>>11681561
>especially true in the hands of a collector
Someone who never changes the pose.

>>11681565
Precisely. Universal joints are a solution to a non-problem. If G2 Hooligan released today in Age of the Primes he'd remain rock solid for years to come.

>>11681577
He'd still be "plane on top and folded-up robot on bottom" as Hasbro and Takara can't design aircraft Transformers for shit.

>>11681580
motherfucker has never held a cyberjet in his life
the fucking ruled, with how simple the robot was, you got macross-lite, lean robot folding. way better than 90 percent of bigger, and even modern jetformers
>this post was made by space case gang

File: why.jpg (90.2 KB)

90.2 KB JPG

>>11681580

>>11681580
Cyclonus

>>11681561
The issue isnt ao much the ball joints but how much of the transformation is just folding the shell around the body and using little nubs to lock it all in place.

The old blocky transformers a more zen like transformation with bow parts slid, folded and locked into place

File: f-14 vs vf-1 and vf-0 .jpg (270.6 KB)

270.6 KB JPG

>>11681580
The only reason Macross jetformers work is because Kawamori invents new additions to the jets to work as robot bits. They're not real world aircraft, they're tweaked so they can have robot parts as part of their jet forms.
As modern jets get thinner and flatter, so have the robot modes.
The thing with TF is that they're often using show models which are far more chunky and not based off just jet parts.

>>11684346
I'm not really sure I'd say they work, the newer macross designs straight up just have half a plane hanging off the robot mode's ass.

>>11681577
this

>>11683768
>The issue isnt ao much the ball joints but how much of the transformation is just folding the shell around the body and using little nubs to lock it all in place

A lot of modern figures don't even get the nubs, they just expect the part to stay in place on its own, and usually doesn't.

>>11684710
new planes are also far less spacious for robot parts, so that's your explanation.