Product Review KP02A body review, & comparison with HT's ...

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: 1,295

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: 7,525

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: 499

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: 814

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

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
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
KP and Andrew Bodies side by side review	slobodaneee	Sixth Scale Action Figure News, Reviews, & Discussion.	12	08-05-2012 10:53
ACI/ACE/BBI/BS/CDM/CM/DiD/DML/EB/GIJ/HT/IGN/ITPT/SI/SS/SST/TC/TS/TRD/ZCWO Bodies	Davinator65	Sixth Scale Action Figure News, Reviews, & Discussion.	227	07-01-2012 10:52
Femme Fatale | Review: Phicen "Hindu" seamless body	RichardtheBloody	Sixth Scale Action Figure News, Reviews, & Discussion.	18	04-25-2012 11:17
Ignite Swordsman Review	iampoch	Sixth Scale Action Figure News, Reviews, & Discussion.	19	12-11-2009 23:52
Figure Review - ZC Pale Body (*pic heavy and bewbages*)	RichardtheBloody	Sixth Scale Action Figure News, Reviews, & Discussion.	21	12-10-2008 03:49

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:25.

Powered by vBulletin? Version 3.7.0
Copyright ?2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.3.2

Copyright 2003-2011 One Sixth Warriors. The content of this website does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the OSW. The mention of, or links to, trade names, commercial products or organizations does not necessarily imply endorsement, express or implied, by the OSW nor it's affiliates, nor is it responsible for the content or activities of those mentioned or linked to. OSW makes no representation concerning, and does not guarantee the source, originality, accuracy, completeness or reliability of any statement, information, data, finding, interpretation, advice, opinion, or view presented.

Source: http://www.onesixthwarriors.com/forum/sixth-scale-action-figure-news-reviews-discussion/637918-kp02a-body-review-comparison-hts-noland-barneyross-whiplash-body-var.html

chanukah david archuleta david archuleta hobbit trailer greenhill nj plane crash plane crash new jersey