting Rules
|
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off |
|
|
| 
Similar Threads
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.