|
|
Post by King Bálor (CM)™ on Dec 17, 2010 0:03:44 GMT -5
So the ESR is 22X22. Whats the size of the RSR? I heard someone say that the ESR is larger. HOW THE  can you call it in scale then? Jakks RSR wasnt in scale with their 6-7" thicker figures. Now the larger ESR is supposed to be in scale with the 5-6" much thinner Mattel figure?!?!? |
|
|
|
Post by "Original Broski" jonjon535353 on Dec 17, 2010 0:08:53 GMT -5
The Mattel figures are all in scale with the ESR. The Jakks RSR was never truly in scale. To put it into simpler terms, the Jakks RSR is like the new Four-Sided TNA Ring, and the Mattel ESR is like WWE ring.
|
|
|
|
Post by King Bálor (CM)™ on Dec 17, 2010 0:20:48 GMT -5
The Mattel figures are all in scale with the ESR. The Jakks RSR was never truly in scale. To put it into simpler terms, the Jakks RSR is like the new Four-Sided TNA Ring, and the Mattel ESR is like WWE ring. I agree the RSR was never in scale. I found it WAY too big for my DA figures, so I ended up getting rid of it. That and it was a piece of junk. But the ESR is supposed to be bigger? is that right? The mattel figures are smaller and the ring is bigger? What we need is an ACTUAL in scale ring. A real wrestling ring goes from 14-20 feet. Lets use 18 to side on the higher end. If we get 2 WWE wrestlers at 6'3" each, 150 total inches between the two men's height. 216 inches for the ring. So 150 for each 216 or 1.44" wrestler to ring comparison. Reduce our figures 5" and our ESR is 22".....we get a wrestling to ring comparison of 2.2"!!!!! .70" more ring to wrestler comparison. I know it doesnt sound like much .70", but it thats huge in action figure scale. .70" would make a real life ring like 5-7 feet larger. |
|
|
|
Post by mickieishot06 on Dec 17, 2010 0:24:01 GMT -5
From the pics that I have seen, it looks absolutely perfect for Mattel Figures. It looks to be in scale with Mattel Figures, I haven't seen any Jakks figures inside but I'm guessing that it would be slightly different due to Jakks scales vs. Mattel. But I know that regardless of the fact, I am picking up the ESR. I can't wait!  |
|
gawd6sic6™
Main Eventer
" I cross the lines you love to hate "
Joined on: Jan 13, 2009 13:50:08 GMT -5
Posts: 4,868
|
Post by gawd6sic6™ on Dec 17, 2010 1:20:10 GMT -5
i also go by this.. when nexus started off.. they would stand shoulder to shoulder in the ring.. blah blah blah.. that was 7 of em...
you can stand 7 mattel figures shoulder to shoulder in the esr and they fit just right...
so for my tastes.. its pretty to scale...
|
|
|
|
Post by ~*Young $ Money*~ on Dec 17, 2010 1:40:14 GMT -5
I believe a WWE ring is 22 or 24 feet long so 22 inches would be in scale.
|
|
mgwyn
Superstar
Joined on: Jan 6, 2010 16:54:57 GMT -5
Posts: 665
|
Post by mgwyn on Dec 17, 2010 1:46:09 GMT -5
You're basing this off the notion that Jakk's ring was truly in scale. Their figures weren't even in scale, so even if the ring was in scale compared to Undertaker, it wouldn't have been compared to Rey Mysterio.
That being said, I've done a lot of comparisons with figures in the ring to pictures (and the Nexus side by side thing) and it's pretty darn accurate with the Mattel figures. The RSR isn't bad with Mattel figures, but the turnbuckle pads are mega huge compared to the figures.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ultimate Figure Collector on Dec 17, 2010 1:47:10 GMT -5
As someone who has a ring in his backyard, although it's obviously smaller than the WWE ring I can say that it's accurate. As the guy mentioned about nexus being side to side when they debuted(there were actually 8) so if you can fit 8 then it is accurate. It does make it a little hard to play but that doesn't make it not accurate and I display anyway so the more room the better.
|
|
gawd6sic6™
Main Eventer
" I cross the lines you love to hate "
Joined on: Jan 13, 2009 13:50:08 GMT -5
Posts: 4,868
|
Post by gawd6sic6™ on Dec 17, 2010 2:22:29 GMT -5
As someone who has a ring in his backyard, although it's obviously smaller than the WWE ring I can say that it's accurate. As the guy mentioned about nexus being side to side when they debuted(there were actually 8) so if you can fit 8 then it is accurate. It does make it a little hard to play but that doesn't make it not accurate and I display anyway so the more room the better. yes.. they debuted as 8... but we never saw bryan with them after the initial attack.. he never got the chance to stand there in the ring with them shoulder to shoulder. hence me saying 7  |
|
|
|
Post by skribbel24 on Dec 17, 2010 2:25:12 GMT -5
Wow, this is an awesome thread. I honestly read a lot of things I didn't know before. I'm not exactly super-picky when it comes to the ring scale as long as it "looks" like it's in scale, and ESR does the trick for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Assassin on Dec 17, 2010 2:28:36 GMT -5
personally i think both the ESR and the RSR are slightly too big.
|
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Dec 17, 2010 2:53:30 GMT -5
i also go by this.. when nexus started off.. they would stand shoulder to shoulder in the ring.. blah blah blah.. that was 7 of em... you can stand 7 mattel figures shoulder to shoulder in the esr and they fit just right... Exactly. People who think the scaled rings are too big just don't seem to grasp how big a real WWE ring is. |
|
Instant Classic
Main Eventer
10 Year Member
Joined on: May 30, 2007 21:03:36 GMT -5
Posts: 1,207
|
Post by Instant Classic on Dec 17, 2010 3:14:15 GMT -5
who cares, at least there we have a variety to choose from. people are too picky and spoiled when it comes to toys, mattel's is "elite scale" not "true to scale" right?
|
|
|
|
Post by PJ on Dec 17, 2010 5:26:14 GMT -5
So the ESR is 22X22. Whats the size of the RSR? I heard someone say that the ESR is larger. HOW THE can you call it in scale then? Jakks RSR wasnt in scale with their 6-7" thicker figures. Now the larger ESR is supposed to be in scale with the 5-6" much thinner Mattel figure?!?!? I think the Jakks ring is 21" X 21" |
|
|
|
Post by johnnypoopypants on Dec 17, 2010 6:52:50 GMT -5
The Mattel figures are all in scale with the ESR. The Jakks RSR was never truly in scale. To put it into simpler terms, the Jakks RSR is like the new Four-Sided TNA Ring, and the Mattel ESR is like WWE ring. I agree the RSR was never in scale. I found it WAY too big for my DA figures, so I ended up getting rid of it. That and it was a piece of junk. But the ESR is supposed to be bigger? is that right? The mattel figures are smaller and the ring is bigger? What we need is an ACTUAL in scale ring. A real wrestling ring goes from 14-20 feet. Lets use 18 to side on the higher end. If we get 2 WWE wrestlers at 6'3" each, 150 total inches between the two men's height. 216 inches for the ring. So 150 for each 216 or 1.44" wrestler to ring comparison. Reduce our figures 5" and our ESR is 22".....we get a wrestling to ring comparison of 2.2"!!!!! .70" more ring to wrestler comparison. I know it doesnt sound like much .70", but it thats huge in action figure scale. .70" would make a real life ring like 5-7 feet larger. WWE rings are 20 x 20 feet. |
|
the hell demon
Main Eventer
i must possess all, or i possess nothing
Joined on: Nov 16, 2006 12:48:46 GMT -5
Posts: 3,592
|
Post by the hell demon on Dec 17, 2010 7:43:25 GMT -5
The ESR is perfect for Mattels and DA's are great in it too.  |
|
|
|
Post by pwsphil on Dec 17, 2010 9:22:54 GMT -5
YES! Thank you, WWE Ring is 20 x 20, TNA Ring is around 15 x15 or 16 x 16. So a scale ring for mattel should be 20 x20 in. But realistically Mattel is not gonna retool a 22 or 23 inch ring. Unless the consumers really push super hard for it.
|
|
|
|
Post by King Bálor (CM)™ on Dec 17, 2010 10:29:20 GMT -5
So the ESR is 22X22. Whats the size of the RSR? I heard someone say that the ESR is larger. HOW THE can you call it in scale then? Jakks RSR wasnt in scale with their 6-7" thicker figures. Now the larger ESR is supposed to be in scale with the 5-6" much thinner Mattel figure?!?!? I think the Jakks ring is 21" X 21" Which is the point I am making. 21x21 was too big for a 6-7". So how can a 5-6" be in scale with a 22x22? And to those who think they know what size a WWE ring is....you're WRONG. WWE rings change. Depending on the venue, whether its tv or a house show, etc. WWE changes the size of the ring they will use. So perhaps for the Nexus attack, they used a 20X20 and other places they may use a larger or smaller one. |
|
|
|
Post by Word™ on Dec 17, 2010 11:12:15 GMT -5
You bitch and complain alot.
It's for your toys.. Not your promotion..
|
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Dec 17, 2010 11:16:30 GMT -5
I think the Jakks ring is 21" X 21" Which is the point I am making. 21x21 was too big for a 6-7". So how can a 5-6" be in scale with a 22x22? And to those who think they know what size a WWE ring is....you're WRONG. WWE rings change. Depending on the venue, whether its tv or a house show, etc. WWE changes the size of the ring they will use. So perhaps for the Nexus attack, they used a 20X20 and other places they may use a larger or smaller one. False. Very false. All WWE rings conform to the same standard. WCW rings were smaller (18 x 18, same as the TNA ring, I believe) but WWE rings are all 20 x 20. Just use a basic spring ring if an actual scaled ring is too big for your needs. Telling silly lies to make yourself feel better about it isn't going to do you any favours. |
|
