Master List of Lego Production Errors

CCC

Pitfall69 said:

Astrobricks said:

Cyberdragon said:

madforLEGO said:

Yeah, interesting that LEGO attributes the lost figures to people abusing the system of replacement parts instead of, what is likely happening more as well, their lackluster security seals on their sets.

But having those would anger the poor empty box collectors since the box might be damaged when opening.

On that note - I've noticed a lot more boxes using the thumb tabs for opening lately, instead of the tape seals; and not just on ones shipped over from EU.

I actually don't mind the perforated tabs; it prevents those jerks from buying sets with rare minifigures; opening the box, taking the minifigures out and then resealing the box and returning the pilfered box to the store.

You can still open a tabbed box with a knife then reglue the box end.

Astrobricks

CCC said:

Pitfall69 said:

Astrobricks said:

Cyberdragon said:

madforLEGO said:

Yeah, interesting that LEGO attributes the lost figures to people abusing the system of replacement parts instead of, what is likely happening more as well, their lackluster security seals on their sets.

But having those would anger the poor empty box collectors since the box might be damaged when opening.

On that note - I've noticed a lot more boxes using the thumb tabs for opening lately, instead of the tape seals; and not just on ones shipped over from EU.

I actually don't mind the perforated tabs; it prevents those jerks from buying sets with rare minifigures; opening the box, taking the minifigures out and then resealing the box and returning the pilfered box to the store.

You can still open a tabbed box with a knife then reglue the box end.

Hey, they should add tape seals! Yeah, that’ll fix it! ;-)

Bobflip

CCC said:

Pitfall69 said:

Astrobricks said:

Cyberdragon said:

madforLEGO said:

Yeah, interesting that LEGO attributes the lost figures to people abusing the system of replacement parts instead of, what is likely happening more as well, their lackluster security seals on their sets.

But having those would anger the poor empty box collectors since the box might be damaged when opening.

On that note - I've noticed a lot more boxes using the thumb tabs for opening lately, instead of the tape seals; and not just on ones shipped over from EU.

I actually don't mind the perforated tabs; it prevents those jerks from buying sets with rare minifigures; opening the box, taking the minifigures out and then resealing the box and returning the pilfered box to the store.

You can still open a tabbed box with a knife then reglue the box end.

I do that with every box I get... well, the first part of it anyway. If the set gets sold on it won't be reglued, but figure that cutting where it's glued is the closest an opened box can get to the SB part of NISB!

CCC

Bobflip said:

CCC said:

Pitfall69 said:

Astrobricks said:

Cyberdragon said:

madforLEGO said:

Yeah, interesting that LEGO attributes the lost figures to people abusing the system of replacement parts instead of, what is likely happening more as well, their lackluster security seals on their sets.

But having those would anger the poor empty box collectors since the box might be damaged when opening.

On that note - I've noticed a lot more boxes using the thumb tabs for opening lately, instead of the tape seals; and not just on ones shipped over from EU.

I actually don't mind the perforated tabs; it prevents those jerks from buying sets with rare minifigures; opening the box, taking the minifigures out and then resealing the box and returning the pilfered box to the store.

You can still open a tabbed box with a knife then reglue the box end.

I do that with every box I get... well, the first part of it anyway. If the set gets sold on it won't be reglued, but figure that cutting where it's glued is the closest an opened box can get to the SB part of NISB!

Same here if I am keeping the box for display purposes. But for smaller sets, they just go into the recycling.

CCC

The_Rancor

People probably still want a 5 stud brick today but I think Unikatty was the only example!

CCC

Yes, unless you count Modulex.

WesterBricks

GentlyBenevolent said:

The Lego Racers Ferrari FXX 1:12 Set Number 8156 Has 1 X 2569 Black Antenna Whip 8H, Nowhere In The Whole Build Of The Car Is It Used, Why Is There Lego??.

I didn't see this one answered yet, I apologize if this is already common knowledge. The alternate images on the back of the box show the antenna being used to prop up the engine cover.

mustang69

Not sure if this has been brought up, but with #75275 box art, is it me or is the fin on the right (looking at the picture) not angled correctly?

560Heliport

It looks wrong to me too.

veyniac

I think I found the first error on the Colosseum. They did the Roman numeral wrong on the fourth interior box:

I should be IV (The image is from the Rebrickable review).

CCC

Modern usage would be IV. Although on a clock IIII can be used. But both were used in Ancient Roman times.

Fizyx

veyniac said:

I think I found the first error on the Colosseum. They did the Roman numeral wrong on the fourth interior box:

I should be IV (The image is from the Rebrickable review).

I understand why they did it that way, since it's more intuitive and lots of people may not know how Roman numerals work... but yeah, that's still pretty funny.

Paperballpark

Yeah, IIII can be used for four for sure ;)

stlux

veyniac said:

I think I found the first error on the Colosseum. They did the Roman numeral wrong on the fourth interior box: 

I should be IV (The image is from the Rebrickable review).

As @CCC already highlighted, both IIII and IV were used in Roman times. In this case IIII is actually more accurate: the Colosseum does not use IV for any of its entrances (at least for the remaining entrances 23 to 54).

Picture of entrance 54:
 
So actually: big thumbs up to TLG for getting it right.

Astrobricks

Hey I learned something! Who says it’s all bad puns and sausage jokes around here. ;-)

CCC

LIIII means lunch = four sausages.

Istokg

The Roman alphabet used the same character "U" (vowel) and "V" (consonant) in their text... but I digress...

Casper_vd_Korf

Istokg said:

The Roman alphabet used the same character "U" (vowel) and "V" (consonant) in their text... but I digress...

That’s kinda related though! One theory as to why IV wasn’t used is that it looked too much like the first letters of jupiter, which would be written with IV!

SumoLego

CCC said:

LIIII means lunch = four sausages.

FIFTY FOUR!  Now, that's a lunch.

Brainslugged

I came across a sort of production error while building the Resistance Transport #75293. One of the big bags of parts didn't have any smaller bags inside it. All the big, medium and tiny pieces were all mixed in together. Id be interested to know if that has happened in anyone else's copy of the set.

Astrobricks

^ Hard to see how that kind of “error” would happen. It must have been intended. Maybe more packaging reduction.

560Heliport

^^ I don't remember noticing that when I built mine. But mine probably came from the Mexico factory. Maybe yours is a transition from plastic bags to the paper ones, and the paper bags won't have smaller bags inside?

Brainslugged

560Heliport said:

^^ I don't remember noticing that when I built mine. But mine probably came from the Mexico factory. Maybe yours is a transition from plastic bags to the paper ones, and the paper bags won't have smaller bags inside?

I think it's more likely some sort of weird error. Plus I believe the bags-within-bags thing is part of Lego's quality control. So they weigh a pair of tiny bags to make sure they're the right weight. Then they stick those in another bag of parts and weigh again. This is done for every bag and every bag containing bags and then for the entire set.

So a big set might end up having all it's individual and cumulative parts weighed dozens of times. So for an error to make it all the way through to the finished product, it must have been missed potentially a dozen times or more. Just one way that Lego ensures missing pieces are as rare as unicorn poop. And if there is a missing piece... 999 times out of 1000 it will be user error.

I don’t have first-hand knowledge of this, but it's what I've always believed to be the case. Either way, I can't believe they'd get rid of bags within bags. Interesting theory though.

560Heliport

^ My thought is that it's usually a bad idea to change several aspects of something at the same time: it's better to change one thing, see what unintended cosequences result, tweak it to get things the way you want, then change the next thing, etc. It just seems to me that if you got all the correct parts, the lack of little bags must be deliberate. 

rd1899

Saw this on reddit today.  Set is #76150 Spiderjet vs. Venom Mech.

(source link)

DadsAFOL2

In #10276 The Colosseum, Bag 29 is the last section in Book III, however the bags were packed into box IIII.   Wonder how many calls customer service is getting about missing bag 29.

masterX244

Brainslugged said:

560Heliport said:

^^ I don't remember noticing that when I built mine. But mine probably came from the Mexico factory. Maybe yours is a transition from plastic bags to the paper ones, and the paper bags won't have smaller bags inside?

I think it's more likely some sort of weird error. Plus I believe the bags-within-bags thing is part of Lego's quality control. So they weigh a pair of tiny bags to make sure they're the right weight. Then they stick those in another bag of parts and weigh again. This is done for every bag and every bag containing bags and then for the entire set.

So a big set might end up having all it's individual and cumulative parts weighed dozens of times. So for an error to make it all the way through to the finished product, it must have been missed potentially a dozen times or more. Just one way that Lego ensures missing pieces are as rare as unicorn poop. And if there is a missing piece... 999 times out of 1000 it will be user error.

I don’t have first-hand knowledge of this, but it's what I've always believed to be the case. Either way, I can't believe they'd get rid of bags within bags. Interesting theory though.

Its also the only way to catch the small part weight differences.

High precision scales got a limited max weight and the scales for larger weights got less precision. if a part is weighting less than the precision it can escape getting measured. the smaller bags being weighted group those to a larger "part" which can only goof up entirely or not.

mustang69

From what I've read in the past, I thought the small spare parts were included to ensure the correct (required) amount were in a set. However, I noticed recently that some of the small bags that include the typical parts that are spares (1x1 tiles and plates, cheese wedges and such) dont have the spare. Has anyone else noticed this? Is this an indication that their weighing process is getting more accurate? I was wondering if they started including the spares just because we've come to expect it. Not complaining, just curious.

Casper_vd_Korf

When the small parts are in 2 or more separate stages of the build (like bag 2 and 6) then they’ll only include a spare in bag 2. At least, for most parts. 

MinifigInSpace

An couple of small errors from the instructions of set #70700:

1. The orange and black eye prints are gone from the robot. Looking at the upper right image that's found throughout the instructions, I find it funny that quality control somehow missed this detail...
2. This page shows the head on the robot. The next page shows the head completely gone while the jetpack is being built. Wouldn't it be easier to keep the head off until the jetpack is installed?

Brainslugged

mustang69 said:

From what I've read in the past, I thought the small spare parts were included to ensure the correct (required) amount were in a set. However, I noticed recently that some of the small bags that include the typical parts that are spares (1x1 tiles and plates, cheese wedges and such) dont have the spare. Has anyone else noticed this?

Yup. Sadly it seems we only get one spare of a particular part per set now as opposed to a spare per bag.

CCC

MinifigInSpace said:

An couple of small errors from the instructions of set #70700:

1. The orange and black eye prints are gone from the robot. Looking at the upper right image that's found throughout the instructions, I find it funny that quality control somehow missed this detail...
2. This page shows the head on the robot. The next page shows the head completely gone while the jetpack is being built. Wouldn't it be easier to keep the head off until the jetpack is installed?

I don't see why 2 is an error. You can build the figure with or without the backpack. You have to remove the head to put on the backpack.  That is what the instructions are showing.

Astrobricks

CCC said:

MinifigInSpace said:

An couple of small errors from the instructions of set #70700:

1. The orange and black eye prints are gone from the robot. Looking at the upper right image that's found throughout the instructions, I find it funny that quality control somehow missed this detail...
2. This page shows the head on the robot. The next page shows the head completely gone while the jetpack is being built. Wouldn't it be easier to keep the head off until the jetpack is installed?

I don't see why 2 is an error. You can build the figure with or without the backpack. You have to remove the head to put on the backpack.  That is what the instructions are showing.

Is that the way you would build it? Put the head on, just to have to remove it again a few steps later?

CCC

Astrobricks said:

CCC said:

MinifigInSpace said:

An couple of small errors from the instructions of set #70700:

1. The orange and black eye prints are gone from the robot. Looking at the upper right image that's found throughout the instructions, I find it funny that quality control somehow missed this detail...
2. This page shows the head on the robot. The next page shows the head completely gone while the jetpack is being built. Wouldn't it be easier to keep the head off until the jetpack is installed?

I don't see why 2 is an error. You can build the figure with or without the backpack. You have to remove the head to put on the backpack.  That is what the instructions are showing.

Is that the way you would build it? Put the head on, just to have to remove it again a few steps later?

No I wouldn't. If you wanted to play first without the backpack, they show you how to build it.

Then you build the backpack and they show you how to attach it.

CCC

Also, looking at the instructions, this is quite different to most backpack type designs. Usually the figure is built first with the neck bracket, then the backpack is attached to the neck bracket. Whereas here, the neck bracket is attached to the backpack before attaching it to the figure. I don't know if this is due to the design of the backpack (it doesn't look like there is anything special or difficult to align once on) or that the figure has a molded rather than tradition head.

Speedman29

Spotted my first mistake in an instruction book today! Ploughing through the Technic Volvo 6x6 build #42114. Currently working on the fake engine at the front.

Between steps 441 and 442 as you add the bonnet support, the side radiator miraculously appears from nowhere! Turn the page and the instructions for the sub build of it are there!

TheOriginalSimonB

I'm assuming this is deliberate rather than slipping through the cracks, but just noticed that on the S21 CMF Beekeeper's printed tile the bees only have one wing each.

WesterBricks

TheOriginalSimonB said:

I'm assuming this is deliberate rather than slipping through the cracks, but just noticed that on the S21 CMF Beekeeper's printed tile the bees only have one wing each.

I assumed we were looking at the bees from the side, as if they're flying and the wings are atop the bee.

The_Rancor

Yes, it is accurate to real bee keeping as they would have a vertical stack they pull out of the hive which has the honeycomb inside. I haven’t seen one yet but it’d be great to see a beehive MOC at minifigure scale with a set of CMF stacks to slide out.

datsunrobbie

In the instructions for #75300 Tie Fighter the 1x4 plate in step 29 was added in step 28

Switchfoot55

Small misprint, but I was building #75278 D-O recently, and this caught my eye. 


The "call out" states only one of the 1L bar w/ 1x1 round plate, but obviously requires two for the step. 

datsunrobbie

#21324 Sesame Street bag 1 step 13 is missing the 16x16 plate in the call out.

wardm

Just noticed this in the new #80025 monkie kid set! 

Astrobricks

^ I’m pretty sure that’s an illegal connection method, lol

Where is that image from? I don’t see it in the images on Brickset.

pvp3020

^ It's in the main image on the set's home page: https://images.brickset.com/sets/large/80025-1.jpg?202106010403. The staff/weapon that the mech is holding.

Astrobricks

pvp3020 said:

^ It's in the main image on the set's home page: https://images.brickset.com/sets/large/80025-1.jpg?202106010403. The staff/weapon that the mech is holding.

Doh! I was only looking at “More Images”.

KungFuKenny

wardm said:

Just noticed this in the new #80025 monkie kid set! 

Maybe Lego is re-introducing magnetic pieces?  :-)

Cymbeline

I think that LEGO has presented us with a challenge. . .only the most worthy builders who are pure of heart will be able to balance the claws. The rest of us can just attach them in the boring usual way. :)

Yellowcastle

But choose wisely, for while the true connection will bring you life, the false connection will take it from you.