What about Cybertron's moons in the movie? They were sizable in comparison to Unicron, which means they'd be much bigger than Earth if Unicron was Saturn-sized. And yet, they didn't seem to be planet-sized at all.

He was titanic compared to these!

You call this titanic? Not counting his ring, Unicron's diameter is only a little over twice the size of that moon. (Which is, in itself, evidence that Cybertron and Unircon aren't Saturn-sized. Out of the planets we know, only small ones like Earth and Pluto have moons that are large compared to the planet. Some of Jupiter and Saturn's moon's are as big as Mercury, but that's still tiny compared to the planets; if Unicron's the size of Saturn, that would make Cybertron's moons about the size of Neptune.)

 

Plus he was bigger than cyberton in robot mode and about the same size in planet mode.

In the movie, his robot mode is smaller than Cybertron. In the comic, his height is equal to it's diameter IIRC.

We never see Unicron's planet mode in comparison to Cybertron (except in Armada, where it's definitely smaller), but I would assume that if he undergoes any size-changing at all, he's bigger in planet mode than in robot mode, not smaller (again, excluding Armada, where he follows the toy's transformation and his height is definitely more than his diameter; G1 Unicron's transformation, OTOH, appeared to involve more compacting than expanding).

 

I always thought that cybertron was a giant planet, because of the sheer number of TF's on it.

Except in Beast Machines, who ever said there were a huge number of Transformers? Although I'm sure there were more than this, G1 would actually make sense even if there were less than a million Transformers.

 

I always thought that cybertron was pretty far away from earth in the ultimate doom. If you think about how small the moon looks compared to earth if you see it from earth.

Cybertron came close enough to have a major tidal effect on Earth, and yet it only looked three times larger than the moon in Earth's sky. It must be small and dense, not large and light. (It certainly can't be large and dense; it's surface gravity would be crushing.)

And the mere fact that it was said to be in orbit around Earth proves it was smaller and/or less massive than Earth.

 

The angle in that scene is from the other side of earth than cybertron is and is focused on earth.

I always thought it looked fairly close to edge-on. Sure, Cybertron is probably larger compared to Earth than the perspective of that shot makes it look, but not 34 times larger.

 

So I say that Cybertron is massive because you couldn't fit many 20 foot tall robots on something about the size of Australia.

But you could fit a billion of them in something the size of Asia (and still be less densely populated compared to their size than humans in India are), which is the smallest anybody's said it was in this thread.

And what evidence do you have for there not being ten billion Transformers or more on Cybertron?

What evidence do you have that there are that many? When I hear someone say "billions", I think it's probably a few billion.

 

And furthermore, even if you are right, it still doesn't prove Cybertron is the size of our moon.

Well, if it was Saturn-sized, there would be room for trillions, considering the fact that they do seem to use the entire planet. Mere billions (even a hundred billion) wouldn't have any use at all for more than a fraction of a Saturn-sized planet, so most of it should be empty if it's that big.

 

Which is evidence of Cybertron's diameter being smaller. The larger it is, the more tidal forces would have affected it.

Really? I thought it was because Cybertron's gravity was significantly stronger than Earth's gravity.

Overall, it does work out either way (for example, the Sun and the moon have approximately the same tidal effect on the Earth), but if it was massive and further away, the Earth's orbit would have been screwed up, which didn't happen.

 

But "The Ultimate Doom" isn't a particularly unreliable source like the first few comic issues, and isn't contradicted in other cartoon episodes.

Given the choice, I'd take the word of Bob Budianski and Simon Furman over the G1 cartoon ANYDAY.

The first issue wasn't written by Budianski or Furman. It was written by Bill Mantlo. Budianski never actually said Cybertron was Saturn-sized, and I don't think Furman even remembered that it had been said.

In any case, this isn't a matter of taking one's word over the other, because the comic and cartoon don't have the same facts. They don't have the same history, they don't have the same characters at the same time, and there's no reason to assume Cybertron's size is the same between them either.

My point was that the first four issues are to the comic what "Carnage in C Minor" is to the cartoon in terms of consistency.

 

Not in the cartoon.

That's because "Call of the Primitives" is one of the worst TF related stories ever concieved.

Even if that were true (which many will disagree with), it's still an important part of cartoon canon.

 

But he did. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it contradicts anything.

See above.

What? Are you seriously saying that just because you think it was bad, that makes it a contradiction? How good it is is a subjective thing, but whether it's a contradiction is objective, and it isn't one.

The only contradiction is between the cartoon and the comic (which aren't supposed to be consistent with each other), and the cartoon gave Unicron an origin first. (At least in the US. I'm not sure exactly when the UK comic gave Unicron's origin.)

It would be like if I said Prime's death in the comic was a contradiction; it's certainly stupid that he died because of a video game, and it's nothing like the movie's much better version of the same event, but it's not a contradiction within the comic.

 

And why _wouldn't_ he create his body to be large enough to be capable of eating planets?

Harder to manuever?

The point is he probably didn't unless there's evidence that he did.

 

And all incarnations of Unicron, from G1 to Armada to Universe are exactly one and the same. Just check out the Armada and Universe comics, aswell as the upcoming Transformers: The Ultimate Guide if you don't believe me.

I know that the Armada comic says that, but it's a stupid idea that actually does contradict other things (like the fact that Armada cartoon Unicron seems much different, the fact that Primacron created G1 cartoon Unicron, etc. It even contradicts the G1 comic, where each universe had its own Unicron.), so I say it's only canon for the Armada comic, and Universe of course, and not for the other continuities that they pull characters out of.

 

Except Unicron can't be killed or contained.

But he was contained, in an asteriod. He didn't "escape", he simply used his "prison". Unless he could do the same from a black hole, he'd be history.

 

Yes, he could devour objects bigger than he is, but it's much more easier and believable for him to eat most planets with his maw in planet mode.

Weird definition of "believable"...

The bigger he is, the more unbelievable it is that he can move so fast, and the energy it takes for him to even move.

 

What reasons? Because there were only a few Transformers on them in the Movie? There are only a few Autobots on the moons because they're on the verge of extinction.

But if just a few are capable of running the moonbases, then they can't be very large bases. And the bases do seem to be the entire moons; why else would the self-destruct be powerful enough to destroy the whole moon?

 

And how do you know they were built within the last 20 years? Sure, they weren't seen at all in the previous two seasons, but so what?

The opening narration of the movie implied that the existence of the moonbases was something that had changed since season 2 in response to the Decepticons driving them completely off Cybertron.

 

Neither were Ultra Magnus or Kup and we know that they're significantly well over 20 years old.

They were either on Cybertron or in deep space; either way, there's no particular reason to have seen them, whereas Cybertron's moons would be hard to miss if they were there.

 

(And again, this is without pointing out the G1's inconsistant animation and writing.)

What inconsistent writing? Animation, sure, but I can only think of a few apparent inconsistencies in the cartoon's writing, and only one definite one (the Constructicons; it's pretty obvious which is the throwaway line and which is canon, though).

 

And as for visible buildings on the moons and planets, chalk that one up on exzaggeration. 'Cause otherwise Cybertron and it's moons aswell as Lthone would all look like bland, undetailed metal balls floating in space. (And once again, there is the issue concerning size and scale in the G1 cartoon.)

The same scale issue exists in the comics, you know.

And it doesn't take buildings 1/10 the size of the planet to stop it from looking bland. Earth doesn't look bland from space, and it doesn't have things 1/10 its own size sticking out. (Of course, Earth has oceans, ice, and more clouds than Cybertron, but Cybertron could still look interesting without any of that. The very same surface features Cybertron has could be redused to 1/100 of their height/depth, and maybe the buildings could be smaller in their other dimensions as well, and Cybertron would look interesting without looking small. )

And what evidence do you have for there not being ten billion Transformers or more on Cybertron?

What evidence do you have that there are that many? When I hear someone say "billions", I think it's probably a few billion.

 

And furthermore, even if you are right, it still doesn't prove Cybertron is the size of our moon.

Well, if it was Saturn-sized, there would be room for trillions, considering the fact that they do seem to use the entire planet. Mere billions (even a hundred billion) wouldn't have any use at all for more than a fraction of a Saturn-sized planet, so most of it should be empty if it's that big.

 

Which is evidence of Cybertron's diameter being smaller. The larger it is, the more tidal forces would have affected it.

Really? I thought it was because Cybertron's gravity was significantly stronger than Earth's gravity.

Overall, it does work out either way (for example, the Sun and the moon have approximately the same tidal effect on the Earth), but if it was massive and further away, the Earth's orbit would have been screwed up, which didn't happen.

 

But "The Ultimate Doom" isn't a particularly unreliable source like the first few comic issues, and isn't contradicted in other cartoon episodes.

Given the choice, I'd take the word of Bob Budianski and Simon Furman over the G1 cartoon ANYDAY.

The first issue wasn't written by Budianski or Furman. It was written by Bill Mantlo. Budianski never actually said Cybertron was Saturn-sized, and I don't think Furman even remembered that it had been said.

In any case, this isn't a matter of taking one's word over the other, because the comic and cartoon don't have the same facts. They don't have the same history, they don't have the same characters at the same time, and there's no reason to assume Cybertron's size is the same between them either.

My point was that the first four issues are to the comic what "Carnage in C Minor" is to the cartoon in terms of consistency.

 

Not in the cartoon.

That's because "Call of the Primitives" is one of the worst TF related stories ever concieved.

Even if that were true (which many will disagree with), it's still an important part of cartoon canon.

 

But he did. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it contradicts anything.

See above.

What? Are you seriously saying that just because you think it was bad, that makes it a contradiction? How good it is is a subjective thing, but whether it's a contradiction is objective, and it isn't one.

The only contradiction is between the cartoon and the comic (which aren't supposed to be consistent with each other), and the cartoon gave Unicron an origin first. (At least in the US. I'm not sure exactly when the UK comic gave Unicron's origin.)

It would be like if I said Prime's death in the comic was a contradiction; it's certainly stupid that he died because of a video game, and it's nothing like the movie's much better version of the same event, but it's not a contradiction within the comic.

 

And why _wouldn't_ he create his body to be large enough to be capable of eating planets?

Harder to manuever?

The point is he probably didn't unless there's evidence that he did.

 

And all incarnations of Unicron, from G1 to Armada to Universe are exactly one and the same. Just check out the Armada and Universe comics, aswell as the upcoming Transformers: The Ultimate Guide if you don't believe me.

I know that the Armada comic says that, but it's a stupid idea that actually does contradict other things (like the fact that Armada cartoon Unicron seems much different, the fact that Primacron created G1 cartoon Unicron, etc. It even contradicts the G1 comic, where each universe had its own Unicron.), so I say it's only canon for the Armada comic, and Universe of course, and not for the other continuities that they pull characters out of.

 

Except Unicron can't be killed or contained.

But he was contained, in an asteriod. He didn't "escape", he simply used his "prison". Unless he could do the same from a black hole, he'd be history.

 

Yes, he could devour objects bigger than he is, but it's much more easier and believable for him to eat most planets with his maw in planet mode.

Weird definition of "believable"...

The bigger he is, the more unbelievable it is that he can move so fast, and the energy it takes for him to even move.

 

What reasons? Because there were only a few Transformers on them in the Movie? There are only a few Autobots on the moons because they're on the verge of extinction.

But if just a few are capable of running the moonbases, then they can't be very large bases. And the bases do seem to be the entire moons; why else would the self-destruct be powerful enough to destroy the whole moon?

 

And how do you know they were built within the last 20 years? Sure, they weren't seen at all in the previous two seasons, but so what?

The opening narration of the movie implied that the existence of the moonbases was something that had changed since season 2 in response to the Decepticons driving them completely off Cybertron.

 

Neither were Ultra Magnus or Kup and we know that they're significantly well over 20 years old.

They were either on Cybertron or in deep space; either way, there's no particular reason to have seen them, whereas Cybertron's moons would be hard to miss if they were there.

 

(And again, this is without pointing out the G1's inconsistant animation and writing.)

What inconsistent writing? Animation, sure, but I can only think of a few apparent inconsistencies in the cartoon's writing, and only one definite one (the Constructicons; it's pretty obvious which is the throwaway line and which is canon, though).

 

And as for visible buildings on the moons and planets, chalk that one up on exzaggeration. 'Cause otherwise Cybertron and it's moons aswell as Lthone would all look like bland, undetailed metal balls floating in space. (And once again, there is the issue concerning size and scale in the G1 cartoon.)

The same scale issue exists in the comics, you know.

And it doesn't take buildings 1/10 the size of the planet to stop it from looking bland. Earth doesn't look bland from space, and it doesn't have things 1/10 its own size sticking out. (Of course, Earth has oceans, ice, and more clouds than Cybertron, but Cybertron could still look interesting without any of that. The very same surface features Cybertron has could be redused to 1/100 of their height/depth, and maybe the buildings could be smaller in their other dimensions as well, and Cybertron would look interesting without looking small. )

This is getting a bit drawn out. Look, Unicron is a dark god that devours planets. Not just asteroids or moons, but planets. He even states as much later on in the series in the episode "The Ghost in the Machine." "...Able to devour all worlds in my path." All worlds, not just small miniscule ones, moons, and asteroids, all. And for him to do that, he's almost certainly going to have to be pretty darn big. You just can't make an universe destroyer out of a pebble. And since Cybertron is of equal size, it automatically implies that Cybertron is also a huge planet. Oh, sure. Unicron has a robot mode which could easily destroy what few objects that are too big too be destroyed in planet form, but that mode is primarily for battling Primus and Cybertron. The Ultimate Guide even says as much. The animation in "The Ultimate Doom" is obviously in error. I mean, if "evolving from naturally occuring gears and pulleys" can be dismissed as canon, then so can this.

i just read mtmte #8 the other day, cybertron is the size of saturn. cybertron's moons are roughly the size of earth. i forgot, however, to read the size of unicron. but, as seen in the movie unicron is roughly the size of cybertron. though, not entirely sure about that. but cybertron is definately the size of saturn. :thumb

The animation in "The Ultimate Doom" is obviously in error.

Except for the fact that it's more consistent with the dialogue and events of the episode than a huge Cybertron would be.

Cartoon Cybertron is small.

Comic Cybertron's size is Saturn-sized. Although I still don't think Furman remembered that when he said it started as an asteroid.

Okay everyone, let's face it: We could debate about this for EONS without any conclusion ever being reached. Both Marvel AND SunBow productions are to blame for this discrepancy, as is De Laurento Entertainment Group (the company who produced TFTM). In times past, continuity with every issue in all sorts of series (DC's Hawkman is a prime example) cropped up in virtually every comic and cartoon version of everything. An idea I have is to write to simon furman, Sunbow productions, and DreamWave comic via internet (E-mail), and see if we can't get some sort of concrete idea concerning this. I don't blame everyone for being confused on this, but bantering back and forth is really getting us nowhere here. I'll see what I can dig up with these three individuals, and hopefully, we can finally put this issue to rest.

I base my view - the size of Mars - on what I can see in the cartoon. Frankly the early comics were full of inaccuracies.

CYBER-FORMING...This means that as energy as no mass, Cybertron was able to have an immensely large surface area, and not a great deal of mass....

 

Hope this helps.

Energy does have mass.

Cybertron is Saturn-sized according to Dreamwave's More Than Meets the Eye #8.

 

And Unicron, in the movie, was smaller than Cybertron.

 

As for Cyberton looking smaller than the Earth in the cartoon, that may be because we got a view of Cybertron from the Earth's perspective. We never got to see Cyberton and Earth from a proper perspective.

ok im going to end this debate with real simple logic. im not going to get into the physics of it because physics contradict them selves too much so here it goes

 

in planet mode, Unicron has a Ring

 

Saturn has Rings

 

therefore, Unicron is the size of Saturn

 

Unicron wanted Cybertron to be his new body,

 

Unicrons old body was blown up and he was barely functioning, and i can be assumed, that most of his power was gone, and he barely had enough to give Starscream a new body, and keep himself alive

 

therefore, Cybertron and Unicron were the same size

 

there you go simple logic