thegreatgalling
Master Member
I know it's been said but I do wish there was a faster way to make the lights alternate faster. I know they say the real prop had a dial, but I don't remember seeing Harold Ramos spinning back there like a maniac. :lol
Official Ghostbusters PKE Meter Prop
- Thread starter mtsbspidey
- Start date
Got mine today too! This truly is a great piece at a great price. I sincerely hope they look at doing other GB props as well!
Now my dilemma - do I finish the PKE kit I was building, or not?
Sean
Now my dilemma - do I finish the PKE kit I was building, or not?
Sean
exoray
Master Member
Well as I suspected it's a GREAT toy but it's not an accurate replica... It has the right overall shape but just about every detail and proportion is inconsistent with the real thing... One hell of a toy to take out in costume and play with, but far from the level of accuracy I desire for my 'collector' GB props...
protokev DMD
Sr Member
Ugh, Im currently home from school and even made sure to call matty ages ago to change my shipping address to reflect the move. What did they do...ship it to my school apartment. I am trying to get it changed but im not holding my breath i will see my pkes anytime soon
Charles Kline
Sr Member
Dont know about GB2, but the GB1 mode is accurate.
slave1pilot
Sr Member
Ok...
Apparently i am blind as a bat.
I thought my weathering was light (almost nonexistent)
nope
i was wrong
it's obvious
Apparently i am blind as a bat.
I thought my weathering was light (almost nonexistent)
nope
i was wrong
it's obvious
Charles Kline
Sr Member
Its identical* to the available castings.
Which makes sense because the mattel guy said in an interview that they used ebay for research.
(* not identical identical, but damn close.
exoray
Master Member
If you are curious to what is inconsistent the main obvious issues are the wings they are simply wrong in so many ways and to me this is the biggest distraction they are one big eye sore, the handle is flared too much at the end, the indented reveal areas on the sides are way too wide and the wrong profile and shape and and the main body has been widened right where it meets the handle loosing it's 'hourglass' curve that follows the faceplate... There are multiple other small issues but they are not as glaring as the ones I pointed out above, and unless you are holding a real polisher in hand or have studied the prop in detail you won't really notice them... But basically a lot of the curves and profiles are exaggerated...
exoray
Master Member
I'll give it an overall correct shape, but I won't use the word identical in any context...
Charles Kline
Sr Member
Yeah, its not like the molded it, but you can tell some of the details that they focused on recreating. the overall shape is tweaked in about every dim.
Charles Kline
Sr Member
exoray
Master Member
If you want to see some of the more obvious issues...
PKEmeterp3
Go there and look at the first picture (the profile) of the real deal, hold your PKE up next to it, now look at the angle of attack for the the screen, look at the stepped reveal around the screen/face plate, especially up near the front/top where they really exaggerated the initial step, nearly 3x the height that it should be... Notice how the face plate on the real deal is nearly flat while the Matty one is a hump back... Next look at the indented reveal, on the real deal it's a smooth thin curved swooping scallop not a sharp straight in groove like with a hard flat edge, and it's much thinner profile on the real deal...
Next go here for the biggest eye sore with the wings...
PKEmeterp4
Again look at the first photo on that page, that is how the wings should look in the closed resting position, not sticking out a 1/4" or better....
The second photo on that page really shows how much they exaggerated the initial step on the faceplate...
Are these details most and the general public will care about? Likely not... But just the same to those that do care and have studied in detail the inconsistencies are glaring...
*** With the photos Charles Kline just posted most of the details I have described should be pretty obvious...
PKEmeterp3
Go there and look at the first picture (the profile) of the real deal, hold your PKE up next to it, now look at the angle of attack for the the screen, look at the stepped reveal around the screen/face plate, especially up near the front/top where they really exaggerated the initial step, nearly 3x the height that it should be... Notice how the face plate on the real deal is nearly flat while the Matty one is a hump back... Next look at the indented reveal, on the real deal it's a smooth thin curved swooping scallop not a sharp straight in groove like with a hard flat edge, and it's much thinner profile on the real deal...
Next go here for the biggest eye sore with the wings...
PKEmeterp4
Again look at the first photo on that page, that is how the wings should look in the closed resting position, not sticking out a 1/4" or better....
The second photo on that page really shows how much they exaggerated the initial step on the faceplate...
Are these details most and the general public will care about? Likely not... But just the same to those that do care and have studied in detail the inconsistencies are glaring...
*** With the photos Charles Kline just posted most of the details I have described should be pretty obvious...
O.k. Dumb Ass Question time! Will the electronics ( in anyway! ) fit into one of the cast Iona shells?
exoray
Master Member
I personally won't bother trying, you would likely get better results just tweaking the Matty one to be more accurate...
SD Studios
Well-Known Member
Its
a
toy-eeeee!!!!!
a
toy-eeeee!!!!!
DrMcoy
Sr Member
While I do not do GB cosplay, I loved the movie and did order the Matty PKE as I also collect props (mostly classic Star Trek....phasers, communicators, etc.)....plus I play pretend with my 6 year old daughter who likes the first GB movie and often asks me to pretend I am Egon while she pretends to be some dragon or Pokemon or other creature, and I had been using a TV remote control to fill in for the PKE meter so I could "scan" her.
I am 48 years old. I started liking Trek when I was 6 or 7. I used to comb the aisles of the department stores back then in hopes of finding a toy phaser or communicator...no luck for many years, and when something did come out, it was grossly misproportioned and/or molded in color nowhere close to the actual prop (i.e. bright blue instead of black).
It wasn't until almost THIRTY YEARS later that they finally made toys that were 95% identical to the actual props AND they had authentic light and sounds.
My point...for a toy, the PKE is amazing. I understand the attention to the most minor details, as I am the same way about the Trek toy/props, and the frustration you die-hard GB enthusiasts must feel. And while the PKE toy is still pricey for a toy, it is amazingly accurate --I'd say 95% to my eye.
I guess whatever you collect, and whatever stock you place in judging it as a toy or more expensive prop recreation, the bottom line is are you happier with it or without it. If you obsess over the minor inaccuracies and will not be content with it as is, then I imagine you can either try to correct them or purchase a more accurate (and expensive) prop replica.
I realize this discussion begs the question, why didn't they just make it 100% accurate? I imagine this can only be answered by the engineers/designers and manufacturers of the piece.
Understand that I am NOT trying to belittle those that obsess over the small stuff....but having done so myself for many years over the Trek props, I can tell you that I spent waaaaaay too much time fretting over details on something that, at the end of the day, are simply toys...whether they are $500 prop replicas or $20 toys...they are all toys. And when the obsessing overcomes the joy of collecting or owning a piece of a movie/TV show you love, well, to me, it just sort of takes the fun out of the entire experience.
My humble two cents.
I am 48 years old. I started liking Trek when I was 6 or 7. I used to comb the aisles of the department stores back then in hopes of finding a toy phaser or communicator...no luck for many years, and when something did come out, it was grossly misproportioned and/or molded in color nowhere close to the actual prop (i.e. bright blue instead of black).
It wasn't until almost THIRTY YEARS later that they finally made toys that were 95% identical to the actual props AND they had authentic light and sounds.
My point...for a toy, the PKE is amazing. I understand the attention to the most minor details, as I am the same way about the Trek toy/props, and the frustration you die-hard GB enthusiasts must feel. And while the PKE toy is still pricey for a toy, it is amazingly accurate --I'd say 95% to my eye.
I guess whatever you collect, and whatever stock you place in judging it as a toy or more expensive prop recreation, the bottom line is are you happier with it or without it. If you obsess over the minor inaccuracies and will not be content with it as is, then I imagine you can either try to correct them or purchase a more accurate (and expensive) prop replica.
I realize this discussion begs the question, why didn't they just make it 100% accurate? I imagine this can only be answered by the engineers/designers and manufacturers of the piece.
Understand that I am NOT trying to belittle those that obsess over the small stuff....but having done so myself for many years over the Trek props, I can tell you that I spent waaaaaay too much time fretting over details on something that, at the end of the day, are simply toys...whether they are $500 prop replicas or $20 toys...they are all toys. And when the obsessing overcomes the joy of collecting or owning a piece of a movie/TV show you love, well, to me, it just sort of takes the fun out of the entire experience.
My humble two cents.
Last edited:
slave1pilot
Sr Member
Gotta agree wholeheartedly with DrMcoy
