Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo
- - - - -

M.U.S.C.L.E Class A Figure Review - Kinnikuman Part 1


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 jmckinnon316

jmckinnon316

    Serious Collector

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 769 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Highland, UK

Posted 29 October 2013 - 08:47 AM

Hey Guys

 

As mentioned a few weeks ago in Biffard's Class A Quick Reference Guide (here), myself and Biffard are now beginning to embark upon a project to review the currently acknowledged Class A MUSCLE Figures. We hope that the whole MUSCLE community will contribute towards this discussion and help bring some further information to light to help improve our understanding of the MUSCLE figure classifications.

 

We're not out to reinvent the wheel - fantastic work has of course already been completed previously (Soupie/URS), which led to the MUSCLE Classification Guide (available here), but we feel there are still some questions worth asking - and who better to ask than the people who know the most about the figures - the collectors.

 

It is widely accepted that MUSCLE figures, when made, were attached to Trees - and each tree would have a certain number of figures attached to it. The work done previously has established that certain figures were always part of the same tree, along with other associated figures, and so were created at the same time and in equal numbers. Each 'Part' (21 of them) could be made up of 1,2 or 3 'Trees'

 

The aim of this project is to look at each of the 21 'Parts' and assess whether our accepted understanding is still appropriate, given the information we may have learned over the last 5-10 years.

 

As expected, I would like to begin with Part 1 - http://soupie.little...ia/PartOne.html

 

It's made up of two trees, each tree contains what we might classify as RARE Figures.

 

Tree 1, has the following Class A's:

 

41p, 93p, 123p, 156p

156s

 

Bearing in mind what was said above about figures being made on the same trees each time, it's immediately clear that there's something up with this tree. For example, why are the Salmon variants of 41, 93 and 123 not Class A too?

 

And even if they were added, should we not then add in the Salmon and Purple variants of 27, 28, 39, 55 & 220?

 

Or perhaps it's time we stopped looking at 41p, 93p, 123p, 156p, 156s as 'Class A' figures. After all, why should they be Class A and the others on the same tree not?

 

None of the figures on this tree are particularly hard to find - I have been collecting on and off for 6-7 years and have seen multiples of pretty much all of these.

 

Let's move onto Tree 2:

 

It has a bunch of Light Blue Class A's (20, 23, 31, 33, 35, 36, 46, 60, 61, 82)

 

It also has a couple of 'random' Class A's thrown in too: 60p, 60s

 

The Light Blue Class A's are hard to argue with - they seem all to be genuinely hard to find (Rare) figures - certainly 23 and 60 fit this description. And although certain other figures seem to show up a little more often (20, 31, 61), it's possible that 23 and 60 are thought of as more rare because they're more sought after than the other figures in this tree. I am reasonably happy to accept the Light Blue Class A's on this tree as genuine.

 

My problem is with the other two random Class A's, mentioned above.

 

60p and 60s are Class A, but why?

 

If they are class A, then so too are 20 S/P, 23 S/P, 31 S/P etc etc.

 

My feeling is that they are not Class A figures. In reality, they are no harder to find than a Salmon Iwao or a Purple TerryMan (31).

 

According to the colours that each figure is available in, I would say that the trees are accurate, so it's hard to attribute the discrepancies to wrong tree allocation.

 

My initial assessment of part 1 is as follows:

 

Tree 1: No Class A Figures. 41p, 93p, 123p, 156p, 156s are Class B/C

Tree 2: Only the Light Blue figures are Class A. 60s & 60p are Class B/C

 

I look forward to hearing other opinions on this! :)

 

*Please note, we hope to create a new thread for each 'Part' so if possible, can you please ensure that this thread discusses only Part 1?

 

Many Thanks!

John


Edited by jmckinnon316, 29 October 2013 - 09:03 AM.

  • 1
My NEEDS List: HERE
My Collection: WORKING ON IT!





#2 walker13.1

walker13.1

    .

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4950 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 October 2013 - 09:05 AM

Don't know if this is of any help, but here is a write up of the light purple claw's discovery.

 

Recently a genuine M.U.S.C.L.E. Tree from Part 8 of the Kinnikuman toy line was discovered! This tree is made from authentic Muscle plastic, and contains the five light purple figures from the Muscle Mega-Match Game. The most amazing part of this tree is that it also contains four other Muscle sculpts in light purple: a light purple Claw #153, a light purple Sunshine #3, a light purple #155, and a light purple #138!
 
Four new Super Rare Muscle colors...and we all thought the regular purple Claw was rare! This tree is evidence that all the figures on a specific tree were produced in the colors of others that already exist in the same color!
 
Another interesting fact is that one of the sculpts on this tree has been removed by the factory. The empty space at the top between figure #138 and figure #3 used to be home to another figure, but the tree shows a perfect factory slice where the sculpt used to be. Based on the Muscle Color Code of the MCIA, the missing figure is one of the six non-muscle sculpt figures from Part 8. It simply cannot be any other muscle sculpt because the color patterns of the remaining trees show that the other muscle sculpts of this part belong to separate trees.
 
So what does this mean? Theoretically, this discovery supports the idea that all the original 400+ Kinnikuman figures were made into Muscle Men figures. The production factories simply attempted to remove the non-muscle sculpts that were not supposed to be included in the American Muscle toy line. Rather than plug a line for a sculpt, figures not intended to be part of the Muscle toy line were simply sliced off and discarded! However, some evidently made their way out of the factories, which explains why the Super Rare Muscle figures exist!!!

 

Attached Files


  • 0

#3 adiy009

adiy009

    I live for the JIZZ!!!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 401 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 29 October 2013 - 09:13 AM

i would say just about all the class a figures are class a
including a few other hard to find figures
if anything was to change it should be a few figures are upgraded to say a*
not down graded
also doing them as trees is not going to work for me
only muscle figures that we could as trees came in 28 packs
so you could easy have a few figures in tree class a in a tree
when none of the others are as
we DO NOT have all the figures produced in collections
or even know the production number of the figures we all have total
  • 0
Account closed by request of adiy009 on 2018-08-15

#4 adiy009

adiy009

    I live for the JIZZ!!!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 401 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 29 October 2013 - 09:18 AM

Recently a genuine M.U.S.C.L.E. Tree from Part 8 of the Kinnikuman toy line was discovered! This tree is made from authentic Muscle plastic, and contains the five light purple figures from the Muscle Mega-Match Game. The most amazing part of this tree is that it also contains four other Muscle sculpts in light purple: a light purple Claw #153, a light purple Sunshine #3, a light purple #155, and a light purple #138!


who found this and where was it found

Edited by adiy009, 29 October 2013 - 09:18 AM.

  • 0
Account closed by request of adiy009 on 2018-08-15

#5 adiy009

adiy009

    I live for the JIZZ!!!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 401 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 29 October 2013 - 09:27 AM

lets just say they produced 100 tree 2 light blue but just about all 23 light blue are lost in the dump in someones closet leaving 5 know to us this could be the same for other tree meaning figures from the trees can be class a and b as quantity differs for each figure

Edited by adiy009, 29 October 2013 - 09:28 AM.

  • 0
Account closed by request of adiy009 on 2018-08-15

#6 adiy009

adiy009

    I live for the JIZZ!!!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 401 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 29 October 2013 - 09:41 AM

over the years i have found about fifteen 31 light blue figures
does this not make this figure not class a
and yet at the moment 23 light blue is very hard to find
or is this also not class a as i have found 15 from the same tree

sorry friend but unless you can find out how many figures got produced
and how many are still in existence how can you really tell
what is actually a class a or not

also that light purple tree find is great if it is real
as i remember as a child playing with colour muscle
figures that people think do not exist
but i also had some canadian class a figures
and i lived in england
maybe my part of england got some figure no one else
got in the rest of the world at the time
in super small amounts now lost till found again

Edited by adiy009, 29 October 2013 - 09:43 AM.

  • 0
Account closed by request of adiy009 on 2018-08-15

#7 Biffard

Biffard

    Team Truffle Shuffle

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1008 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 October 2013 - 09:42 AM

i would say just about all the class a figures are class a
including a few other hard to find figures
if anything was to change it should be a few figures are upgraded to say a*
not down graded
also doing them as trees is not going to work for me
only muscle figures that we could as trees came in 28 packs
so you could easy have a few figures in tree class a in a tree
when none of the others are as
we DO NOT have all the figures produced in collections
or even know the production number of the figures we all have total

 True, but based on the grape tree that was found, the explaination of Super Rares, and the kinnikuman trees, there is more evidence that MUSCLE were molded in trees. My thoughts are that certain trees in certain colors were produced and released in Canada and that is where the Class A figures originated.

 

That is just theory as I have no proof but I think it is plausible.


  • 0

#8 adiy009

adiy009

    I live for the JIZZ!!!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 401 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 29 October 2013 - 09:50 AM

yes muscles got molded in trees
but we did not get to buy them in trees apart
28 packs most got broken up and sold as one figure
as part of a 4 pack 10 pack etc
so many trees are not complete as many of the figures
that got molded are now lost in the dump
in someones collection etc
you should be going on known figure quantity
not just trees
  • 0
Account closed by request of adiy009 on 2018-08-15

#9 walker13.1

walker13.1

    .

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4950 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 October 2013 - 10:02 AM

we DO NOT have all the figures produced in collections
or even know the production number of the figures we all have total

 

Good point.  I would, and imagine a lot of others too, venture to say that the Purple Claw shouldn't be class a.  In my opinion, class should be based only on difficulty to find, and the last year or so has proved that the purple claw is far from rare.  Want level or us pinheads' willingness to pay high for it shouldn't justify it being class a. 


Edited by walker13.1, 29 October 2013 - 10:23 AM.

  • 0

#10 adiy009

adiy009

    I live for the JIZZ!!!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 401 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 29 October 2013 - 10:21 AM

that light purple tree is nice but it also confirms if real light purple Claw #153, a light purple Sunshine #3, a light purple #155, and a light purple #138!are as common as the mega match game figures are common no i have only seen pictures of two[url=http://soupie.littlerubberguys.com/mcia/images/155p.jpg]http://soupie.little...images/155p.jpg[/url the 155 p on soupie's guild is light purple and someone has a 153 light purple .they must have had to make all figures on the tree in the mold plates in light purple in order to get perfect figures for the mega match game so just how many could be out there

Edited by adiy009, 29 October 2013 - 10:26 AM.

  • 0
Account closed by request of adiy009 on 2018-08-15

#11 adiy009

adiy009

    I live for the JIZZ!!!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 401 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 29 October 2013 - 10:29 AM



if you want to doing anything add a+ a a- figures

but the light purple figures find are a talking point for sure
  • 0
Account closed by request of adiy009 on 2018-08-15

#12 adiy009

adiy009

    I live for the JIZZ!!!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 401 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 29 October 2013 - 11:18 AM

Attached File  article-2478975-190E5F8300000578-851_964x590.jpg   261.76K   25 downloadsnew class a shipment found making them all class z
  • 1
Account closed by request of adiy009 on 2018-08-15

#13 jmckinnon316

jmckinnon316

    Serious Collector

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 769 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Highland, UK

Posted 29 October 2013 - 11:19 AM

My objective is not to add, nor remove, Class A figures from the classification guide.

 

Also, my personal opinion is that there's no need to add more classes (A-, A+ or whatever)

 

I remember that Veers said he envisaged that one day Class B could probably disappear, once we know more/enough about the figures. Perhaps one day we could actually realise this.

 

Let's try to bring this post back on track - I think it's clear that figures were part of a tree when molded (the alleged Light Purple picture could prove this) - BTW, has this Light Purple 'tree' actually ever been verified beyond doubt....?

 

Are there any comments relating to the figures I mentioned in the first post? Adiy - do you think that every other Salmon and Purple figure on the same tree as #60 should become class A then? And do you also believe that Salmon and Purple variants of 27, 28, 39, 55 & 220 are actually Class A's!?

 

As i mentioned, I think none of those are - but that's just my opinion (backed up by the science of the MUSCLE colour code)

 

J


Edited by jmckinnon316, 29 October 2013 - 11:21 AM.

  • 0
My NEEDS List: HERE
My Collection: WORKING ON IT!

#14 Ericnilla

Ericnilla

    Y/S*N*T

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9150 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 29 October 2013 - 11:32 AM

The US muscles were produced in the same factory as the japanese figures. This light purple tree is likely a proto sample showing the color.

(And arent we not supposed to post any photos from arforbes?)
  • 0

#15 adiy009

adiy009

    I live for the JIZZ!!!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 401 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 29 October 2013 - 11:52 AM

hi o.k not trying to ruin your post john :-)just posting my valid and un valid points the 60 p yes i have two in 4 packs they are for sure class a figures:-)Salmon and Purple variants of 27, 28, 39, 55 & 220 are hard to find for sure even class a maybe but we have found three 27 s in a short space of time and did not pay much for them to be honest i can't give a fair say on what is class a or not as i might have a vested interest it is all about supply and demand class a figures just seem to show up at random some have shown up more than others i for think you can have some figures from a tree class a and others not like i don't think 31 lb or your 18db lol ;-p are class a but it is not up to me to decide this

Edited by adiy009, 29 October 2013 - 11:57 AM.

  • 0
Account closed by request of adiy009 on 2018-08-15

#16 walker13.1

walker13.1

    .

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4950 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 October 2013 - 11:57 AM

(And arent we not supposed to post any photos from arforbes?)

 

I believe that is just links.


  • 0

#17 iwao

iwao

    Toy Addict

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1481 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maryland

Posted 29 October 2013 - 12:15 PM

My problem is with the other two random Class A's, mentioned above.

 

60p and 60s are Class A, but why?

 

If they are class A, then so too are 20 S/P, 23 S/P, 31 S/P etc etc.

 

My feeling is that they are not Class A figures. In reality, they are no harder to find than a Salmon Iwao or a Purple TerryMan (31).

Makes sense to me that 60p and 60s were produced in the same numbers as the other purple and salmon on that tree. You have to consider that collectors don't always sell every figure they own when they sell their collection. I sold about half of mine and kept the figures I like. Maybe some people are holding onto their 60p and 60s, so fewer of them are made available to other collectors.

 

Sorry for the random question, but does any Class A figure show up less than light blue Iwao?


  • 1

#18 Biffard

Biffard

    Team Truffle Shuffle

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1008 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 October 2013 - 12:54 PM

you should be going on known figure quantity
not just trees

 

I'm glad this thread is sparking these conversations.

 

I agree with Adiy that going off of current figure quantity would be a good way to determine classifications. Unfortunately, we don't have that data. There was a MUSCLE database that tried to capture that info but it didn't work so well because the data was inaccurate. People would add colors and figures dishonestly and it tainted any efforts of gathering figure/color quantities.

 

You also bring up some good points around Tree distribution. That would be a good explanation of why some figures on a tree are considered Class A and others are not. If 60P was distributed exclusively in 4-packs and the other purple figures on that tree were distributed more frequently in 10 packs then that could explain the variance. 

 

Does anyone know if any figures and colors were exclusive to 4, 10, and 28 packs? I don't believe I have seen any info on this but it would make for a great discussion.


  • 1

#19 jmckinnon316

jmckinnon316

    Serious Collector

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 769 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Highland, UK

Posted 29 October 2013 - 01:22 PM

Sorry for the random question, but does any Class A figure show up less than light blue Iwao?

 

Lol! Very few show up less than 23LB!

 

Perhaps the red figures from part 11? http://soupie.little...PartEleven.html

 

I reckon collecting those is the key to the Master Set!!


  • 0
My NEEDS List: HERE
My Collection: WORKING ON IT!

#20 jmckinnon316

jmckinnon316

    Serious Collector

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 769 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Highland, UK

Posted 29 October 2013 - 01:31 PM

I'm glad this thread is sparking these conversations.

 

I agree with Adiy that going off of current figure quantity would be a good way to determine classifications. Unfortunately, we don't have that data. There was a MUSCLE database that tried to capture that info but it didn't work so well because the data was inaccurate. People would add colors and figures dishonestly and it tainted any efforts of gathering figure/color quantities.

 

You also bring up some good points around Tree distribution. That would be a good explanation of why some figures on a tree are considered Class A and others are not. If 60P was distributed exclusively in 4-packs and the other purple figures on that tree were distributed more frequently in 10 packs then that could explain the variance. 

 

Does anyone know if any figures and colors were exclusive to 4, 10, and 28 packs? I don't believe I have seen any info on this but it would make for a great discussion.

 

I'm glad too - it shows that people are curious and that they care.

 

The tree distribution point is certainly a good one - but I would think that whether a figure was distributed in a 10-pack or a 4-pack, if it comes from the same molding tree as a bunch of other ones then the same number of each was made, and should surface gradually - regardless of what kind of packaging they were put in. Wouldn't you say?

 

Maybe the further we go into this, and look at each part as a 'team' we'll begin to notice other patterns.

 

At the moment, though, I see no rhyme nor reason why 60s and 60p were singled out as Class A's above the others in the tree. It would be good to see Soupie/URS or Veers reasoning behind the Classification of A for those. It may have been a result of tampering with the MuscleDB, back in the day. Or perhaps another factor that I am not aware of. 

 

J


  • 0
My NEEDS List: HERE
My Collection: WORKING ON IT!

#21 Ericnilla

Ericnilla

    Y/S*N*T

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9150 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 29 October 2013 - 10:11 PM

...

At the moment, though, I see no rhyme nor reason why 60s and 60p were singled out as Class A's above the others in the tree. It would be good to see Soupie/URS or Veers reasoning behind the Classification of A for those. It may have been a result of tampering with the MuscleDB, back in the day. Or perhaps another factor that I am not aware of. 

 

J

 

Well I know years back the mini figures like 60, 162, and 189, (along with the claw) were considered the more expensive figures and most popular sculpts. At a time when almost all figures were pulling $.50, these were pulling $2. I knew plenty of people that were army building them as well. Maybe most stayed in peoples collections? and im sure when the army builders were having problems snatching up 60s and 60p it was shared with the community.

 

Plus the MuscleDB tampering wasn't anyone keeping low numbers... The MuscleDB was open to anyone to create an account and list all the figures they owned in their collection, which then added all the collections numbers into one list you could check out. It was arforbes padding numbers of figures he knew were harder to find so when people checked to see how many were known in the community he could buy them cheaper since the numbers were high or consistent with most.


Edited by Ericnilla, 29 October 2013 - 10:13 PM.

  • 0

#22 Soupie

Soupie

    @minifiguresXD

  • Legends
  • 7881 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Not Telling
  • Interests:Not Telling

Posted 25 February 2014 - 01:07 PM

It would be good to see Soupie/URS or Veers reasoning behind the Classification of A for those.

The MCG is solely Veers' baby. URS, myself, and others merely consulted.

Veers used a few criteria to sort the figures. One criteria was the sculpt's popularity among collectors. More popular = more demand = harder to get = Class A.

I think these classifications should totally be open to debate. I think Veers would agree, so long as someone's argument was logical. Of course, he could still disagree. :)
  • 0
Posted Image

#23 Guest_General Veers_*

Guest_General Veers_*
  • Guests

Posted 25 February 2014 - 01:39 PM

First, does anybody read the first two pages of the guide? http://uofmuscle.com...gGuide-v1.0.pdf I tried to explain how A, B, and C came about.  :wallbash:

 

Soupie is right. I'm open to the classes changing. However, we have very little qualitative data to change the classes. I've said many, many, many times that peoples' memories are terrible. Claiming "I've seen..." or "I remember..." doesn't really help anything and proves nothing.

 

The UofM Guide took all the qualitative data we had (MUSCLEDB - both contaminated and not, plus the Parts/Trees) and used some collector judgement. To make a change now, based on only collector judgement does not seem very helpful. It seems like it would lead to much more subjective rankings. If people don't like the classes, then the other options is Soupie's CIA by the trees and parts.

 

The goal was certainly never perfection. I would argue a perfect guide will never happen. But the goal of the UofMUSCLE Figure Guide was to provide some general framework and understanding about M.U.S.C.L.E. figures. I think that goal was achieved.

 

To really move things forward we'd need data - pictures and a count. Years ago I thought that would be very likely as MUSCLE continued to evolve. Not anymore. Not because people are terrible, but things are less and less centralized. There's always seems to be such a point made that there may be MUSCLE collectors that don't want to share or be a part of LRG, or Twitter, or Facebook, or UofM, or whatever. Or that they don't want to share their collections. Those would be the people we need help from. Actual figure counts from trustworthy sources.

 

 


  • 1

#24 Soupie

Soupie

    @minifiguresXD

  • Legends
  • 7881 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Not Telling
  • Interests:Not Telling

Posted 25 February 2014 - 02:45 PM

I have to agree with Veers. Unless (many) recent finds indicate that a certain figure is no longer rare or someone can argue convincingly that a particular sculpt is not popular, it will be hard to argue that a figure's classification needs changed.

 

Wasn't Jkaris in the process of rebooting the MDB? Having said that, I'm not sure we actually need more data to say whether certain colors in certain trees are common or rare. What may change is moving an uncommon to a common. (Perhaps this is what was meant by moving a Class B to a Class C?)

 

What we really need, is to determine why 1) certain trees were/weren't made in certain colors, 2) certain trees were/weren't made more abundantly in certain colors. If some clever MUSCLE sleuth were to crack that code, then we'd be able to use the code to analyze all the common, uncommon, and rare tree/color designations.

 

(I wonder if the abundancy designations are more like "ultra common," "common," "rare," as opposed to "common," "uncommon," and "rare.")

 

On a sad note, I can't find the notes that URS left me. But I'm 99% certain they are on a server I have that is currently offline.


Edited by Soupie, 25 February 2014 - 02:50 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#25 jkaris

jkaris

    AKIA Site Owner Y/S*N*T

  • Little Rubber Guys
  • 22184 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West Sacramento, CA

Posted 25 February 2014 - 03:14 PM

MDB became this:
http://www.littlerub...e_men/index.cfm

The main thing I am missing that people have asked for is an ability to bulk upload their collection numbers. I haven't added that in, but will once the sites get moved to the new server.

I also didn't import the old counts, although I do have them for reference.
  • 0






Copyright © 2024 LittleRubberGuys.com