Autobot032 wrote:breakdown99 wrote:Autobot032 wrote:breakdown99 wrote:Kibble wrote:orangeitis wrote:I didn't say it is. But the force of the limb landing on the floor first, with all the pressure of the rest of the figure falling on top of it, the limb would be tossed away at a decent speed.
I'm not a drop test expert either, but I don't think that has anything to do with it.orangeitis wrote:It's an SDCC toy. Not a retail version. That's like wanting to hold 2007 Shattered Glass Oprimus Prime to $700 standards, because that's around how much it's being sold for now(last time I checked, at least)
Okay, but you can get Hercules for like $300 in shops over in China so from now on we'll just consider him a $300 toy then. Or six $50 toys which is about the same price as a voyager United figure.
Can somebody explain to me the different categories that may effect the outcome of said "drop test"? Logically thinking, a TF would do less damage than a Lego City dropped from the height? (Think of all those annoying small studs) Are there different levels of drop testing-ness(?) Cheers.
Well, the thing is, Lego pieces are modular. They're meant to break away and because of this, usually cause less injury or damage.
A Transformer falling from said height (I believe it's 3 feet...) is problematic because if it breaks, it can shatter and those pieces can become small shrapnel. Smaller chunks could be swallowed, etc. Even entire limbs or sections of the figure could go flying and cause injury.
A-haaa... Now it makes a bit more sense. I thought they just put on their safety goggles and hurled the buggers down the stairs regardless of the toy. Thanks Autobot032!
No problem. Although, the goggles idea could be cool... Hmm. C'mere FOC Jazz...we's gon' try an experiment...
LOL Judging by all the breaking tabs, brainfart design ideas and asspie execution on the thing, maybe we should throw the designers instead