QMx Unveils 2009 Star Trek Movie Enterprise Replica – Yours For $5k | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

QMx Unveils 2009 Star Trek Movie Enterprise Replica – Yours For $5k October 18, 2011

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Replicas,Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback

After two years Quantum Mechanix has finally revealed the final design for their Artisan Replica of the USS Enterprise from JJ Abrams 2009 Star Trek movie. They will start taking pre-orders at the end of this month and so if you have $5000, one of these limited edition replicas can be yours. See below for pictures and details.

 

QMx "Star Trek" 2009 USS Enterprise Artisan Replica

The QMx replica of the 2009 Star Trek movie USS Enterprise is about 3 feet long and over a foot tall (mounted). QMx stresses that it has spent the last couple of years painstakingly going over the ILM digital master files to create a screen-accurate version of the ship which was originally CGI model. It has over 200 lighting effects and is hand-painted. QMx says "no detail was spared, from the hand-painted graphics to the tiny shuttlecraft docked in the shuttle bay."


New Artisan Replica "Star Trek" 2009 USS Enterprise from QMx

According to QMx each Artisan Enterprise is built with using the same techniques as a filming miniatures. The replica has many details that were only barely glimpsed on screen and is constructed out of resin, laser-cut acrylic and styrene, and features an internal network of brass tubing and steel rods that help ensure rigidity and longevity.

Great detail was paid to the lighting system, featuring:


Attention to detail on SS Enterprise paintjob and lighting

The U.S.S. Enterprise Artisan Replica sits on a stand that’s principally a large, rectangular mirror, which shows off the underside detail of the ship. Plaques on either side of the ship include the ship’s name and edition number.


Mirrored base and plaque

The replica also offers a number of options for customization including battle damage and placement of the shuttle bay doors. You can also have a custom engraved base.


Detail on shuttle bay

The QMx Star Trek (2009) U.S.S. Enterprise Artisan Replicas will be limited to a run of 250 ships total. Each hand-built starship will set you back $4,995. QMX will begin taking orders on October 31st. You can sign up today for the waiting list at Qmxonline.com.


"Star Trek" 2009 USS Enterprise – preorders begin Oct. 31

More from QMX

And if you have another $5,000 handy, you can pick up the QMx Artisan Replica of the USS Enterprise Refit, as seen in the 1979 Star Trek: The Motion Picture


Artisan Replica USS Enterprise Refit from QMx

QMx also offers additional Star Trek 2009 movie items, including 2009 Star Trek phaser replica (see TrekMovie review), badge replicas and posters. They will also soon be offering animated maquette statues from the Star Trek movie (see TrekMovie preview). QMx also offer replicas, posters, shirts and more for Batlestar Galactica, Warehouse 13, Doctor Who, Firefly, and other franchises. Find out more at QMXOnline.com.

Comments

1. NuFan - October 18, 2011

Can someone loan me $5000?

2. guest - October 18, 2011

I sent several requests for a cost/quote for the refit (the only one I’d buy), finally I get it here. No response from QMx! Unfortunately, it’s about double what I expected the cost to be, not going to get that one past the wife…
I’d be curious as to how fast 250 orders come in…

3. Dave Thornton - October 18, 2011

I’m sorry,
but showing the “TMP” U.S.S. Enterprise only shows just how awful the 2009 U.S.S. Enterprise looks in comparison.

At no time in the 2009 Movie did Ryan Church’s Enterprise EVER, look as beautiful and magestic as Andrew Proberts ” Motion Picture” one does.
I would not give Fifity bucs for it, let alone 5 grand.

Just a very ugly ,rushed and not thought through looking design .

4. Devon - October 18, 2011

^^ No it’s fine.

In fact, very awkward view of the TMP Enterprise.

Discussion over :)

5. Vultan - October 18, 2011

Poor Abrams Enterprise. I hope nobody got hurt in that wreck.

6. Captain Andrew Bryce - October 18, 2011

New Enterprise FTW. I know there are a lot of haters out there but the redesign is so much better in my opinion. I love the sleek lines of it.

7. Jordan from UGO - October 18, 2011

sweet

8. Clinton - October 18, 2011

Saw it at ComicCon, as well as the TMP model. They are beautiful…but it’s beauty my wallet can only admire from afar.

9. Newman - October 18, 2011

@3 Myself, I think something was lost when the industry went from models to full cgi to create these ships.

10. Nony - October 18, 2011

Come to me, my pretties… if I had $10k, I’d buy both. I love the sleek curving lines of the reboot Enterprise, looks like a sexy sports car. And the TMP refit is a majestic design.

11. rm10019 - October 18, 2011

8 was that NY comic con??

12. THX-1138 - October 18, 2011

The $5,000 price tag is redunculous. Not that it isn’t worth it, I guess. But you would sell a lot more of them at 1/5 the price. Or perhaps if they were scaled down a bit.

Who am I kidding. I couldn’t afford one at $1,000. Star making something around $500 and I would be in the market to at least save my ducats. Ya’ know, put it on my birthday or Christmas wish list. As it is, my wish list would get laughed off the table.

I need $12,000 dollars to get those two ships and find a MR TOS Enterprise. You think those Occupy Wall Street folks might be able to figure something out? Divert some of the corporate greed into “THX-1138 ships collection slush fund”.

13. Vultan - October 18, 2011

#9

Agreed. But they are getting closer and closer to matching physical models. Lighting and textures look great. It’s the motion—the animation—that needs work. I mean, if a giant ship like the Enterprise swings through the frame like a fighter jet—well, it ain’t gonna compute.

14. C Mosenko - October 18, 2011

If I win the lottery I’d order TMP version, I have always liked the look of that ship. I have the ships from Art Asylum, they are affordable, and for the price are pretty good. The only trouble with the ones from Art Asylum, is waiting for the next ships to come out.

15. Lt. Bailey - October 18, 2011

They can keep this 2009 version, I’ll take TMP any day if I have to spend 5 grand for some thing.

16. DestinyCaptain - October 18, 2011

That 2009 thing is one expensive piece of crap.

17. Sebastian S. - October 18, 2011

I love the TMP refit and the Nu1701. To me, it’s apples and oranges; each have strengths and weaknesses.

But forgive me if my love for Nu1701 (or TMP refit, for that matter) stops at the $5,000 threshold. I’ll stick with the cheap, plastic toy version I bought a couple of years ago.

It only set me back about $20… ;-P

18. DAK23 - October 18, 2011

I absolutely HATE the 2009 design, but have to admit as far as replicas go, they did quite a lovely job.

Now, the ACTUAL Enterprise (refit) is the true beauty. Sleek lines, nice curves, logically designed (no need for darned ‘racing fins’), subdued yet intricate paint job. Just gorgeous.

Also, I’ll be whoring myself out to get that $5,000. Hit me up, lol!

19. Phil - October 18, 2011

RE: 2009 ENT…Nice!

20. Robman007 - October 18, 2011

Really, $5,000….seriously? That’s a bit insane. Way too crazy for essentially a nicely lit model and painted model.

A sucker is born every minute..thank god I’m not one of them.

No thanks. I’ll save up my hundred or so bucks and get me my 3 foot long ORIGINAL SERIES 1701 model kit next year.

21. Nelson - October 18, 2011

Less said about the 2009 Enterprise…..

Now I wonder if the refit Enterprise they are offering, which is 1:350 scale built off the Polar Lights kit? I plan to do a build myself and aim for that level of quality.

And same with the Polar Lights 1:350 scale TOS Enterprise when that is out next year!

22. Jonboc - October 18, 2011

Wow. Beautiful…and outrageously over priced. Lots of detractors of this ship…which I happen to love…so I don’t expect that run to sell out any time soon.

23. Craiger - October 18, 2011

I wonder if they are going to do all of the Enterprise’s if they did that imagine someone wanting all of them if they are all $5,000 a piece?

24. Radioactive Spock - October 18, 2011

Someday when i finally catch that greased up leprechaun that taunts me from beneath the rainbow diversity billboard on interstate 70, I WILL BUY THIS.

25. Browncoat1984 - October 18, 2011

Design and construction WIN Pricing FAIL

Good job at pricing it so high nobody will buy it.

26. PEB - October 18, 2011

#4 & #6 i’m with you on this! the original is the original, it’s classic, i’ll always enjoy it, but i really do love the new design. i like how sleek and streamlined it is, while retaining elements from the original series ship. alot of people seem to hate it just to hate it (sentiments that some still seem to have for the 09 movie). its still a ship i like more than many of the other era enterprises.

27. Craiger - October 18, 2011

I think they should do smaller versions of the Enterprise’s for maybe $100 a piece.

28. VZX - October 18, 2011

Can someone explain why there is so much hate directed towards the new Enterprise? I mean, it is more like the original version from the 60s TV show than the TMP refit version. The 2009 version’s nacelles are cylindrical rather than flat, the deflector dish is a separate, satellite dish-like piece, and the ratio of the nacelles, secondary hull and saucer section are almost exactly the same as the 60s version. Oh yeah, the 60s original also had fins.

So, why the hate? Other than the extra curves in the three supports, there are not many differences. The nacelles of the 2009 version are closer together, but I don’t see that as a big deal.

Yeah, I like it. If only I had an extra 5 grand around. I wonder if anyone from the production staff will get one. Hey Bob Orci, buy one and tell us how awesome it is.

29. Mikey1091 - October 18, 2011

Might I ask what middle class person/poverty level person, probably about 90 percent of the population, is going to have the 5G’s it’s gonna cost to buy this thing? I’m pretty sure they’ll have a magnificently hard time selling this. Lower the price to something everyone can actually AFFORD and maybe then you’ll sell something.

30. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - October 18, 2011

It would be worth more it it came with lense Flares.

31. Starman - October 18, 2011

ONLY 5000 FOR A MINIATURE?! I’ll take 20.

32. AdmNaismith - October 18, 2011

I took a quick look at the pics. When I got to the last one I thought for a second ‘Oh, that’s an attractive shot’ before realizing it was the TMP Enterprise (which is itself not even the best look for the TMP ship).

#28
the JJ-prise is out of proportion in comparison to itself and the look of the previous incarnations.
The shape of the nacelles is not the issue as much as they are HUGE and misshapen (in the same way the 2ndary hull is too small and squished) in comparison to the saucer.
The nacelles and engineering hull are from a different ship than the saucer, seemingly, so that the whole thing does not come together as a whole as other versions of the ship do. The Excelsior has similar problem with the way the nacelles are attached, so it’s not just JJ v Roddenberry for me.
In the TMP version the saucer is a little big, but in a way that adds interest other than seeming completely the wrong size.

33. Vultan - October 18, 2011

#28

Let’s put this in automotive design terms.

TOS Enterprise:

http://www.classicreflectionscarclub.com/Palm%20Bay%20Cruise%2002-11-2006%20resize/Bill%27s57Chevy.jpg

Abrams Enterprise:

http://www.cruisenewsonline.com/57ChevyProModStyleStreetLegal/57ChevyProModStyle-Top.jpg

See the difference?

34. jas_montreal - October 18, 2011

very nice !

35. Rusty0918 - October 18, 2011

Well don’t get me wrong. The 2009 version isn’t bad. It’s not as bad as I thought (though that brewery leaves something to be desired). Is it better than the TMP refit version? No.

Keep in mind that you’re talking about a completely different team. Rick Sternbach, Andrew Probert, John Eaves, and company aren’t coming back. They’re going to do things somewhat differently.

I think the annoying thing to me is the people who that those who question the design should be burned at the stake (hyperbolic idiom, btw).

36. DS9 IN PRIME TIME - October 18, 2011

5000 i bet not many people will be buying this item

37. BK - October 18, 2011

Amazing how much better TMP looks, despite being a design that’s 30 years older. That’s the one that I’d buy.

Any chance JJ fixes it for the next one? Might do better in the toy stores and at Hallmark…

38. Quatlo - October 18, 2011

I would have created professional DSLR promo images of each replica with proper depth of field for QMx in a trade for one of each, maybe.

39. Endeavour Crew - October 18, 2011

Exactly #33……

TMP Ent will always be a classic beauty- the soul of Star Trek.

Whereas JJ’s Nacelleprise- while being interesting will fade quickly after the movies end.

And no, I’m not a JJ hater. The Enterprise-E felt the same way. Interesting but not enduring.

For some reason ST makes for better TV rather than full blown flicks.

40. Captain Karl - October 18, 2011

hrmmm….I only have to sell 715 copies of my book to buy this….lol

41. Lyle Kinney - October 18, 2011

Lovely model but you’d think for 5K asking price they’d spend a few dollars and get a promo video shot in focus instead of on somebody’s camera phone…

42. Captain Karl - October 18, 2011

#39 I agree….TMP Ent will always be my favorite

43. Craiger - October 18, 2011

What about the original 1701 exterior with the computers the Abrams Enterprise had or the LCARS system?

44. Snugglepuff - October 18, 2011

I saw this a DragonCon this year. The pictures don’t do it justice, it looks beautiful!

45. boborci - October 18, 2011

5000 for an upside down toilet bowl attached to two hair dryers?

46. John Koenig - October 18, 2011

I can led anyone the 5k with compoud interest of 15% per year with colateral and a contract payable in 3 years.

I’ll be here.

47. TrekMD - October 18, 2011

Whether one likes the design of the new Enterprise or not, it is hard not to recognize the hard work these people put to create these models. It is unfortunate that they are so expensive because I would love to get both these ships! The attention to detail is remarkable!

Like many others, I do love the TMP version of the Enterprise. I don’t think any other Enterprise looks as beautiful.

48. Quatlo - October 18, 2011

Those are curling irons, I think…

49. Red Dead Ryan - October 18, 2011

#45.

Well, according to some people, that discription fits because those fans sure like to crap all over it!

Personally, I don’t think the J.JPrise is a bad design. In fact, it looks better as a physical model rather than the cgi version seen in the movie!

50. Shunnabunich - October 18, 2011

Tl;dr version of #32:

If the TOS Enterprise went through a few bouts of bulimia and put on bell bottoms, then OK, sure, the JJprise looks just like it.

#39: You expressed something that had been at the back of my mind. I think the Enterprise E is a hot little ship, but the design of it (as much as I like it) just fails to stick in my mind like the refit and Ent-D do. Those are iconic.

51. Brett Campbell - October 18, 2011

Does it include fuzzy dice for the bridge and Yosemite Sam “Back Off!” mud flaps for the super-size-me nacelles?

52. Dave Thornton - October 18, 2011

Why is it ;
whenever disliking anything Trek or Trek related,
The term “haters” is often used?

In NO way do I “Hate” It or the people who designed the C.G.I. model for the movie or the model makers of this $5,000 replica.

Like some others,
I simply do not care for the design.
But, it doesn’t mean we are Anti Trek , Trolls , Disloyal Fans or Haters
because of that dislike.

So if l possible,
Try to be more understanding and accepting of others opinions and viewpoints. Even if they tend to differ from what some would prefer to hear or believe :-)

53. Nick - October 18, 2011

Regards the pedigree of the NCC-1701 refit, I believe Andrew Probert did a large share of the design and, of course, the completion on this. I also undertand that Matt Jefferies did actually also contribute to the refit design as part of the proposed Phase 2 series.

I think this is right, anyone what to share their trivia knowledge?

Anyway, I’m just glad to be able to enjoy any Enterprise on this big screen but $5k US is too much for me. When I was a teenager I used to wood-work the Enterprise … with quite a few broom handles robbed for secondary hulls … my Dad loved that!

54. VZX - October 18, 2011

52: I have nothing against your opinion, I just wanted someone to better explain why they hate the 2009 so much. To each his own, I guess.

32: Thanks for your explanation, but I took out my models and measured all of them. The 2009 Enterprise has a closer match to the 60s original than the TMP in terms of saucer to secondary hull to nacelles ration. I did this since so many people state that the 2009 design is too much a departure from the original. My point is that it is more like the original than any others ever. (If interested: TOS saucer to 2nd hull to nacelles ratio: 1:0.78:1.13; TMP: 1:0.625:0.875; Trek09: 1:0.8:1.08)

OK, I get that maybe people just don’t like the aesthetics of it. Hey, I can’t stand the Enterprise-D, but that’s just me.

55. Miles R. Seppelt - October 18, 2011

I think the new Enterprise is the ugliest of them all…everything just looks too front heavy…

56. Buzz Cagney - October 18, 2011

I’ve yet to see anything with the realistic look and easy grace of the refit E in TMP. Glorious.
’09′s effort is ok’ish and i think they got it’s movement spot on but it is a bit awkward looking and, as others have said, front heavy.

57. Buzz Cagney - October 18, 2011

#54 i can’t stand the D either.

58. Christopher Doll - October 18, 2011

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

$5,000 for a painted lit resin model???

No thank you, I’d rather spend that on a lightly used Jetta.

QMX, Paramount Licensing- Get over yourselves. If I want this model I’ll build it myself, and for a hell of a lot less than $5K USD. For $5K you could outfit a respectable workshop to build this on your own.

And before any apologists pipe up about “accuracy” and “but it’s been designed from REAL LIVE CG FILES”… Yeah, you can find those if you know where to look.

Uncreative fascist toy makers.

59. Vultan - October 18, 2011

#57

Buzz, what is with your hatred of all things Star Trek? I just don’t get you, man. Next you’re gonna say the Enterprise should look like a Yaris.

;)

Nah, even as a fan of TNG, I can still see why some don’t like (or hate) the D. That deflector dish, much like the one on the Abrams Enterprise, does look a little too… well, like it’s puckering up for a big ole smooch.

60. DeShonn Steinblatt - October 18, 2011

Nobody likes Enterprise-D. Ugliest ship in the history of science fiction.

61. theone - October 18, 2011

I like it! :)

62. Rocket Scientist - October 18, 2011

I got the toy version of the JJprise, and it really helps to hold it in your hands and view it from multiple angles. Having said that, my reaction was more like “yeah…this is OK”, whereas my reactions to the TOS and later the TMP Enterprises were much more visceral and intense.

An icon like the Enterprise really should knock one’s socks off. JJprise didn’t do it. It works, but it’s not a home run.

Oh, and the Ent D? What a stinker! Hard to believe Probert had a hand in that one too.

63. Anthony Thompson - October 18, 2011

Only 5K? Are you sure??? : 0

64. MJ - October 18, 2011

@60 “Nobody likes Enterprise-D. Ugliest ship in the history of science fiction.”

I completely agree. It is horrendous looking — it looks like a ‘pregnant guppy”

65. MJ - October 18, 2011

The $5000 price point is ridculous. You know, if somebody did a really cool, but not gold plated, Enterprise for around $500, I think they would be suprised for the market at that price point. A lot of us could stretch and buy it for $500, but very, very few of us could spend $5000 on this.

66. Buzz Cagney - October 18, 2011

’59 Vults, no, a Prius buddy! ;D

In fairness I may have disliked the D because I just never connected with that ‘new’ crew. The dislike of the ship was just a natural extension.
Plus, for whatever reason it just never looked realistic to me.

67. SPOCKBOY - October 18, 2011

Beautifully made model, but hard as I have tried I just can’t get into the design. As Andrew Probert (designer of the TMP Enterprise) said “it is unbalanced”

My biggest problem with the design is obvious when you focus on where the warp engine is attached to the secondary hull.

Dare to compare…
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v617/spockboy/compare-1.jpg

:)

68. Buzz Cagney - October 18, 2011

btw, Vults, Did you hear, to make it safer for pedestrians, Nissan engineered in some noise for its new Nissan Leaf EV and they tried to give it a hint of the noise the Enterprise makes apparently!
One went by me the other day and there was indeed a very subtle suggestion of its warp drive capability!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yO5msMEGZI

69. MJ - October 18, 2011

@67. Nice comparison, thanks. However, they did extend the length of the secondary hull, so to me that makes up for the dramatic tapering where the engines are connected. In fact, you could make the argument that it is better stuctural engineering by moving the supporting members under/at the bottom of the hall versus having then enter the hall mid-section.

70. Vultan - October 18, 2011

#68

Cool!

Now comes the inevitable motorcycle that sounds like a TIE fighter, the truck that sounds like V’ger, the SUV that sounds like the DeLorean time machine, etc., etc…

Maybe someday folks will download their vehicle’s sound from iTunes!
The way of the future, Buzz. The way of the future.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_Pbx9mvWPY

71. Greenberg - October 18, 2011

I feel seriously, seriously sorry for anyone who throws down $5000 on this turkey.

72. Bradley - October 18, 2011

They should use something like this for Star Trek II/XII. They could scan the model from all angles and use CGI to add detail and for movement.

73. S. John Ross - October 19, 2011

#33: Nicely done :)

74. MC1 Doug - October 19, 2011

$5,000???!!!!

Yeah. Let’s order two–no, make that three!!!

75. MC1 Doug - October 19, 2011

#9: I’m with you! I miss the models… real models!

76. Hat Rick - October 19, 2011

Imagine what archaeologists of the future that discover these models will think. They’re created in such detail that they might as well be of actual starships, rather than fictional ones.

In the year 20,011, will a cybernetic version of humanity wonder if there’d been a vast conspiracy in “the past” to cover up the existence of ancient starfarers in the 21st Century?

Stay tuned … for the X^10 files!

77. Chris Pike - October 19, 2011

I try to like it but….can’t get past it……urghhh SO ugly!!!!!!

78. Victor Hugo - October 19, 2011

I got used to this new ship, same way i got used to Voyager, at first i found it very ugly ship, same way with the defiant, but learned to like it.

Now i like this one too, i´ll get a model yes, but a much smaller one,

79. rogue_alice - October 19, 2011

I am saving my money for the day when they put a real one in orbit and I can roam the corridors.

80. ToMaHaKeR - October 19, 2011

#79. Or if they ever make a hotel in the shape of the ship, so they bring you a breakfast to your quarters!

81. AdamTrek - October 19, 2011

Does anybody remember a high-priced Enterprise D that a company did many years ago? It was also a lit model, over 3 feet long and made out of brass, if I remember correctly. Those suckers went for a pretty penny as well. Curious to know if anyone here has one and how it’s held up over time.

=A=

82. Silvereyes - October 19, 2011

I would get the refit Enterprise, from TMP. The only true Enterprise. But unfortunately, I have a life so the $5,000 will have to be spent on something else.

83. SPOCKBOY - October 19, 2011

@69, Yes it’s much better to put all of the weight of something on the very end of something else.(something thin and weak) That’s like standing on one end of a see saw wondering why you are not moving. Balance. Even distribution of weight and mass.
Anyway, it’s a “fictional” ship so why are we arguing?

You like it, I don’t, I can live with that. :)

84. I'm Dead Jim - October 19, 2011

Who here would pay an EXTRA $250 to get your $5000 Enterprise “battle damaged”?

85. The First Son Of Krypton - October 19, 2011

The new Enterprise looks beautiful! The lighting for it is superb, if anything I prefer the rounder nacelles to the thick rectangles of the TMP one

Both look great but the new Enterprise is, IMO, the best design to date. Certainly a worthy addition to “The Line”

86. ALEC GRIMES - October 19, 2011

Some things are made for the wealthy, somethings are made for the 99%. Eventhough this replica is beautiful, I sure couldn’t afford it on my security guard salary. It’s disgusting that the fans who supported this franchise for so many years, continue to get the SHAFT bigtime. If i could afford it though, I would purchase both of the replicas….but damn…5K is 5 months of rent or a few car payments.

87. Charlie Y - October 19, 2011

To quote a wise engineer, “What do you want with that bucket of bolts?” Sorry; not a fan of Church’s design, though the model as shown is top-notch; must agree. I just can’t get past how awful the design is.

I agree with #82; the TMP Refit is my favorite ENTERPRISE. I have a phenomenal model of Matt Jeffries’ version in my office, built by a pro model builder back in the 90s. Doesn’t light up or anything fancy, but it’s a great build and I like it a lot.

88. Michael - October 19, 2011

I love all of them, I’m going to buy the 09′ version, STTMP, 1701-A & WOK Batlle Damaged models! To be able to do that, I’m going to sell blood, sells drugs, max out multiple credit cards, rob a liquer store, print counterfit money & deposit it inot my checking acct., have a bake sale, and then I’ll have enough! LOL :)

89. Robman007 - October 19, 2011

@ 21. Nelson

Yes, the Refit IS the Polar Lights kit. Identical, even with all the flaws. In email inquiries it seems that the Polar Lights kit is being used, but with some cosmetic changes and some different materials. Still, $5,000 for each is really, really lame and a huge shame.

Kinda makes ya question now why the 2009 Enterprise Polar Lights kit was cancelled. Why have a kit out there that costs $20-$30 bucks that can detract from sales from a model kit that costs $5,000?

90. VZX - October 19, 2011

@67:

Yes, that comparison pic makes me like the Trek09 version even more. The nacelles look powerful, as opposed to the rectangles of the TMP version.

Also, why should it matter where the center of gravity of a ship is in space? Look at the ISS, that doesn’t look “balanced” to me.

91. MrRegular - October 19, 2011

No thanks—The 2009 Enterprise has a lot of problems. Once you go beyond the saucer section and interconnecting dorsal then it goes downhill from there. The engineering section is too small to do its job (and well leave the issue of what is depicted in the engineering section for another comment thread). Of all of the warp nacelles I have seen in Trek, the ones mounted on this version of the Enterprise seem bloated, each almost matching the proportions of the engineering section. The whole design seems to indicate a lack of awareness of the center of gravity.

92. Buzz Cagney - October 19, 2011

#91 gravity? In space? Which is where, and correct me if i’m mistaken, the E tends to spend its time? ;)

93. Buzz Cagney - October 19, 2011

#70 Vults, I think i’d settle for the sound of a Aston or Ferrari my friend!
Preferably i’d settle for a Aston or Ferrari to go with the sound too!

94. Capt. of the U.S.S. Anduril - October 19, 2011

I knew it’d be expensive…and when I asked them about the smaller, more affordable models that they said were coming, they said they have no plans for small models. :(

95. Robert Bernardo - October 19, 2011

Wow, those $5K jobs make my Master Replicas’ NCC-1701 seem like a bargain at $1,195.

96. Z3R0B4NG - October 19, 2011

ok now we have a realy realy cheap one that is realy realy bad from Ban Dai…
and a realy realy awesome one that is realy realy expensive

now how about one that is actually looking good to and can actually be bought by people?

*sigh*

97. florian - October 19, 2011

the 2009 e is such a ugly, plumb ship. the artisan refit seems so much more complete, thought-out and well proportioned.

98. Lt. Bailey - October 19, 2011

I think the nacelles on the 2009 version look like the Dommsday machine int eh TOS episode. This ship just does not appeal to me as much as the TOS & TMP versions I grew up with.

99. Christopher Roberts - October 19, 2011

45. Giving serious thought to a refit then, Bob?

100. Battle-scarred Sciatica - October 19, 2011

love it or not, i would love one.

“…..and features an internal network of brass tubing and steel rods that help ensure rigidity and longevity.”

thats sounds like engineering to me.

yeah, i was never too sure about ol’ D either. at first i liked her because she was sooooo different. eventually when you take a good look at her she was too mis-shapen. side-on view looks nice and the view from above but most other angles made her look awful (my opinion of course – this is not hatred!!). i quite liked the deflector shape and colours but WTF was with all the decals? she was totally and utterly plastered in them.

can someone tell me the best models to get? i want to buy all versions of the enterprise and have them all around my office.

i still love all Trek though.

Keep on trekkin’

101. VZX - October 19, 2011

@92: The center of gravity and center of mass are the exact same thing, just used in different contexts. Everything has a center of gravity, yes, even in space.

That said, I don’t see why people care about the center of mass/gravity of a Starship. It is in space, as you mentioned.

102. Exodus_Captain_A62 - October 19, 2011

Hey all the 2009 haters came out from under that rock they’ve been hiding under all this time! Seriously, why can’t you guys accept change? You’re no better than those “GEE-WUN” Transformers fans. Things change over the years, get over it. I mean, I love TOS just as much as any other series, but, when it comes to showing how advanced Technology should be by that time, (i.e. touchscreens instead of a bunch of buttons, streamlined instead of blocky, etc.) Im goin with the new.

Having said that, there’s no way in hell I’d pay for either E’s. To be honest, they aren’t worth that much. Yah, they are cool as f***, but not $4 or $5g’s cool. Plus, IMO, there were better E’s out there. Gimme a Nemesis E and we can talk. Or hell, even an Excelsior would be nice. Since they are much bigger, at least $1000 would be reasonable.

103. Buzz Cagney - October 19, 2011

Indeed.

104. Thomas Jensen - October 19, 2011

I don’t like the JJ Enterprise design at all. It’s all squatty body. But if I lived in that universe…I’d love it.

105. Phil - October 19, 2011

@101. We have had this conversation before. The forces exerted on a starship will need to be resisted by the structure of the ship, and the basic artistic layout of all the Enterprise’s would suggest that at full sub-light speeds the good ship would probably be ripped apart from a number of shear and rotational forces. Sorry, guys, but just enjoy the model for what it is, and don’t try to make it work. It can’t.

Don’t even go to “structural integrity fields”. Just another plot devise to add glowing panels to the set.

106. SPOCKBOY - October 19, 2011

Okay, everyone keeps talking about the center of mass etc.
When I referred to it, it was from a “design” perspective.
All designs have a line through them, a balance of shapes and mass.
For me, the 2009 Enterprise is an unbalanced hodge podge of former Enterprise designs.
-The Primary hull of the TMP version.
-The warp struts of the Enterprise D.
-The round bussard collectors of the TOS version with TMP framing on them,
and a secondary hull that looks like a cross between the Enterprise D and a tube of toothpaste with most of it squeezed out. Additionally the nacelles look like 2 Hot Rod Doomsday Machines.

I loved the movie, but don’t dig the new ship.
I’m cool with other people liking it though. :)

107. Jonboc - October 19, 2011

#67. “Beautifully made model, but hard as I have tried I just can’t get into the design. As Andrew Probert (designer of the TMP Enterprise) said “it is unbalanced”

Now I love Andy Probert’s contributions to the Enterprise refit of TMP as much as anyone. The ship is a space bound work of art. But also being the designer of the top heavy, huge saucer, tiny nacelle, Enterprise D of TNG…I think he should probably be the last person to accuse JJ’s Enterprise of being “unbalanced”!

108. They call me Stasiu - October 19, 2011

This is no different from seeing a beautiful original painting with a hefty price tag attached to it that makes one say “D’oh!” and walk away.

“There are a million things in this universe you can have and a million things you can’t have. It’s no fun facing that, but that’s the way things are.” -Capt. Kirk, ‘Charlie X’

109. Vultan - October 19, 2011

#106

Exactly. It’s a matter of taste, not whether this ship that runs on dilithium pixie dust can exist in the real world.

As someone else stated, the saucer looks fine, but the rest of it is just… awkward… front heavy… out of proportion. Take your pick.

But hey, I’m sure she has a great personality. Maybe that nice Vulcan science ship will take her to the prom.

;)

110. REM1701 - October 19, 2011

In this economy WHO? do they plan on selling it to for 5K?

111. VZX - October 19, 2011

#109: It has almost the same proportions as the original. But, whatevs, to each his own I guess.

#105: You’re right, I didn’t consider that about the shear forces. Why is the saucer and secondary hull separated like it is, anyway? To create more surface area for cooling needs, maybe? A more compact design would make more sense. Like the Defiant from DS9.

112. Vultan - October 19, 2011

#111

Actually, looking at her again, the design wouldn’t be so bothersome if they’d just push the deflector dish back a tad—get rid of those puckering lips… that would put Pepe LePew to shame.

113. CaptainDonovin - October 19, 2011

Great, I’ll just go into my vault & pull out a couple grand. Geesh, must be nice to have that kind of dough to spend on this.

114. =A= - October 19, 2011

yeah right! no one buy that damn 5,000!!!!

115. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 19, 2011

It’s crazy to think, given the economic situation we’re in, that some buyers will gladly throw down $5k for a model. The fact is, there will be buyers, and at that price point, they don’t have to sell many to make a profit. It’s a luxury item, for sure – the cost of labor and parts is not what justifies the cost, from the manufacturer’s point of view, but the fact that the demand for the item, while exclusive, sees it as a mark of status.

Bizarre, yes, but since we are fans, I think we all at least understand the appeal, as opposed to, say, that of a designer Gucci bag or some such (not to say there are no Trek fans who also are into Gucci, but I think my point stands nonetheless).

116. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 19, 2011

To those of you who think the superiority in design of the TMP refit Enterprise over the 2009 Enterprise is obvious, it is not. It is still just a matter of taste.

I admit, it took me a few weeks to appreciate the new design, but that’s only because I was accustomed to the older one. The 2009 Enterprise, taken completely on its own, is not unbalanced in itself, it only seems so by comparison to the TMP Enterprise.

I am not saying the 2009 Enterprise is a *perfect* design, but then I can think of precious few starship designs that are truly, architecturally “perfect”, which is to say patently masterful, from a pure, abstract perspective. Although I admire the TMP Enterprise, it still does not meet the absolute highest standards.

As an aside, no starship design can be considered even close to perfect if it is streamlined in any way, unless it is intended to enter the atmosphere. So, all Enteprise designs share that failing. All of them look vaguely naval rather than truly astral. The Apollo program’s Lunar Module is a true space ship, and it is interesting to see the difference between the earliest designs, all of which were designed to look like something out of SciFi, and the final design, which at first glance appears spindly and ungainly, but is totally appropriate for its role. Once you see footage of it in action, the Lunar Module ends up being a rather appealing design, in my opinion.

And to Vultan, #33, not to be contentious, but both of those automobile designs are just god-awful to me. The classic design looks bulbous and clunky, the new one looks like a door-stop with wheels.

117. Michael Hall - October 19, 2011

“In this economy WHO? do they plan on selling it to for 5K?”

To well-heeled fans of Star Trek, I’d suppose. Of which experience suggests there are more than a few; certainly enough to sell-out this run of QMX replicas if the customers ultimately decide (as I did with the Masters Replicas model) that this is just a must-have item, no matter how extravagant the pricetag.

(Of course, it might be more accurate to say that the intended customer base for this model is actually that subset of Trek fans that are flush with cash, really liked the 2009 movie, and dig on the Abrams/Church/Supreme Court redesign. Unfortunately I don’t fit into any of those categories, but still wish QMX every success. I don’t personally believe the $5000 pricetag is at all excessive, since trained craftsmen deserve to be rewarded for their labors at least as much as hedge fund managers and CEOs (something this country has regrettably forgotten), and it’s obvious that these people take great pride in the work they put out.)

“But also being the designer of the top heavy, huge saucer, tiny nacelle, Enterprise D of TNG…I think he should probably be the last person to accuse JJ’s Enterprise of being “unbalanced”!”

Point. As an old-school fan, I never entirely warmed up to the D myself. (From the beginning, I was much fonder of Herman Zimmerman’s production designs for the interior than I was the exterior.) But Probert’s ship at the very least had the virtue of being a logically worked-out design, its various elements unified in their modular construction and the way they flow into each other. By comparison, the 2009 version looks like a cobbled-together Frankenstein monster of a ship, its team of designers unable to reach consensus even on something so basic on how big the damn thing was supposed to be.

118. Vultan - October 19, 2011

#115

Wow, really? I was just using those images to prove a point, but you’re the first person I’ve ever heard of that didn’t appreciate the design of the ’57 Chevy. Take a look at some of the other cars of that era and maybe you’ll see why it was (and still is) such a big hit.

This infamous one for example (note the puckered deflector dish—I mean, grille):

http://theinvisibleagent.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/1958-edsel-citation.jpg

As for the hot-rod racing version of the Chevy, yes, it is an ugly, distorted mess of the original. Remind you of anything?

119. Hat Rick - October 19, 2011

If I had $5K to splurge, I’d buy me some rockin’ shares of some Internet start-up that’d get me $5K to splurge on a fantastically detailed starship model of some kind. I know it sounds contradictory, but it’s not.

But then again, Internet start-ups are so 2010.

120. CarlG - October 20, 2011

I think I’ll hold out for a model kit, thanks — I like the new Enterprise but 5 grand is crazy!

@118: It’s funny, the front of the Edsel looks like it would make a really cool impulse engine for a retro-style starship. :)

121. jpd13 - October 20, 2011

Holy Crap! I had no idea Qmx was doing TMP Enterprise as well! I’ve been dying for a high quality replica of this ship for years. To me it’s the ultimate version of the Big E….period. Having said that, $5K!!! I just don’t think I’m going to be able to swing that. $1 – 2K I can maybe justify (I have a MR Enterprise that was around $1K) but I think this is going to be out of my reach. Man that’s depressing.

122. Phil - October 20, 2011

@111. They were designed that way because it looked good to an artist. Any vessel designer is first and formost going to design for the easiest method of construction for the ship to perform it’s function in it’s environment. Taking FTL travel and the physics problems off the table for the moment, the ship design closest to what you probably will see in space in the future is the Borg craft. Simple geometry creates the least amount of problems for the engineers.
Anyway, I don’t hate any of the versions of Enterprise. I just prefer one version over another – I prefer Corona, but Dos Equis is good, too.

123. Scott - October 20, 2011

For $5K this is probably going to be a super detailed piece, but it will be a very limited amount of people that will shell out the money. That’s what is going to make this piece so special!! It could almost be considered a museum piece.

124. jpd13 - October 20, 2011

There’s a lot of people going back and forth stating which version they prefer. It’ll be interesting to see which version sells better or sells out first

125. Chris Doll - October 20, 2011

> 121

Just get the Polar Lights 1:350 refit kit and find a good model builder to make it up for you. There’s no good reason for anyone to charge $5K for a buildup of a model kit that retails for about $75.

There’s plenty of aftermarket lighting and detail kits available to get a quality buildup.

126. I'm Dead Jim - October 20, 2011

I hope they weren’t counting on Steve Jobs to buy a few!

127. Buzz Cagney - October 20, 2011

#109 i’m sure she has a nice personality!! pmsl Nice one mate.

128. sean - October 20, 2011

I find all these complaints about the Enterprise-D fascinating, especially considering the fact that the D model went for more than 2 1/2 times what the TMP model went for in that Christie’s auction. Clearly, there are people that liked the D just fine.

129. Vultan - October 20, 2011

#127

Thanks, Buzz.

Totally off-topic, but congrats to you Brits and the French with the whole Libya situation. As today’s news has proven—well done!

130. et - October 20, 2011

@8 – I agree. They’re both drop-dead gorgeous in person. However, I could use that money as a down-payment on a bionic arm.

131. Tony - October 20, 2011

There is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in the proportion.

~ Sir Francis Bacon

132. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 20, 2011

Vultan – I don’t like most American cars from 50′s and 60′s. The exception would be the first generation Ford Thunderbird, because it is much more sleek than the rest.

To me the height of automobile design was the mid to late 30′s. The Auburn 85, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Auburn-851-1.jpg, may be my favorite design of any car, ever. I also really admire the Alfa Romeo 6C 2300B, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Coys_vintage_car_501593_fh000035.jpg, and the Alfa Romeo 8C 2900B Touring Spider, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Alfa_Romeo_8C_2900B_1937.jpg.

133. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 20, 2011

^ The last link does not work because of the final period; just delete the last period and it works.

134. Buzz Cagney - October 20, 2011

#129 like we had anything much to do with it Vults. That will have been primarily your boys. For political reasons the US role was downplayed and put under the UN banner.
So well done your guys.
Thats another nasty scumbag we can tick off the list. And he properly grovelled for his life too. I know we shouldn’t delight in such things but he really didn’t deserve compassion.
Its how a Dictator should go out really.

135. Buzz Cagney - October 20, 2011

#132 they are all sweet choices.
Here’s one of my favourites

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jaguar_XK150_Roadster.jpg

136. Red Dead Ryan - October 20, 2011

#131.

“Sir Francis Bacon”

Homer Simpson: “Mmmm……bacon….(drool)….”

137. Vultan - October 20, 2011

#132

Well, to each his own, and I wholeheartedly agree about the T-bird. And yes, I love the cars of the 30′s as well. That decade produced probably the most sinister looking car ever designed (only one ever built, which I saw in Reno a couple of years ago):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_Corsair

138. Vultan - October 20, 2011

#134

Team effort, Buzz! But I really don’t care who gets the credit. Just as long as the rat is dead. 2011 may go down as the year of “death to tyrants…” and other scumbags.

#135

Beautiful Jag, by the way.

139. Vultan - October 20, 2011

At the risk of turning this into another episode of “Car Chat,” I’ll post this link and skee-daddle.

Here’s another rare car from the 30′s… which would probably make the Rocketeer envious:

http://massiveideas.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/1937-dubonnet-hispano-suiza-h-6c.jpg

140. Buzz Cagney - October 20, 2011

#138 i’m more than happy to call it team work, Vults. Lets hope Libya can move forward successfully and peacefully from here. They’ve suffered enough over there.
And that would indeed be perfect for The Rocketeer!

141. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - October 20, 2011

Vultan & Buzz Cagney, thanks for those links. I do love the Jaguar and the Hispano Suiza. And I can say with certainty that I had never seen the Phantom Corsair ever before… it looks like a Batmobile!

142. Vultan - October 20, 2011

#141

That it does. And believe it or not, the Phantom Corsair was even the star of its own movie—here called “The Flying Wombat”:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpUHvXIXFQY

143. Keachick - rose pinenut - October 21, 2011

Thought this was Top Gear for a moment… btw, cool cars!

144. William Kirk - October 21, 2011

Great TMP Enterprise, the 2009 Ent is awful, in my opinion, and even more if you can see the beautiful TMP refit next to it….

145. VZX - October 21, 2011

#116: Yes, you said it perfectly. It is just that so many people have marveled at the TMP design for decades and can’t bring themselves to appreciate the 2009 version. I actually prefer the original 60s design over the TMP version since it is less aerodynamic (its in space!), has larger, cylindrical nacelles (more powerful, and the bussard collectors should be round), and that deflector dish is actually a dish and not some big, blue headlight.

These are the reasons I can’t stand the Ent-D. Why is to so aerodynamic in space? And, why are the supports for the nacelles built in that way when it is a waste of material to not go straight and not as strong?

Yeah, I’m not crazy about the support curves of the 2009 version, it seems to be a waste of material, but it might be stronger. BUT, I like the larger, cylindrical nacelles and dish-like deflector dish (eventhough it glows).

146. Reign1701A - October 21, 2011

I’ve grown to like the 2009 Enterprise, but in the first picture’s angle, geez, if that neck was scootched forward just a bit, it would be a long, elegant design. I like all the design elements (especially the large, powerful looking nacelles), I’m just not sure about their placement. She doesn’t hold a candle to the gorgeous Refit design but she’s still worthy of the name Enterprise.

147. Markus McLaughlin - October 21, 2011

I wish there was a $100 model kit of both with led lighting, I rather build one…

148. Kirk, James T. - October 21, 2011

The 2009 USS Enterprise is BEAUTIFUL, it’s stylings involve sweeping, bold lines, beautiful colours and most of all, it evokes power and strength whilst being all about exploration, Its an instant classic taking aspects of the much loved refit Enterprise as well as the original Enterprise. All those who disagree are cretins and wouldn’t know good design if it walked up to them and said “Hi, I’m Apple”

149. Kirk, James T. - October 21, 2011

I would love a mid scale (25 inches) USS Enterprise that’s a little cheaper but carries all the detail. These are stunning pieces but way out of my price range.

150. Buzz Cagney - October 21, 2011

141 and 142 I thought exactly the same, its a Batmobile! An amazing looking car and I don’t think i’ve ever seen it before either. And thanks for the YouTube link, Vults. I will take a look at that when I get a chance

And just getting back to Lybia briefly, Vults, it seems I can accept your well done’s on behalf of our boys and girls. There were nearly 30 countries involved out there ( so it was a real team effort! ) and the RAF flew 10% of the missions. As usual the UK punching above our weight!

151. Alex Prewitt - October 21, 2011

To each their own, I suppose. If I could afford it–the TMP version, definitely.
The Abrams version—ugghhhh.
I can’t stand the art direction in the Abrams Universe. The look of the ships, uniforms, props, sets–looks like crap. I’ll go see the sequel, because I really like the casting. Apart from that, there’s not much to like in my opinion.

152. Michael Hall - October 21, 2011

@ #148, “Kirk, James T:

“All those who disagree are cretins and wouldn’t know good design if it walked up to them and said “Hi, I’m Apple”

Really?! I’m guessing, then, that this posting comes from the “Kirk” of the Abrams alt.universe–you know, the one who’s kind of a jerkoff.

153. Buzz Cagney - October 21, 2011

#152 pmsl I couldn’t come up with a witty riposte to #148 so chose to rise above it! I’m glad you chose not to. :-D

154. Vultan - October 21, 2011

#150

The Phantom is even more amazing up close, Buzz. I was in Reno for the air races back in ’09 and stopped by an auto museum one afternoon. I’d seen pictures of the car before but had no idea where it was kept—then boom!—there it was behind a velvet rope next to a dozen other rare cars. Needless to say, I stood there for a long while… eyes bugged… and drooling. ;)

155. J.C. England - October 21, 2011

The 1701-A has always been, and probably
always will be, my favorite…

156. Bruce Banner - October 21, 2011

The. 99% of us should begin a large protest against the corporate fat cats that can pay 5k for a model. Or the fat cats that insist on charging that much by limiting the run to 250. Larger production would bring the price down. Whose with me!

157. Red Dead Ryan - October 21, 2011

#155.

“The 1701-A has always been, and probably
always will be, my favorite…”

Yeah, cause we all know the 1701-A is a better design than the 1701 refit…….. :-P

158. Buzz Cagney - October 21, 2011

http://www.necclassicmotorshow.com/

I’m going to that in a few weeks, Vults. Its a terrific show. I think you’d enjoy it.
It runs alongside Top Gear Live but i’ve seen that 4 or 5 times and, to be honest, that takes up time i’d rather spend looking ar the ‘oldies”;

I’m just getting a cup of coffee and i’m going to watch your Phantom clip…..

159. Vultan - October 21, 2011

#158

Looks cool, Buzz. Much like that Reno museum I mentioned before.

I wish the British Top Gear would bring their live show to the States. The American version of the show (on the History Channel) just doesn’t cut it for me. Too scripted. Dull. And worst of all… it doesn’t have Clarkson, May, and Hammond. ;)

But I have to say, as much as I love that show, I don’t think it’s going to last much longer. Can’t say why exactly. Just a feeling. Maybe they’ll go a couple more seasons—I mean “series.” But I hope I’m wrong.

160. Buzz Cagney - October 21, 2011

I am surprised they haven’t brought TGLive to the US. Not sure why they haven’t.
I agree, it only has so much life left in it. Maybe a 2 or 3 year break would be good for the long term health of the show.
I do know its a big money maker for the BBC so i doubt they’ll give it up easily.
That Phantom clip made me laugh. Clearly they thought they could build something around the car which would make a good movie. They weren’t correct were they!
Still, what a car!
Did they have many car’s at that museum in Reno?

161. Vultan - October 21, 2011

#160

Yeah, I think you saw the best parts of that movie! Come to think—I don’t even know the name of it. Just the Phantom car movie, I guess.

There were probably a hundred or so cars in the museum, ranging from the ordinary (Mustang fastback) to the very rare (a gold-plated DeLorean). They had it set up in a walk-through-history style, starting with the earliest buggies and steam-powered horseless carriages and ending with modern supercars. A very cool experience. Worth a look… if you’re ever in Reno… which isn’t the greatest tourist destination I’m sorry to say.

Look, just take an ashtray, sprinkle it over a sandbox (cigarette butts and wads of gum included), toss a couple of poker chips in there, then stumble across it with a half-dazed look on your face and a bottle of Jack Daniels in your hand and—bingo—you’re in Reno, my friend. :(

162. Buzz Cagney - October 21, 2011

LOL sounds appealing! Something tells me i’ll never make it to Reno- no matter how hard you try to sell it to me! The Museum does sound good though. I’ll Google it later.

If you should ever make it to these shore’s head here…

http://www.beaulieu.co.uk/attractions/national-motor-museum

Its a nice day out.

163. Vultan - October 21, 2011

#162

Thanks for the link. Merry old England is definitely on my list of countries to visit… some day.

Cheers.

164. Vultan - October 21, 2011

Oh, and here’s the museum I mentioned:

http://automuseum.org/

165. Buzz Cagney - October 21, 2011

oh thanks for that Vults.
I will take a look later. Somehow, now i’m around new metal all the time (which I love- car’s these days just drive so well), older car’s have aquired an even bigger appeal for me.
It is slightly depressing though- that event I mentioned earlier will showcase classic car’s that I saw launched 25 or 26 years ago at the same venue! It does make you very aware of the passing of time.

You still driving the Jeep (it was a Jeep, wasn’t it?) or did you ever downsize?

166. Vultan - October 22, 2011

#165

Yep, still with the old Jeep.
Hopefully she’s still with me tomorrow!

167. Buzz Cagney - October 22, 2011

That is a nice collection in Reno. Looks like a good venue too.
Another nice Museum…

http://www.haynesmotormuseum.com/home/your-visit/collections.php

Yes, its the same company that do the Haynes car manuals.
One of my favourite car’s in there is this..

http://www.flickr.com/photos/28439790@N03/5160724082/

It really is a Duesey!

168. Buzz Cagney - October 22, 2011

#166 why, what is happening today??

169. Vultan - October 22, 2011

#168

Nothing going on.
Just joking… that it will start the next time around…
It is getting up there in age.

Nice wheels @ 167!
I’m sure Mr. Burns of Springfield would approve.

170. Spatan555 - October 22, 2011

Pretty Girl.

171. Buzz Cagney - October 22, 2011

#169 ah I see Vults. You planning on keeping it till it drops?

172. CarlG - October 22, 2011

@145: I always though the point of the D’s design was that technology was so advanced they didn’t have to worry about everything in a starship design being “functional”; they could add artistic touches as well. It’s like those beautiful cars a few posts earlier — compare them with a Model T and you can see how once designers master the basic principles, they start working on making them attractive.

173. Vultan - October 22, 2011

#171

Yeah, pretty much. Don’t have much choice at this point.
It’ll probably end up looking something like this:

http://willieandjoe.tripod.com/jeep.jpg

174. Buzz Cagney - October 22, 2011

lol excellent

175. VZX - October 22, 2011

172: But that is so illogical! Why would Starfleet waste resources on making starships “look cool?” It doesn’t make sense. I know the designers of the Ent-D, including Roddenberry, wanted it to look that way based on the same concept you stated: that future tech can be more cool-looking since its so advanced.

Then again, a lot of Star Trek doesn’t make sense. But there are some things that are done so ridiculously on the show that I can’t get past it. Like the aerodynamic features of a space-based vehicle.

I just never liked the D. The E is better, but still ehh. My favorites are the DS9 Defiant, TOS Enterprise, and Trek09 Enterprise. Yeah, go ahead and judge me….

176. CarlG - October 23, 2011

@175: Cause it’s a production team of art designers building it, not a bunch of Starfleet guys? :)
The way the ship looks is supposed to be cool for us the audience, not them that ride in it, especially in a middling-soft-SF show like Trek. I know, I know, in a perfect world, a starship could both be cool-looking and functional, but when it comes to making a choice, I’ll suspend my disbelief with a smile and happily sacrifice realism if it gets Captain Kirk out to where the hot green chicks and punchable Romulans are.

177. Chain of Command - October 23, 2011

@67

I agree with you. As much as I try to get into that design, it just looks too comic book-like. Maybe that’s what they wanted. Who knows.

I still think they just needed to kick the nacelles out a bit and beef up the secondary hull.

The refit Enterprise is still the best version of the ship (At least in my opinion). I wish they had gone more in the direction. But, oh well! LOL

178. VZX - October 23, 2011

176: True that. I just wish that we lived in that perfect world where a starship was both functional and awesome-looking. Ahh, it is to dream.

But, I still like the Trek09 Enterprise more than TMP one. But…yeah, $5000 is too much to spend on a starship model, unless I were to film it for a movie or something…

179. Kev - October 24, 2011

5K? I could buy a fixer uper corvette C3 for that price!

and what about a star trek 3 enterprise complete with all of the weathering and battle damage?

that might be worth the price of admission if they could get it looking exactly like it did in the film, although for that price I could build a minature myself or buy one of the original enterprises from this guy:

http://steveneill.wordpress.com/author/steveneill/

180. AJ - October 25, 2011

The Probert ENT, to me, is still the legendary ship’s most beautiful and enduring iteration.

I have the cheap plastic models of both, plus two original TOS NCC-1701′s (one with Pike nipples). And they talk, so why pay more?

181. Michael Hall - October 25, 2011

At the Trekweb site there’s an angle on the 2009 ship that actually manages to make it look sleek and impressive. Lord knows, there ain’t many of them.

What I’ve noticed about the various iterations of the ship through the years is that while all of them photograph well from certain perspectives, none of them look as good from just about any angle as Matt Jeffries’ original (and yes, I include even the TMP version in that assesment). For example, the E-E looks wonderfully sleek and elegant from the side, but squashed from the front or back. The D looks massive and impressive from the front or rear, but stubby and top-heavy from the side. And so on.

Nice to know that with all of our sophisticated 21st century tools for visualization we’re still chasing the accomplishments of someone who worked out his ideas with pen and paper, and who by the standards of today’s designers wouldn’t even be considered to have much in the way of technique. But then, raw imagination will win out over technique every time.

182. VZX - October 26, 2011

#181: You’re absolutely correct. I have been to the Smithsonian many times and took probably 100s of pictures of the orignal Enterprise model in the basement gift shop, and every single picture looks great, no matter the angle.

That thing is just awesome. THE best space vehicle from any sci-fi show or movie or other art form. (I just wish the original Enterprise model had more details on its port side, but then they only ever filmed the starboard side.)

183. Michael Hall - October 26, 2011

Yeah, I finally made that trip to the Smithsonian myself late last year after participating on Phase II’s “Origins” shoot. Or maybe “pilgrimage” would be a better word, since when I saw that ship in person for the first time, I felt like a Muslim who’s finally arrived at Mecca. :-) The old girl is showing her age a bit: the nacelles are out of trim, and of course there’s that awful “restoration” paint job that was slathered on a few years back. Still, you’re correct–the thing is just awesome.

184. Bob - October 26, 2011

I wouldn’t give 5 dollars for that ugly ship.

185. SoonerDave - October 27, 2011

The 2009 version looks like a bad cartoon image compared to the classic TMP ship. Just no comparison at all. TMP is classic and graceful, Abrams version is unwieldy and disproportionate.

Oh, well, they didn’t ask me. And I don’t have $5 large to blow on anything like this anyway. Give me an old ERTL TMP movie Enterprise and I’m happy. The Abrams version? Meh.

186. VZX - October 27, 2011

183: I kind of wish they didn’t do that restoration paint job. But I am glad that it’s on display at a museum, even though its in the gift shop. I hope it stays there for decades to come. I’ve brought my kids to see it and even they were impressed. What surprises me is how far ahead of its time the original Enterprise is. It still impresses the youth of today.

187. Buzz Lancaster - October 29, 2011

I preffer the Enterprise from ST:TMP…

188. Mr, Dupper - October 29, 2011

OH, its to bad your not all filthy stinking rich like me!’ I think I’ll buy three, one for me and two of my friends. heh, heh,heh!!Just kidding;)

189. J.A.G.T. - November 7, 2011

Oh my – That’s neat! I really love scale models but 5000 bucks… well…

190. Melllvar - November 10, 2011

#10
It’s not a reboot it’s a different reality which incorporates the original. It even has original Spock duh!!

191. Bill Lutz - November 11, 2011

The 2009 Enterprise, the JJPrise, is a piece of designed JUNK.
Yuck

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.