Former LEGO designer finds illegal technique in new model
Posted by Huw,
11376 Ford Model T was revealed last week and the discussion about it appears to have been positive on the whole.
We weren't sent one to review (which is fine, we receive more than we can handle as it is) so we have not had a chance to build it yet.
However, ex-LEGO designer Tiago Catarino has, and has just posted his video review on YouTube.
Unfortunately, he found a serious illegal technique that is stressing elements to breaking point.
The problem he found is caused by the fact that stud on the side of a headlight brick sticks out further than the width of a brick. Consequently, they can't be placed next to another element with the stud facing in, but that's exactly what's been done in the Model T.
Here's a small construction Tiago built to illustrate the problem. The stud of the brown brick interferes with the back of the green one, so it won't affix properly to the yellow plate below it.
At best it's unsightly, and you would not expect to find the technique used in an official model, but there's no real harm done to any of the pieces.
The real problem comes when you attach a plate above them and that's exactly what's been done on this model.
We are led to believe that models undergo stringent quality tests to ensure that they can be built, are stable, and do not include techniques that might cause pieces to break over time, so one has to wonder how this ever passed review.
Unfortunately, this is not an isolated case. In his review of 76324 Spider-Man vs. Oscorp, CapnRex101 found another egregious example caused by the Fez piece on top of the hydrant being wider than the width of a brick, causing interference with the wall. This is obviously easily avoided by placing the hydrant a stud further out, but it is still an oversight:
There were also several examples found in models designed during COVID, such as this one, but they are perhaps excusable given the working conditions at the time.
Do you have theories as to why this has been allowed to happen? Will it put you off buying the set? If not, perhaps seeing the other shoddy technique found in the set will!
58 likes
33 comments on this article
It seems that the quality management is lacking recently - similarly to the many misspelled texts on the recent sets
I will certainly hold off on buying the set until this is corrected.
Very strange and unfortunate. I'm not sure if the setup there also uses a 1x2 at the bottom, but if it does, at least it can be easily fixed by swapping them? I consider this one of the most famous "fun fact" illegal techniques, considering the age of the part, so I'm very surprised this wasn't noticed.
@dawid said:
"It seems that the quality management is lacking recently - similarly to the many misspelled texts on the recent sets"
Don't forget the color matching too: https://brickset.com/article/122025/review-5009325-the-simpsons-living-room
Hurry! There's no time for quality control, WE NEED MORE SETS!
Well I guess there will be an updated set soon. Or the release is postponed to fix the issue
Not surprised at all about this, unfortunately. The only thing that is trending upward with regard to LEGO at the moment are the prices.
Interesting to see how long TLG can continue increasing its profits while simultaneously tanking the quality across the board.
It's especially puzzling that this illegal technique was used in the first place, because I can't see any reason not to have the other headlight bricks placed one plate lower, which would resolve the issue.
Wonder why they didn't use the technic brick with the two pin holes? Actually something is tickling the back of my head that it is also illegal in some fashion, like I know you aren't supposed to mate those with stud out bricks. Can anyone confirm that's the case?
Couldn't they have used a Technic brick instead? And yes, I am awar that the hole in those is slightly higher than in the headlight brick, but considering the pieces it's used for here I'd think there's no stress in that connection? Or at least a lot less than with this method.
Still weird this wasn't found out during the design process. You'd think once they have a final design, they let a test group actually build it? Yet no one noticed? Weird...
As for the fez thing....once encountered a similar issue in a Loz set, but nothing a X-acto knife couldn't solve ;-)
"Do you have theories as to why this has been allowed to happen?"
Well, I'm not expecting LAN members to notice this because they get stuff for free to shill for LEGO, but the rest of us has been saying for YEARS now that the quality standards at LEGO have been falling severely.
In fact, the more the prices go up, the more the quality goes down.
That being said, I'm of the mind that there's no such thing as an "illegal technique". We are free to do whatever we want with our pieces and LEGO is as well.
As long as the QUALITY OF THE BRICKS is good, there's no issue. A ton of sets from the 70's, 80's and 90's used "illegal" techniques and they're all still perfectly fine.
Whereas more modern sets are falling apart because of the quality of some bricks (remember the dark red fiasco? It wasn't that long ago).
So what concerns me here is that they're using an "illegal" technique in a time when the quality of their products is also falling severely.
It would be great to go back to less sets with higher quality. But that is coming from someone who simply cannot afford to purchase all these sets, nor has the space. Do people really buy all these news sets??
@djcbs said:
""Do you have theories as to why this has been allowed to happen?"
Well, I'm not expecting LAN members to notice this because they get stuff for free to shill for LEGO, but the rest of us has been saying for YEARS now that the quality standards at LEGO have been falling severely.
In fact, the more the prices go up, the more the quality goes down.
That being said, I'm of the mind that there's no such thing as an "illegal technique". We are free to do whatever we want with our pieces and LEGO is as well.
As long as the QUALITY OF THE BRICKS is good, there's no issue. A ton of sets from the 70's, 80's and 90's used "illegal" techniques and they're all still perfectly fine.
Whereas more modern sets are falling apart because of the quality of some bricks (remember the dark red fiasco? It wasn't that long ago).
So what concerns me here is that they're using an "illegal" technique in a time when the quality of their products is also falling severely."
You are free to use illegal techniques all you want, but LEGO (usually) doesn't because it breaks / bends parts, which drives up consumer complaints and part replacement requests plus it gives the company a black eye to the public when things like this surface. These 'legal / illegal' rules have changed slightly over time as the parts catalog and design ideals evolve. (Example: The sideways-plate-wedged-between-the-studs of 1970s sets wouldn't fly today. Tiles, however are fine like that, but studded plates are not, as they as slightly thicker in width due to the LEGO logo on the studs) So this error - and others like it - is a big deal, and it's very odd it passed muster with the issues it has.
Personally, I think the sets mentioned were digitally designed as was the case during COVID, and were not tested as thoroughly as they should have been, possibly to cut costs. (or something like that)
The disgust that courses through me, you could bottle it.
When you make a toy and try to save as much as possible to make a very affordable product, you obviously have to cut costs in the controls. It happens.
Once again, we just can’t trust Ford. I was done with them after the OJ Last Jedi slow speed getaway….then they tried their darndest to keep Christian Bale out of that race in Monaco and now they foment illegal LEGO building techniques.
@LEGO - we’re ready for our Honda CRX or Toyota FJ.
It's always interesting when these things crop up. What's surprising here is that the illegal technique is such a basic, obvious one - even 8-year-old me knew headlight bricks didn't fit together like that. How did the designer not notice it? (And digital designs aren't an excuse: LDD wouldn't let you place headlight bricks like that.)
Some other questions come to mind: why not use 1x1 Technic bricks there? It's not illegal to attach individual studs to Technic holes. Why don't the parts look stressed in the in-situ photo of the set shown in the article? Finally, are we sure Tiago built the set correctly? Not that I doubt him, but I can't view the instructions, so we technically don't know for sure that this issue is legitimate and not user error.
It's clear LEGO needs to expand their QC department. They're forcing their designers to constantly churn out set after set, so I have no doubt their QC department is completely overwhelmed and can't properly test every model. C'mon, LEGO, hire a few more employees! We all know you can afford it.
@djcbs said:
""Do you have theories as to why this has been allowed to happen?"
Well, I'm not expecting LAN members to notice this because they get stuff for free to shill for LEGO, but the rest of us has been saying for YEARS now that the quality standards at LEGO have been falling severely.
In fact, the more the prices go up, the more the quality goes down."
It was literally a LAN member who identified this problem and reported it, so I am not sure what more Fan Media can actually do.
You would have no way of knowing this, so I cannot blame you for doubting it, but LAN members give a huge amount of critical feedback on countless topics. Sadly, we cannot guarantee whether LEGO employees will act on that feedback, short of watching over their shoulders.
Only the best is good enough
Watch LEGO investors buy up original production runs of this set before they release an updated version.
@Heriol said:
"Very strange and unfortunate. I'm not sure if the setup there also uses a 1x2 at the bottom, but if it does, at least it can be easily fixed by swapping them? I consider this one of the most famous "fun fact" illegal techniques, considering the age of the part, so I'm very surprised this wasn't noticed. "
Worse, this is one of the specific instances cited in the Stressing the Elements presentation that first introduced AFOLs to this concept, so it’s been a known problem for decades at this point.
@lost_scotsman:
If you attach a brick/plate/tile to the side of a Technic brick in any manner, you can’t also attach overhanging elements to the top of the Technic brick, because the top piece can’t be fully seated on the Technic brick. You also can’t put the studs of x2 or longer parts into the Technic holes because the clutch is stronger than a normal anti-stud connection, and it’s too difficult for kids to disassemble. The Monkie Kid hilts avoid both of those problems, plus the bar extending outward would make it super easy to pop them loose when needed. However, I can’t recall the last time I’ve seen even a 1x1 stud inserted into a Technic hole.
@djcbs:
_You_ can do whatever you want with the parts once you buy them. _They_ have an entire department that’s set up to prevent stuff like this from making it into official sets.
Thank you for covering this increasingly common issue. It's incredibly disheartening to watch Lego's quality continue to drop while prices inexplicably rise. I hope something changes in the future, but the decline has been slow and steady so I don't expect a quick fix
The car's 120 years old, we could have waited a couple months for quality control to take a look at it.
I’m most ashamed at myself for being surprised at the fact that the stud sticks out a small amount on the headlight brick!
I should know this!!
The elephant in the room is the fact that it looks like they’ve used cutlery on the steering column. That’s no way to treat utensils and is clearly an even worse illegal move. It’s a wonder how they manage to continue to sell any sets with such low quality control. Goodness me.
I really wonder how mistakes like this make it all the way to production, where they're instantly spotted by early reviewers who are somehow more sensitive to LEGO's official building techniques than the designers themselves. This looks like the biggest illegal technique mistake I've seen in years, since it's actually stressing the bricks a lot.
It's disappointing to see more quality control issues sneaking through lately, but at least the Star Trek sticker was finally fixed after three tries! :D
I hadn't seen Tiago's video, but I did see a short about this issue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQFtZpKr3_w And now there's *another* dodgy connection? I bought 76205 despite its issue with the socket joint pieces on the fender piece, but this one, I'm not sure I'll be as willing to ignore.
@Crux said:
"The disgust that courses through me, you could bottle it."
You're leaving something important out. How big of a bottle would be required?
Do you have theories as to why this has been allowed to happen?
Corporate greed?
@Bricklunch said:
"Do you have theories as to why this has been allowed to happen?
Corporate greed?"
Or too much time in a CAD model
you'd think they'd update the headlight brick's mold by now... or at least introduce a proper in-System hole brick, like a shorter version of the "Piece of Resistance" piece (15444)
@Sandinista said:
" @Bricklunch said:
"Do you have theories as to why this has been allowed to happen?
Corporate greed?"
Or too much time in a CAD model"
Assuming they use proper software with a accurate parts catalog, that should automatically detect problems like this. Even ones that would be barely noticeable in real life.
This on the other hand is one you don't need software for to detect....
actually, looking at the pics again, there's more than enough space to have used a recolor of 15444. god forbid LEGO spend just a little bit more on completely reasonable recolors
@TheOtherMike said:
"I bought 76205 despite its issue with the socket joint pieces on the fender piece…"
I bought three copies _because_ of the intersection, figuring the set might be subjected to a recall, or at least modified mid-run. I had a heck of a time actually buying them before street date, too. Between Meijer, Target, and Walmart, I think I found them shelved at least 4-5 times before they were supposed to go on sale, but only one of those three chains let me buy them a few days early. The other two had the street date coded into their inventory software, so whenever it was scanned in prior to that date, it would inform the cashier that they needed to confiscate the set(s), and it wouldn’t even ring up normally at self-check. You’d just get the error message and your screen would lock up until a cashier came over and cleared it. And confiscated the set.