Random set of the day: Baby Ankylosaurus

Posted by ,
Baby Ankylosaurus

Baby Ankylosaurus

©2001 LEGO Group

Today's random set is 5950 Baby Ankylosaurus, released in 2001. It's one of 12 Dinosaurs sets produced that year. It contains 37 pieces.

It's owned by 303 Brickset members. If you want to add it to your collection you might find it for sale at BrickLink or eBay.


 

Sponsored content

21 comments on this article

Gravatar
By in Australia,

Doesn't have the same ring to it as "Baby Shark", though, does it?

And now you've got the song in your head.

I gotta say though, this was Lego's first foray into dinosaurs since the Adventurers visited Dinosaur Island, and I like that the dinosaurs -- particularly the bigger ones, I bought all four -- were evolving, design-wise. I'd waited years for a Tyrannosaurus to stomp down the main street of my Lego city, and I wasn't disappointed at all.

Gravatar
By in United States,

I really liked the huge variety of the dinos in this theme, enabled by their brick-built nature. Good old classic fun!

Gravatar
By in Canada,

I actually bought numerous copies of some of these small dino sets back then, primarily in order to get some sand green parts that were quite difficult to find (bricklink included).

To this day, the only AFOL in my old friends circle still gives me grief about this...

Gravatar
By in New Zealand,

OMG!, is the a dinosaur theme coming Huwbot?

Gravatar
By in Netherlands,

I just can't get over how terrible these dinosaurs were. I get that designs evolve from humble beginnings but even taking that into consideration... what on earth were they thinking?

Oh, right. It was 2001 Lego.

Gravatar
By in United States,

Say what you will about bad designs, but I adored this set as a young child. It was perfect.

Gravatar
By in France,

What a strange set, what a strange design! When I read the article, I really had to zoom and look closely at the build to make sure that it was really a dinosaur. Many of us don't like big pre-shaped lego specialized parts, but I must say that I do prefer the latest Lego versions of dinosaurs, as released in recent Jurassic world sets. Even if building one with available parts at this time was probably very difficult and tricky.

Gravatar
By in Bulgaria,

Wow, for once a set that I have!

Gravatar
By in Canada,

This set reminds me of my childhood when horses were still brick built and weren't a single molded piece.

Gravatar
By in United States,

Aww! Anklyosorus is my favorite dinosaur ever! They should really remake one into the style of recent year I.e. One to four or so molded pieces.

Gravatar
By in United States,

People complaining about Dinosaurs. DINOSAURS?! How can you not like Dinosaurs? Yeah sure, each Jurassic movie gets worse, but the dinosaurs are always cool, nobody complains when the dinosaurs are dinosauring it up. And speaking of this set, I got the boxed version, but this might have been my introduction to the Ankylosaurus, and later in the year I saw Jurassic Park III and there some were!
And make fun of the way all the sets in the Dinosaurs line are built/designed, but I'd rather have a bunch of parts that can be combined with regular bricks. The Dinosaur Body Quarters are not screen accurate all the time, but if we got another Boga from Revenge of the Sith, it will probably be like the latest Dewback and be one giant hunk of plastic than the parts used for these dinosaurs that were reused for the Spinosaurus, Boga, a Dewback, Elephants, and the mutant Killer Whale in Alpha Team: Mission Deep Sea. I feel like these more generic parts that can be recolored and reprinted should have won out over the overly specialized parts of today, but the the Mutant dinosaurs from Dino Attack/Dino 2010 happened and then the new ones that are better, but not by much. I won't deny, the size of the dinosaurs is an improvement, but I still hate when people hate the older sets just because they are old. Yes, I kind of hate on the newer stuff, but that's because the goal of recycling and repurposing of the parts seems to be missing.

Gravatar
By in United States,

Looks neat and I have it. Would be nice to have one updated for the Jurassic World line (it can work being brick built).

Gravatar
By in United States,

I personally think these ones don't look too good, and much prefer the newer molded ones. However, that's just my opinion

Gravatar
By in United States,

I have the box version of this set 7000

Gravatar
By in United States,

Man these dinos where weird. Always wanted the Mossasaurus though.

Gravatar
By in Netherlands,

MCLegoboy: "but I still hate when people hate the older sets just because they are old."

I don't hate these dinosaurs because they're old. I dislike them because they're awful. My favorite Lego era is 1985-1995, I love old stuff. You could say this 2001 set feels "new" to me. I always try to appreciate things in their historical context, and even taking context into consideration, it's very hard to imagine what Lego were thinking when designing this.

It's no wonder that they came out with Galidor just a year later. Turn-of-the-century Lego was in a bad state.

Gravatar
By in Germany,

Well in terms of paleonthological realism these dinos surely were pretty bad. Some of them even had some nastily exposed socket sections or hinge notches.

But I surely love that 'creature build system' concept still today^^
One should not forget that this system was also used for quite convincing elephants in Orient Expedition and the Dewback and Varaktyl from Star Wars (oh and there was that 'killer-whale-cyborg' in Alpha Team...)

I think it was a missed opportunity when they sorted out all those parts during the 'Big Purge' in 2004. They needed to find a way to make the legs a non-assembly mould (thus reducing production costs) whilst also allowing them to articulate independently. Then it could have turned into a far more 'LEGO-like' alternative to modern days' very specialized creature moulds, that are rarely being used for more than a single year and theme.

Gravatar
By in United States,

@Nick That tends to be the thing I see though. People just say that something is bad, never any explanations for why they think it is bad, or if they do, it's because a set uses a couple of slopes to achieve a curve instead of the fancy curved slopes we have today which suggests that just because it doesn't use the parts we have access to today means it's bad. It also tends to be from the younger crowd. If everyone just rummaged through the catalogs of themes on Brickset, they can see and appreciate what there has been over all the years, and it's great to have the Random Set of the Day to showcase the "hidden gems" to the younger generation.

When it comes to the Dinosaurs, really the only thing that would have been better at the time is if the legs could have moved separately from one another, but at least they moved. That's more than could have been said of a lot of animals and so it wasn't a deal breaker. Horses could only move their head, aligators had the jaw and tail, dragons had the added wings, Adventurer Dinosaurs also had limited movement, these new dinosaurs were a revolution with all the articulation they had, and I'd argue that the modern creatures of today wouldn't have happened without them. Another nice thing about these dinosaurs is that they could be taken apart and extended in the middle like what they did with Boga, or you could make freaky mutant hybrids (not that you can't do that with the new ones, that's part of the marketing for Fallen Kingdom, but there is more of a visual continuity with the 2001 forms). I'm not saying that the pieces aren't specialized, but they were utilized for more than just this one time. Galidor has also been shown to be quite versatile if you just think differently (but also if you have a million of the pieces.) and I don't see that as a bad thing. It wasn't the best move, but the action figure craze from the 90s was still strong at the time.

My complaint about the newer creatures though is that they are a bit too specialized. I look at the Vikings dragons from 2005, and while being a little rough in some cases, they aren't composed of five giant pieces. There's no building there. Even though these dinosaurs are specialized, the body uses six pieces, and then multiple pieces for tails, necks, the Mesosaurus and T-Rex had multiple pieces for their heads, there's some actual building taking place. And then you also see that some of the pieces in other themes, and even of the smaller heads and tails could be used in the Raptors of Studios or in these baby dinosaurs. Not everything is accurate to anatomy, but it's nice reuse of the molds. We can't use a T-Rex body from these days for much more than a T-Rex body. Then you look at Elves and there's these awesome creatures made of multiple pieces with only the heads being specialized, and wings if they fly. Why is that not the case for the other themes? Since we've abandoned the 2001 Dinosaurs pieces, why did the newer dinosaurs get more Galidor-like with only a few piece compositions and other creatures in other themes derive more from the Creator side and be composed of bricks?

Gravatar
By in Portugal,

This dinosaur is horrible.

Gravatar
By in Australia,

I like the newer "Dino" figs from 2012, for the record, but I do think MC has a valid point.

And as an aside, I loved the Alpha Team underwater cyborg creatures. That killer whale was *tight*. The squid and ray were cool too.

Return to home page ยป