Shopping at LEGO or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.com
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
What are the worst redesigned parts Lego created?
These are the bricks that we all knew and loved, but then they became different.
Lego constantly re-designs bricks to become stronger, lighter with less plastic, cheaper, with more clutch power, and have better looks. But sometimes they screw up something, and things go a step back instead of a step further.
Remember when the angled part of slope bricks lost the little sand-paper look on them and became flat? That was a screw-up on the part of Lego. They did eventually fix it, but it was still bad, it made them look like a cheap imitation for a while.
Those are the types of redesigns that make the bricks have less texture, look more generic and specific to just one use, have less connection possibilities, or just... make them look clumsier and not Lego.
They might have been fixed right away, after a few years, or never gotten better after it was redesigned.
So what's your least favourite modification?
Shopping at LEGO.com or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon
Recent discussions •
Original-bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=2580c01 (from 1990 to 1999)
I was born a year before it was discontinued, but I've played with it and built a lot of stuff with the few I had from an older friend of mine. After a few minutes of research, I found out that this brick was short lived, and short used, only appearing in 7 sets released throughout 9 years, appearing in the colour red 4 times, black 2 times, and light grey once in a promotional set. So what could have possibly replaced this little gold nugget?
These bastards right here:
1-rebrickable.com/parts/30517 (from 2000 to 2008)
2-bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=57893 (from 2006 to 2007)
3-rebrickable.com/parts/58827 (from 2006 to 2012)
4-rebrickable.com/parts/95347 (from 2010 until present day)
As you can see, this isn't 1 part, but 4, however, these parts are essentially the same, so I'm counting them as 4 variations of this little disaster.
I can see that they were going for a longer version of the previous brick, that minifigures could be attached to. But the execution is just horrible. Different designs of the same brick were available at the same time (between 2006-2007, 3 variations of the same brick, what the heck?!), and in 14 years it has been modified 4 times, instead of the 0 in 9 years the previous brick had. Sure, it's been used a lot more, but it only looks sort of decent at an angle, and looking straight at each of the 4 sides... it's just an ugly brick, especially Nº 3. Each version has it's flaws, but the worst one by far is Nº 3, with an obvious mould injection point, 2 of the 3 sides are hard to connect anything to them, and from the back it's just... my god is it ugly!!!
If I worked at Lego, I'd bring this old brick back, and make an ultimatum saying:
Either we get a deffenitive good looking long beam, or else it's gone.
I found the best way to use them in separating plates is to use it normally to create a little gap, then push the thin bottom part in between the plates and run that all the way around. They separate easily at that point.
I'm not entirely sure why, but I prefer the old 5 stud long "castle wall with window" (http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=4444) over the much more useful 4 stud versions (http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=60808). Nostalgia probably.
Bring back the proper arches!
It's not clear exactly what the purpose of this redesign was. I doubt it was just aesthetic, and if it was meant to solve issues with fragility it did just the opposite. So it seems to me that the point was probably to give the connection greater friction. But I think it's safe to say that more was lost than gained with this redesign. Simply taking apart a model for the first time became a huge gamble, because there was no telling whether the parts would snap, or whether they would still be usable if they did.
Thankfully, in 2011 the LEGO Group finally introduced a new ball cup design that is the sturdiest to date. 93571 is incredibly resilient, and I have had no issues with it since its introduction.
It's a bit of a shame that some older parts like the 5M double ball cup (47296/61053) have not been redesigned with this sturdier design, since the introduction of the redesigned ball cup coincided with the introduction of a new Character and Creature Building System that did not include such parts. But in some ways, the CCBS has done away with the need for such parts. I certainly haven't felt at all limited by their absence.
I was just thinking the other day how much I liked the old tiles with no groove, so you can have a smooth join, so to speak. I always try to pick some up whenever I'm on Bricklink.
But yeah, the finger joints with their infinite possibilities of angles must be so much better for MOCers than the new clicking ones.
And I got 60011 the other day (I love surfers!) and I was horrified at the gap the life preserver creates on the neck. It seems utterly abhorrent! The only thing I can think is it allows helmets to be put on, whereas when it went around the neck it got in the way?
Oh, and I got a mixture of jumper bricks in the little chibi Star Destroyer, all in the same colour, but some with a groove and some without. Strange!