On Jan 16, 2006, at 4:55 PM, Dr. Core wrote:
Boaz MyTurnASpace wrote:
My definition was more as "how much its assembly is different from
typical
Bandai models".
Ok, let's rewind, and playback:
Boaz: GC vs. EX Musai is a dilemma between "typical model" and
"impressive display"
Core: GC WB is totally typical... GC BZ is about as untypical as GC
gets
Boaz: how can you say GC BZ is untypical but not GC QM.
Core: let's TRY to define typicality: blah blah blah
Boaz: so you appearantly define typical as blah blah blah, mine is
more as "how its assembly is different from orthodox Bandai models"
Core: but GC WB is totally orthodox...
So we are back to sqare one.
wow, that's using selective omission for your advantage (just of this
speech, not the argument). You made it sounds like we're "back to
square one", but the "blah, blah" you omitted actually contributed to
how we reach the point here where you explain orthodoxy. We didn't
"back to" anywhere, but we have a common ground now, which is
orthodoxy as assembly design, not customization approach.
Ok rhetorics aside, GC WB is totally typical. The parts division
follows the same philosophy as the old 1/1200, 1/2400 WB and the EX
Pegasus-like ships. Only, of course, there are many more parts since
it's more than 27 times larger. Some of the coloring is achieved by
plastic color, just like HGUC/MG models. Some of the coloring is
achieved by pre-painting, somewhat like the system injection HG kits.
GC QM is a little less typical, since a lot of coloring is done as
pre-painting and there are a few more parts with side-cuts. But the
parts division still follows closely a typical HGUC robot. So the
assembly process is pretty similar.
The GC BZ is very untypical, since more than half of the robot is
pre-assembled. You do less than half the assembly work compared to a
"typical" robot (even considering an armless & headless robot),
especially if you compare GC BZ to the old BZ model.
That is, assuming we understand how you define the word "typical".
I think I'd refine the way I am trying to ask you: why'd you think GC
BZ is less orthodox than GC QM or GC WB. Even if they don't assemble
the upper body of GC BZ, it'd just be probably 5 pieces... only that
they're bigger chunks of vinyl than the GC QM's body. For GC WB, I
can take your word of it as I can't tell which pieces are vinyl and
which are styrene, yet for assembly they're probably still different
from HGUC/MG type assembly method. Correct? For me they're about the
same distance of difference from HGUC/MG models.
That's all I'm trying to say. As said, our range on "model" is
already different.
Boaz
-----------------
myturnaspace at gmail dot com
http://myturnaspace.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------
The Gundam Mailing List MK-II [email protected]
Archives: http://www.gundam.com/gml
Help: Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] with this in
the BODY: help list
