autoprops713
Sr Member
No problem man, we're cool. I just want to make sure we focus and work as a team against a common foe! :lol
MattyCollector "Mattel Hoverboard" discussion
- Thread starter hound97
- Start date
Ojobenito
Well-Known Member
Well, going back to the thread....
As I said before, I'll maybe keep the hoverboard, but I want to make some changes on it when I got it (new velcro applied on all 4 red stripes and the green one), and new battery cover made from molding the retail one in fiberglass, and then sandpaper the writings and create recessed screwholes so it matches better the original battery cover. I don't mind if the new screws doesn't match and I have to glue the new battery cover and I can´t open it again. I don't want to put batteries on the board nor the sound effects mind me at all.
Also, I want to make some tiny changes like painting in black the handlebar hole and the screws from the magnet holders.
But I have a question about matching colors.
My reference for the velcro and battery pack colour will be this original hoverboard:
ScreenUsed Mattel Hoverboard - YouTube
I found a seller on ebay that has luminous velcro in green, pink and red. It's this link, and you have to choice the colour next to the photo to see it:
Sew On Velcro Like Hook and Loop Fasteners Strap 25 mm Colorful Free Shipping | eBay
Luminous Green is great for the green stripe, but I don't know exactly what color should I use for the red/pink stripes. The original velcro from the board of the video is similar to the luminous red, but I think Mattel's Hoverboard is more pinkish than originals, so maybe luminous pink shall be a better choice. What do you think?
Also, if I make a new battery pack cover in fiberglass, can somebody tell me what spray color code should I use to match the pink from the original board?
Thanks a lot!
As I said before, I'll maybe keep the hoverboard, but I want to make some changes on it when I got it (new velcro applied on all 4 red stripes and the green one), and new battery cover made from molding the retail one in fiberglass, and then sandpaper the writings and create recessed screwholes so it matches better the original battery cover. I don't mind if the new screws doesn't match and I have to glue the new battery cover and I can´t open it again. I don't want to put batteries on the board nor the sound effects mind me at all.
Also, I want to make some tiny changes like painting in black the handlebar hole and the screws from the magnet holders.
But I have a question about matching colors.
My reference for the velcro and battery pack colour will be this original hoverboard:
ScreenUsed Mattel Hoverboard - YouTube
I found a seller on ebay that has luminous velcro in green, pink and red. It's this link, and you have to choice the colour next to the photo to see it:
Sew On Velcro Like Hook and Loop Fasteners Strap 25 mm Colorful Free Shipping | eBay
Luminous Green is great for the green stripe, but I don't know exactly what color should I use for the red/pink stripes. The original velcro from the board of the video is similar to the luminous red, but I think Mattel's Hoverboard is more pinkish than originals, so maybe luminous pink shall be a better choice. What do you think?
Also, if I make a new battery pack cover in fiberglass, can somebody tell me what spray color code should I use to match the pink from the original board?
Thanks a lot!
JakeBluesZombie
New Member
Excellent! Count me in!
Has anyone seen any REAL video demo of the sound or vibration? I've seen nothing showing the sounds that it makes.
The gliding isn't too impressive going by SDCC, I could take a glass plate and do the same thing...the plate would probably have better distance.
Ojobenito
Well-Known Member
Also, as I pointed out on mattycollector forums, the "lenticular" pattern (to call it something, because is not lenticular), has been fixed since the HUGE scaled pattern from sdcc model. But it's still bigger than it should be. The pattern has to be around 20% smaller than it is now.
It's been fixed (kind of), but not enough.
It's been fixed (kind of), but not enough.
No problem man, we're cool. I just want to make sure we focus and work as a team against a common foe!
Actually I wanted Matty to succeed, just looks like they chose to fail. Hate to call them a foe but also want top consider what alternatives and fallout could occur.
As for the legal quip, I will base my education and degree against other Holiday Inn members legal background.
Actually I wanted Matty to succeed, just looks like they chose to fail. Hate to call them a foe but also want top consider what alternatives and fallout could occur.
As for the legal quip, I will base my education and degree against other Holiday Inn members legal background.
Clock88
Well-Known Member
autoprops713
Sr Member
Trip, Matty could not succeed with this collector group. I knew that up front which is why I started posting what I believe were realistic observations by my buddies. The failure here was not on the design and engineering side (because they were completely capable) but with the over-zealous marketing team.
The other issue is exactly how off is this hoverboard and who exactly can judge this? I'm not trying to cause trouble here but you get where I'm going with this. One collector's "looks great" is another one's "way off".
When I supervised the 1/18 scale Ferrari line I would get email after email from collectors that would tell me our cars were really incorrect. I personally agreed. However....Ferrari approved all the patterns and said perfect. In the case of the hoverboard if Mattel gets sign off from Universal, Bob, etc....I don't think to them anybody else matters. It's wrong, but that's how they think.
Dave
The other issue is exactly how off is this hoverboard and who exactly can judge this? I'm not trying to cause trouble here but you get where I'm going with this. One collector's "looks great" is another one's "way off".
When I supervised the 1/18 scale Ferrari line I would get email after email from collectors that would tell me our cars were really incorrect. I personally agreed. However....Ferrari approved all the patterns and said perfect. In the case of the hoverboard if Mattel gets sign off from Universal, Bob, etc....I don't think to them anybody else matters. It's wrong, but that's how they think.
Dave
JakeBluesZombie
New Member
I keep being astonished at how the battery box clears the MAG pads by what looks like 1/16 of an inch. Crazy!
guys I posted alot of close up shots here out of the glass
Mattel Hoverboard pics comic con :thumbsup
Mattel Hoverboard pictures by pitbull1632 - Photobucket
Mattel Hoverboard pics comic con :thumbsup
Mattel Hoverboard pictures by pitbull1632 - Photobucket
brivette007
Well-Known Member
And more...
Mmm, sexy! (and no, not the board)
Hey Ojobenito, if you're successful in making a new battery cover, you should consider starting a run of those! I'd definitely buy one. That writing and those screw holes (designed by real screw-holes:lol) look awful.
Oh, and DpM, after spending the entire afternoon digging though bank statements, old papers, and my computer, I found out that I actually used a different card that did not expire. So all is good. I wish you luck with your phone call, though. Hopefully better than the generic canned email I got. :rolleyes
Last edited:
Clock88
Well-Known Member
Dave,
I agree. The problem is the whole thing was marketed wrong from the get go. Making the YouTube video of Bob Gale and the prop hoverboards was a terrible idea. They didn't end up making a prop replica (which they marketed); they essentially made a toy based on the movie prop that had restrictions on what they could do. Why even bring the real props in if you are not going to copy them exactly (which they promised)?
I have to say there was certainly some design and engineering flubs, though. Some things can be up to interpretation because there were so many hoverboards (although they should have just copied Bob Gale's board graphic exactly), BUT some other things about the board are just completely wrong. I don't think there is a single measurement that matches the magnets and brackets on the original prop. What happened there?
I agree. The problem is the whole thing was marketed wrong from the get go. Making the YouTube video of Bob Gale and the prop hoverboards was a terrible idea. They didn't end up making a prop replica (which they marketed); they essentially made a toy based on the movie prop that had restrictions on what they could do. Why even bring the real props in if you are not going to copy them exactly (which they promised)?
I have to say there was certainly some design and engineering flubs, though. Some things can be up to interpretation because there were so many hoverboards (although they should have just copied Bob Gale's board graphic exactly), BUT some other things about the board are just completely wrong. I don't think there is a single measurement that matches the magnets and brackets on the original prop. What happened there?
Likewise bro :thumbsup I wish I could of chilled out a bit more :unsure it was total chaos in there lol Did you push those items?
bowspearer
New Member
One giant elephant in the room with this isn't that we're disappointed with the design. If it was just that I could agree completely that after the initial passionate disappointement; there are bigger fish to fry.
However there's more to it in this case. If Mattel had now moved to a point of allowing for anyone who feels this is a bait and switch to opt-out then people's criticisms of the stances of people such as myself would be reasonable.
However that isn't what's happening here. Mattel are still insisting on clinging to the no cancellations policy; while only caving once people escalate things to a point where Mattel have a figurative legal gun pointed at their heads in the form of the likes of the BBB.
It's the fact that it's not just the disappointment but having to deal with this case of fraud hanging over us until after November which makes this far from over and why people being rather less than happy about all of this, is entirely justified.
However there's more to it in this case. If Mattel had now moved to a point of allowing for anyone who feels this is a bait and switch to opt-out then people's criticisms of the stances of people such as myself would be reasonable.
However that isn't what's happening here. Mattel are still insisting on clinging to the no cancellations policy; while only caving once people escalate things to a point where Mattel have a figurative legal gun pointed at their heads in the form of the likes of the BBB.
It's the fact that it's not just the disappointment but having to deal with this case of fraud hanging over us until after November which makes this far from over and why people being rather less than happy about all of this, is entirely justified.
On a positive note.
I was playing with the board for about 15 minutes today and absolutley hogged it from everyone :lol.I will tell you guys this put aside the innacuracies the board is really cool.I do like the hover sounds that it gives off and when you put it to your side by your waist it shuts off.The board has a pretty good weight to it but not that heavy, just enough so it feels like a quality board.The board might look a little cheap in some areas but I think it looks cool up close and personal.I took great pics and in my eyes the board looks even better in person.I'm pissed of with those blemishes were all frowning upon but in the end for $130 I'm gonna be very satisfied with it.When I pre-ordered the board I pretty much knew we weren't getting a 100% SA board anyway so it is what it is why cry over it anymore?.Look at it this way this hoverboard is most likely what it would of looked like if Mattel would of came out with it as a toy replica in 1989.Whatever the case may be surrounding accuracy this board is gonna be a really cool part of my collection and I'm pretty excited to get it:thumbsup.
I was playing with the board for about 15 minutes today and absolutley hogged it from everyone :lol.I will tell you guys this put aside the innacuracies the board is really cool.I do like the hover sounds that it gives off and when you put it to your side by your waist it shuts off.The board has a pretty good weight to it but not that heavy, just enough so it feels like a quality board.The board might look a little cheap in some areas but I think it looks cool up close and personal.I took great pics and in my eyes the board looks even better in person.I'm pissed of with those blemishes were all frowning upon but in the end for $130 I'm gonna be very satisfied with it.When I pre-ordered the board I pretty much knew we weren't getting a 100% SA board anyway so it is what it is why cry over it anymore?.Look at it this way this hoverboard is most likely what it would of looked like if Mattel would of came out with it as a toy replica in 1989.Whatever the case may be surrounding accuracy this board is gonna be a really cool part of my collection and I'm pretty excited to get it:thumbsup.
JakeBluesZombie
New Member
This honestly sounds encouraging, and I like the idea of 'how this would actually look in the real world' as molded in solid plastic versus the foam or wood which is what they originally had as we all know. From the samples at their meeting, the bevel on the upper edge seems so slight, that it could almost be a rounded edge, I think this is taking some liberties, but I am happy they at least kept the correct bevel for the bottom of the board.
Hey Pitt, do you have any video of the sound or the gliding features? How well do they work? How about the vibration? What are you thoughts about the foot strap?
Muchos Gracias.
Dave, first let me say that I really do appreciate the information you've shared along the way. I felt the response to the troll was a "win" because it represented a strong response to someone expressing open disdain and a mocking attitude towards those that are genuinely upset over how this has turned out just because their discussion had veered into legal areas. But I'm all for moving on...
You suggested that true measurements may be open to interpretation. But the bottom part dimensions, for instance, are not really subjective. Other than the battery pack on the special board with the hovering effect achieved via wire stand, they were quite consistent from board to board. It is very possible to judge how off Mattel's board's bottom part assembly is by comparing them to the screen-used references that Mattel was shown and measured when Bob Gale came in.
As someone above posted, it doesn't appear that a single measurement of the bottom parts is correct. The entire collection of bottom parts is made up of approximated shapes that have an overall resemblance to the real shapes but are off in every dimensions—diameter, height, thickness.
While Mattel in the mattycollector forum explained why they chose to forego accuracy in several areas, no one has yet offered up a logical explanation for why the shapes and dimensions of the bottom parts were created to be noticeably and quite obviously different than those of the originals which Mattel was given access to. To me, this is absolutely the result of the design and engineering team, or is there something I'm missing? Marketing deserves it's share of the blame. I guess I'm just feeling that design and engineering still retain a fair portion as well.
You suggested that true measurements may be open to interpretation. But the bottom part dimensions, for instance, are not really subjective. Other than the battery pack on the special board with the hovering effect achieved via wire stand, they were quite consistent from board to board. It is very possible to judge how off Mattel's board's bottom part assembly is by comparing them to the screen-used references that Mattel was shown and measured when Bob Gale came in.
As someone above posted, it doesn't appear that a single measurement of the bottom parts is correct. The entire collection of bottom parts is made up of approximated shapes that have an overall resemblance to the real shapes but are off in every dimensions—diameter, height, thickness.
While Mattel in the mattycollector forum explained why they chose to forego accuracy in several areas, no one has yet offered up a logical explanation for why the shapes and dimensions of the bottom parts were created to be noticeably and quite obviously different than those of the originals which Mattel was given access to. To me, this is absolutely the result of the design and engineering team, or is there something I'm missing? Marketing deserves it's share of the blame. I guess I'm just feeling that design and engineering still retain a fair portion as well.
Similar threads
