The bad habit of reusing moulds for different species

I believe 2020 represents the start of a new phylosophy in this toy animal hobby. Brands will probably turn lazier, return to the era when mostly common and best selling animals were favoured and I even fear a return to a more toyish style.
I hope I am wrong but lazy they are.
The use of the same mould to represent different species was very common during the 1990's decade and it continued although in a lesser extent and dicreasing gradually.
We all know this is a cheap way of producing a new model because a new mould that requires a big investment, is not needed.
2020 has these three strange examples, which one is the less acceptable for you?
I may post later other moulds that were used and abused in the past and also which one I find the worst reuse of ver!!!

CollectA 2020 Malayan Tapir
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

CollectA 2013 Baird's Tapir
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Mojö Fun 2020 Red-eyed Tree Frog
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Mojö Fun 2020 Strawberry Dart Frog
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Papo 2020 Hermann's Tortoise
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Papo 2004 Giant Tortoise
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Very, very bad.....

We need more creativity of the brands manufacturers of animal models.

While there are a few examples of this phenomenon, the vast majority of figures released are indeed new sculpts and the benefits derived therefrom far outweigh a very small smattering of repaints. We are still pretty darn spoiled with the amount of new figures released year after year.

Now, on to Roger's question, the biggest disappoint for me is the tortoise, because it would have been a new species for me. Hermann's tortoise should have a less-convex shell.

Roger wrote:

which one is the less acceptable for you?

As I said in the CollectA thread, the tapir is the worst for me. I wanted like mad the Safari LTD retired Malayan tapir that is my worst regret (see thread about worst regrets/misses), or the Papo one if the Safari is not available. In fact when I bouth the Mojo lowland tapir in MiniZoo it was mainly because I was sure to get all the three tapir species in the trade - otherwise I maybe would have not bought the lowland. And now, CollectA use a figure that I already have repainted as a species that I wish a lot but that of course I can't buy or display together with the identical original Baird's tapir...

Since small frogs and tortoises will be not part of my collection because they're too large in scale, I don't care about them reusing moulds for repaint different species

The "less acceptable" is the Papo tortoise, because it's such an old mold and not a great one IMO. Also it represented a quite different specie that can't be accurate with just a repaint. I would love to have a Hermann's tortoise in my collection, since it's one of the most common animals in Greece (one often visits my garden actually, eating my plants :p ), but not in the size of my Galapagos one...

The most disappointing for me though is the Collecta black panther, since I was waiting for a good black panther figure, but it's the same mold with the current leopard. I know they're the same species so this might be out of topic, but I was hoping for a different one.

As far as the "return to a more toyish style" that Roger mentions, it's obvious (and scary) I think, since Schleich and Papo that seem to choose this approach for some of their new products, are the leading brands of the game.

I think better than nothing.

Reusing moulds is a bad habit of all times. Britains already reused their lead moulds (I am particularly thinking of the bears). Reisler was also very good at it (even reusing lion moulds for tigers).

When we are hoping for new figures, it is disappointing if the same mould is reused. But we don't know what the company would have done if they had not reused the mould: Would they have produced an entirely new figure or no figure at all? It may well have been the latter.

But I agree that the major companies lack a bit of innovative spirit. They are all copy-cats of each other: Similar style, similar material, similar production method, similar size, similar everything. I admit that I am not an expert on the modern companies, but I really can't tell which company made a figure without looking underneath it. In the past, you could immediately see whether a figure was made by Britains, Starlux, Reisler or Elastolin. And you can still tell whether a figure is made by Kaiyodo, Colorata or Eikoh.

But let me not moan too much. I think at least the figures are more realistic than in the past, use better material and there are probably more animal figures than ever before.

Very interesting Roger's approach about vintage companies. Those were other times and I believe the available resources were much more limited.
About the modern figures, I agree with you and probably Blaine is right, the Papo tortoise mould is the one that is used to represent two species with the most noticiable morphological differences.
Turtles and frogs were in the past often represented with very generic looking toys.
Mojö Fun is not exactly reusing a mould but releasing two species in the same year from the same mould. Quite similar with what Papo made in 2014 when launched not less than three frogs with the same sculpt.
One of the differences is that Papo called them in a very primitive way distinguishing them with colors without any particular reference to each species: Equatorial yellow frog, Equatorial blue frog, Equatorial green frog. Was it not enough and in 2016 an Equatorial red frog was also introduced.
We can identify the species with a reasonable certainty but Papo marketed them in a very old-fashioned way.
They represent, however, very close related species contrarily with what happens with the Mojö Fun pair.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] <br>
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

That primitive way of calling different species with colors+a generic name was often used in the past, namely the blue and red parrots released by Schleich in 2001 and 2004 respectively
They may be inspired by the colors of the golden and blue macaw and scarlet macaw but their sculpt don't really works for a macaw. If they represent an exact species of parrots, I have no idea which ones.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Regarding turtles, something more unusual happened when in 2010 Safari Ltd released a Desert Tortoise using the mould of a Schleich giant turtle, likely supposed to be a Galápagos tortoise.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

So, considering turtles and frogs are often represented generically, the most disappointing of the three 2020 lazy releases, is definitely the CollectA Malayan tapir. I may look contradictory once it is not the worst mould to be reused and actually Baird's and Malayan tapirs are quite identical in terms of shape. Though, CollectA never reused a mould like that and it happened with the previous figure still fresh in our memory.

this level of scrutiny is almost absurd. A quick count of the four major non-Japanese companies (Schleich, Papo, Mojo, Safari) reveals 135 figures (with tubes counted as only '1') in 2020 representing at least 24 species new to toy form (this also includes tubes and sets as only '1', some have multiple new species therein). So they decide to reuse a sculpt here and there, who cares. We are very lucky to be getting what we are.

I can't see anything absurd in it. That is just a reflexion of what may turn into a tendency.
I even commented it was a tradition dicreasing over the time but that I feared it could turn a serious thing.
Obviously it is just the minority but this year Mojö and CollectA entered the trend.

Some more examples only for reference.

When Schleich in 2000 used the mould of tehir great white pelican to release a brown pelican.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Safari Ltd did the same in 2005 when they used a same mould to represente an American white pelican and a brown pelican.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

In 2000, also Safari reused the 1997 American bald eagle mould to release a golden eagle.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Still Safari Ltd and the macaws, green-winged in 2006 and blue and golden in 2007.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Even earlier are the American black bear and brown bear from Safari. These were released in 1998.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Papo in 2010 with a mute swan and a black swan
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Papo with the macaws: red and green in 2014 and the blue and yellow in 2018
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]


As I promised, here goes the less acceptable in my opinion.
It was recently, when Safari Ltd reused the mould of the Wildlife Wonders puma to make a jaguar.
That's a prestige line of accurately sculpted figures and jaguars and pumas are different enough to use different sculpts.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I am not very happy with this trend but I can accept such "new" figures in my collections if the mould is correct for all color variants, e.g. different color variants for Java sparrow, budgerigar, horse or dog races. There are some unacceptable cases of course, as Roger shows the Safari Ltd WW puma and jaguar, but Safari created the large puma model later using the different mould. I think it is fair for collectors, if the company releases two different color variants of the same figure at once (the same year) so collectors can choose which one they prefer. But I think it is pretty unfair for collectors if the company releases figure with *very poor* paint (remember Safari anhinga, Mojo leopard, Mojo clouded leopard, Mojo lynx, Mojo cheetahs,...) and in later years releases the same figure with better paint or slightly different paint (here is Mojo as expert again, see Mojo vulture with black wings, Mojo rooster etc.)

In my humble opinion, the Safari LTD Wildlife Wonders cougar is loudly screaming "I'm a jaguar, please repaint me". I agree that both species are very different in shape and proportions, but shape and proportions of the figure are those of a jaguar and wrong for a cougar. Too bulky, too short tail, too strong legs, too long head, too small ears. It's just a jaguar in a cougar costume...

I think the worst ones of the previous message are the swan (use a mute swan as a black swan results in a blaw swan having a knob over the bill, when black swans have not these knobs... and much longer necks!) and the bear (as a brown bear this is ugly and microcephalous!)

Thank you, Roger, for sharing these informative and interesting comparison!

Re: the Wildlife Wonders Puma to Jaguar switch: The figure was originally released as a Black Jaguar in 2009 (I believe). Then, it was retired and re-released as a Puma. It does not have any of the proper proportions to be a Puma. Thankfully, they righted this wrong when they retired the Puma and re-released the figure as a proper Jaguar - the best on the market, if I do say so myself.

"If we release more species, we'll look like we're doing more than the other companies!"
"But a new mould is expensive! For a possible single run, you'd be hurting the bottom line!"

"people, people, you both raise valid points. We need to show we have fresh ideas, but we need to keep a eye on the budget. So why not a new paint job on an existing mould model! Nothing like new paint to spruce up a model that didn't receive enough attention...."

"Fine." "I suppose." "That's the spirit!"

(how i imagine the meetings might go if anyone was exuberant at all)

This whole topic reads in a quite curious way, coming from my background in model horses I'm so used to companies re-releasing moulds in colour after colour. Even those Breyers sculpted as portraits of real individual horses from the sporting or showing world, you expect to see them reappear in a whole range of new colours over the years, perhaps even posing as a portrait of an entirely different horse a time or two.

The difference, though, is that the models released are just coat colour variations, and still portray the same breed, or possibly a related and anatomically similar breed (for example, a model sculpted as a Selle Francais being used for an Oldenburg, the Quarter Horse who comes back in pinto as a Paint Horse, etc).
So you're never getting one species painted as another, and the moulds almost always make a perfect match for the breed they're being marketed as.

Most horse collectors happily have multiple examples of a certain sculpt, I really can't think of anyone I've ever known who stuck to a one-per-mould rule for more than the very beginnings of their buying, cos it just doesn't matter in the same way as when animal collectors want a synoptic collection without duplicating moulds, especially when they don't suit whatever species they've been painted as.

Interesting subject!