Just chiming in with my two cents, I don't personally think that there is
any way to make a toy of a Valk that is both accurate AND a good toy. There
are just too many major differences between how the beast is drawn in its
different modes! The nosecone drastically changes proportion, the mounting
point on the leg slides all over the place, and there is flat out no room
for any sort of inner shoulder joint other than a simple swivel. Anyone
making a toy of this transforming abomination is going to have to make major
concessions. I do agree with you CW that the choices made on the Takatoku
Valks make for a more durable as well as playable toy, but I can certainly
understand the choices Yamato made as well. Personally, I think the HCM of
the Valk had the best all around balance, but I have always been a big HCM
> I think you are missing the point here. I am not talking about how
> "real" the transformation is for the Yamato Toys. I am talking about how
> or bad they are as just "Toys".
> The Yamato Macross just don't stand up in terms of safety or durablity
> compare it to ANY transformable toys from companies like Bandai or Takara.
> There are obvious flaws with it.
> Also, the "real" VF-1 (if they can ever exist) DOES NOT remove its legs in
> transformation. The original design works by Kawamori Shoji never
> showed how the legs would swivel forward during Transfromation but it
> showed that it would deteach itself from the main body.
> I do blame Yamato instead of Kawamori Shoji because the problems with the
> is not in its transformatiopn sequences, its in the toy engineering &