Hot Toys – MMS132 - Iron Man 2: Mark VI full spec and pics

[ali032373]

No way. He's got 2 shoulders full of those little missles that pop up.

If he wanted to end it quickly he could fly t800 over a vat of lava and just drop him in. Game over man. Game over.

 

[obi_dave_kenobi]

NERD BATTLE!!!!

If sarah connor and kyle reese can take one down. I'm certain Rhodey would have no problems with him.

It would be like Bambi vs. Godzilla. Game over man!!!

 

[dedguy]

If you're talking War Machine in the movie he has ONE missile in his shoulder and no indication that there are anymore. The only indication as to what is possibly in that other weapons pod is the grenade launcher shown in the Hammer scene. If that is in fact a grenade launcher then it would have minimal effect on a Terminator since again… grenades are made to take out soft targets.

He could fly a Terminator over a vat of lava? Yeah sure and while he's doing that the Terminator just sits there passively? No. It would be trying to rip apart the armor.

 

[ali032373]

NERD BATTLE!!!!

If sarah connor and kyle reese can take one down. I'm certain Rhodey would have no problems with him.

THANK YOU. Light work for WM.

 

[dedguy]

Kyle Reese was trained specifically to take down a Terminator and had a lot of preparation and STILL FAILED. Sarah Conner just got lucky. She didn't kill the Terminator, she used a massive piece of equipment to do it. It's not like either of them did it with their bare hands.

If War Machine knew what he was up against and had a few weeks of prep time? Sure. If it's just a stand up battle between what we see in both movies? It's far from a sure thing for War Machine.

If it's a Terminator with the weapons from the future? One shot one kill.

Given that we know current modern anti-personaelle weapons are totally ineffectual against a Terminator it means we're really talking strength vs strength. We have no way of knowing what fictional strength either of them has but given that War Machine is based on a prototype piece of "modern" powered armor and the Terminator is a much refined piece of future technology which uses future alloys… it seems totally illogical that War Machine would stand a chance. This seems more a matter of "I like War Machine more so he'd win lol" than actually thinking it through.

 

[ali032373]

Not at all. You present a well thought out argument in favor of the terminator. But I must disagree. Terminators and all their future tech continue to fail. Plus I think WM is stronger and he can fly. I don't know if a plasma rifle can pierce WM's armor. Guessing no.

 

[viruz777]

Thank you. I love coming to Malaysia too. Will definitely go to Genting Island again lol.

I bought all my HT this past months from US sellers and some european, asian, and canadian as well.

Have them all shipped by container back home. Hope they all make through home safely. LOL

Why don't you pack your toys in a sturdy box and bring it with you when you fly home? Wouldn't it be safer that way? At least that's how I'm doing it...

With all the natural disasters happening recently the thought of all my hard earned collection in a ship at sea is sort of scary >.<

 

[dedguy]

Not at all. You present a well thought out argument in favor of the terminator. But I must disagree. Terminators and all their future tech continue to fail. Plus I think WM is stronger and he can fly. I don't know if a plasma rifle can pierce WM's armor. Guessing no.

Well a plasma or electric or whatever whip clearly can.

 

[ali032373]

You're right. I take back the plasma rifle thing.

I enjoy a spirited geek debate once in a while. Also, I love the Terminator waaay more than WM.

 

[obi_dave_kenobi]

Good debate. and good points guys!!

 

[dedguy]

The Terminators always loose because of narrative causality. In order for the good guys to win they have to be destroyed. If you take the technology out of the context of narrative it doesn't seem logical to me that a piece of technology barely more advanced than current real world technology, and a prototype piece of tech at that, could defeat a piece of highly refined very similar technology from a far flung future.

I mean they're really very similar the main differences being materials, refinement, and the Terminator basically being a sort of in-side out version of War Machine. Oh and if the fleshy parts of War Machine get damaged that matters while it doesn't with the Terminator.

Assuming the Terminator is un-armed the two benefits that War Machine has over the Terminator are weapons and flight. The weapons I do not believe would have any impact on the Terminator what so ever. They where barely effective against Whiplash II. The flight would only be useful to run away. If it was used to pick up the Terminator, if anything, it would be a benefit to the unarmed Terminator who would now be in immediate melee range.

You could conceivably drop it from high enough to damage it but there's two problems with that.

- As clearly shown, War Machine would loose power and ice-up at a certain height.

- That entire time War Machine would be without the use of his arms while the Terminator would be able to punch, rip, and tear at War Machine all it wanted.

In any fight Tony would have WAY better chances. In a stand up fight or if Tony had prep, still he'd do far better than War Machine. I'd still give the edge to the Terminator but Tony would far way way better.

 

[ali032373]

Barely effective?? Kyle Reese used a small, well placed homemade bomb and blew the t800 in half, effectively rendering him combat useless. WM has like 10,000 times that capacity. I'm willing to bet if Reese can do it with his little home made bomb, WM (the one man army) can do it too.

 

[dedguy]

Kyle was from the same future as the Terminator and not only had extensive military training to specifically combat that future technology but had extensive experience with improvisation. He specifically knew what the weakest part on a T800 was and what cold be best used to exploit that. He also, as I said, had time to prepare.

This knowledge cannot be undervalued which you seem to be doing. Could Batman with adequate time defeat War Machine despite being substantially undergunned? Of course he could. It would be a simply task.

Kyle had extensive knowledge of Terminators and how to kill them. He had been doing it and managing to survive for his entire life. War Machine has no such benefit. It's not simply a matter of pipe-bomb = Terminator defeat.

Somewhat irrelevant but even a home made explosive, especially by a trained professional, can be massively destructive. From what we can see in the movie, War Machine has no explosives. He just has pistol rounds, rifle rounds, and shotgun shells. None of these would penetrate current modern vehicle armor.

If you're saying War Machine has the physical strength of an explosion that's ridiculous. They're not even comparable and even if they where a decent sized explosive will vastly outpower any similarly sized mechanical device in it's ability to move matter.

The Iron Man movies also have gross lapses in technological logic. Much more so than Terminator. There's some incredibly unrealistic stuff that happens and things that are totally illogical. Whiplash II really should have stood zero chance against the Mark VI let alone both the Mark VI and War Machine. Even given that they just had to fight a bunch of robots. Instead both the VI and WM are shown to be pretty much entirely ineffective against Whiplash II even though that armor is conceivably built from the same components as the Drones which both the VI and WM where just tearing apart moments earlier. The guns on WM's arms fire pistol rounds and shotgun shells. Neither of which will penetrate a flack jacket with any efficacy yet they're shown just tearing apart drones made from heavy duty full metal armor. No matter what the materials involved or the type of rounds being fired that's physically impossible.

 

[ali032373]

I don't think one of us will convince the other. Let's let the people vote/weigh in based on the points raised.

And yes there are some tech issues in the I'M movies but I think you're late in raising that argument.

 

[dedguy]

No, I'm just saying weighing the technical merits of the designs is really hampered by Iron Man's total lack of acknowledgment of reality and even major lapses in consistency in how they ignore reality.

You're comparing them based on what they do while I'm comparing them based on what they are.

 

[pepez]

He could fly a Terminator over a vat of lava? Yeah sure and while he's doing that the Terminator just sits there passively? No. It would be trying to rip apart the armor.

What can it do if it's carried bottom down. Just grab it by the legs and dump it to the lave lol.
Remember the scene on Salvation where T-600 was hung upside down. It can't do 180 up. It can only shoot it's feet.

 

[Y4NK33 PL4N3T]

I'm looking for the HT mark VI thread can someone point me in the right direction?

 

[dedguy]

A T-600 isn't a T-800. They clearly lack the flexibility and maneuverability of the T-800.

 

[pepez]

Why don't you pack your toys in a sturdy box and bring it with you when you fly home? Wouldn't it be safer that way? At least that's how I'm doing it...

With all the natural disasters happening recently the thought of all my hard earned collection in a ship at sea is sort of scary >.<

I would definitely do that if it's only 1 or 2 boxes. The fact that I have predator line, IM line, terminator line, batman line, and random HT line makes it impossible for me to bring them all on the plane with me lol.

Yes it's risky but it's the only choice. I can't sell all the figures I bought and hunted so hard

Just wish me luck

 

[pepez]

I'm looking for the HT mark VI thread can someone point me in the right direction?

You are in it just refer to few pages back lol.