LEGO responds to claim that AT-AT can't be taken apart

Yeah with the "ease the model onto its side" comment they're definitely referring to the longer brown axles with stopper that go into the sides, a completely different assembly and not one anybody has complained about.

That's a pretty weak response from Lego, and the methods described are certainly non-standard deconstruction methods.

If this design choice aided in improving the stability of the model I think it's justified, I know it goes against what Lego is meant to be, but in all fairness the really large sets they've been putting out go well above being construction toys and easily classify as model kits, you don't take a model kit apart when you build it so... I guess they'll allow themselves to do stuff like this on that account.

I can see the set getting a free upgrade pack like WALL-E did.

@Kamiccolo said:
"If this design choice aided in improving the stability of the model I think it's justified, I know it goes against what Lego is meant to be, but in all fairness the really large sets they've been putting out go well above being construction toys and easily classify as model kits, you don't take a model kit apart when you build it so... I guess they'll allow themselves to do stuff like this on that account."

I get what you're saying, but if you read Huw's article about the problem, he explains how it was unnecessary:

"It has presumably been done like this to stop the protruding end of the orange pin from being pushed back into the frame, but if that's the case it all seems totally unnecessary because when it's used to attach the leg to the underside of the walker later on in the build it's evident that a normal 2l black pin in the hole would have sufficed."

(The pin is red in the example photos above)

@omnium said:
" "it's evident that a normal 2l black pin in the hole would have sufficed." "

So essentially it's a really stinky POOP. It's a small piece "made up of" multiple larger pieces!

The description how to disassemble this is here:
https://youtube.com/shorts/WGl73fynSKI?feature=share

@EstragonHelmer said:
"I can see the set getting a free upgrade pack like WALL-E did."

Same here.

Ps. @Huw Interesting to see that Lego replied to Vice instead of Brickset. In all fairness, this looks like a reaction to minimise additional cost. I can understand that from a business point of view.

For me it would have really helped if Lego ended their reply with: "We've seen many Lego fans who outed their concern towards these building techniques when a set needs to be taken apart. Because Lego is meant to build AND rebuild, we'll provide a step by step photographic tutorial in future set instructions to take apart our most challenging construction techniques."

For me, this would would suffice in:
- not providing a fix through a parts pack (less costs)
- remain utilisation of said technique in future sets
- acknowledge the interaction between their brand and their fanbase

anyway, just my 2 cents.

@JayCal said:
"(...)
Interesting to see that Lego replied to Vice instead of Brickset.
(...)"
With all due respect to Brickset, Vice has a vastly wider viewership.

The simple solution is to not use that pin connector, the assembly would still work just fine (and be stable and strong enough) without it (as far as I can tell anyway, I don't own that set or the big technic block piece) but it would be fairly easy to remove the axle from the axle connector if the pin connector wasn't there.

@omnium:
As I’ve said on multiple occasions, the real purpose is to create a solid cotter pin down the center of the frame. The turntable mounts have the same spacing, so one mount attaches from the outside, and the other attaches from the inside. Pressing against the turntable will cause it to detach from the frame. This thick cotter pin in the center of the frame prevents the inside mount from being able to move, keeping them locked together. If you attach this in one orientation, the part attached to the body rests safely on the part attached to the leg. Flip it over, and it’s hanging by whatever friction the pins provide, unless it has this cotter pin to rest against instead. In the other two orientations, the body sits on the pins, but pressure in one direction could dislodge it, again, unless this cotter pin is there to prevent accidental separation that results in the whole thing topping over onto someone.

If someone can afford to spend £700 on a toy, their life is probably able to withstand this very minor infraction.

RacingBricks claims it to be doable:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGl73fynSKI

I should have kept my mouth shut when I discovered this issue. When I addressed it to Lego their initial response was not: thanks for pointing out this issue and we will look into it, but they said: use a Brick Separator.

Still the solution they now probide is bullocks.

They should release a how to video, not a stupid description.

Yeah mistakes like this can happen... does the red technic tube piece serve any purpose? No? Then leave it out.. let's get over it everybody.

@Banners said:
"If someone can afford to spend £700 on a toy, their life is probably able to withstand this very minor infraction."
People who spend huge amounts on goods or services expect them to be flawless. You might imagine that for non-essentials like LEGO (yes, it is non-essential: you can live without it), they wouldn’t care, but that’s not how people reason.

Lame excuse so they don’t have to fix their mistake like they used to.

I find it pretty sad that that that was the most read news article ever. There are so many interesting articles here that would deserve that spot more. Like thousands of them.

FAQ:
> Is it the end of the world?
No.
> Will it affect the majority of buyers?
Probably not.
> Is it a shame?
For sure, especially if it indicates a trend (too early to tell though)

@Banners said:
"If someone can afford to spend £700 on a toy, their life is probably able to withstand this very minor infraction."

It's not so much that this is a minor concern, it's that this build violates a basic tenet of LEGO; namely, that anything we make can be taken apart again without too much difficulty.

@nushae & @eechiwawa

Nothing stops you from bricklinking the parts - it's a fairly simple solution.

https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemInv.asp?S=21303sup-1

LEGO once again not wanting to admit that they made a mistake.

Just a simple "We will do our best not to repeat this again" would have been enough.

@carlitofox said:
""So, LEGO does not want to admit that it's an oversight in the design, then..."

what a truly pathetic comment, that is more sour grapes than anything else

So Lego didn't come to you when they wanted to comment boo hoo

I thought that this was a Lego journalist site not a huws grumpy option site because that's what that is . "

Someone needs a coffee...

Their overblown L' EGO does not let them admit they made a mistake. It was similar with other mistakes. IE. they messed up gears in the Chiron "on purpose" like they claim...

@bananaworld said:
"
@JayCal said:
"(...)
Interesting to see that Lego replied to Vice instead of Brickset.
(...)"
With all due respect to Brickset, Vice has a vastly wider viewership.

"

Do they, though? I mean I can understand more people complaining on Reddit than here, but Vice, along with Buzzfeed, the HuffPo, and other all-digital news outlets are in a near crisis right now. They’re all desperately searching for more venture capital to keep themselves afloat.

They’re not what they used to be.

This is what the world has come too. Oh how it must feel to be a snowflake or a Karen in these “troubled” times. $700 LEGO sets, loss of sleep, and feeling helpless that you can’t take apart 3 of the 8000 pieces of your light grey dust collector. Truly 1st world problems that all the best and brightest minds of this century are working on fixing. So relax Karen, go grab a $9 mocha with low fat almond milk in your gas guzzling climate controlled SUV. The greatest minds in the world will solve this problem.

@Solojif said:
"This is what the world has come too. Oh how it must feel to be a snowflake or a Karen in these “troubled” times. $700 LEGO sets, loss of sleep, and feeling helpless that you can’t take apart 3 of the 8000 pieces of your light grey dust collector. Truly 1st world problems that all the best and brightest minds of this century are working on fixing. So relax Karen, go grab a $9 mocha with low fat almond milk in your gas guzzling climate controlled SUV. The greatest minds in the world will solve this problem. "

Dude, reddit is that way.

@Solojif said:
"This is what the world has come too. Oh how it must feel to be a snowflake or a Karen in these “troubled” times. $700 LEGO sets, loss of sleep, and feeling helpless that you can’t take apart 3 of the 8000 pieces of your light grey dust collector. Truly 1st world problems that all the best and brightest minds of this century are working on fixing. So relax Karen, go grab a $9 mocha with low fat almond milk in your gas guzzling climate controlled SUV. The greatest minds in the world will solve this problem. "

I think you're the one in need of that mocha...

It would be interesting if someone (maybe someone in the staff) would try the suggested methods to check if they really work. A video of the attempt would be appreciated too.

I realized while building it that this assembly was needed to prevent the technic frame from disengaging from the technic disk (or whatever that is called). When you put the legs on the body, the pins they are attached with face downward, which would mean that with time the body and legs would just detach from one another.

[Edit: What @PurpleDave wrote above is what I meant. He said it better than me with my poor English skills…]

RacingBrick made disassembly seems very simple in their video, but I couldn't get that solution to work. Same with this solution from LEGO, using only hands/fingernails did not work for me.

Maybe if the parts used are more worn and have less clutch power, then I could see these solutions working without a tool. In my case, I had to resort to using fine pointed pliers to remove the axle from my test build (inserted under the axle stop, without damage to the part).

That's ehm... one way to address it? Just give a clearly dubious method that 'might' help to disassemble it and call it a day. Wow.

I was giving them the benefit of the doubt earlier. But wow, that's not a good response. At all. At best it might make it look like they care. But they basically tell you you're supposed to be able to disassemble it whilst you clearly aren't able to using any normal method.

"Only the best is good enough" seems to have sunk a bit deeper today. And yes, it's not the end of the world. But you'd want Lego to at least deal professionally with mistakes like these.

Coupled with the Marvel mechs being cancellend AND the GWP being cancelled. All at the last minute. Not a good look. Again.
Well, at least those were corrected by admitting something's wrong...

@Solojif said:
"This is what the world has come too. Oh how it must feel to be a snowflake or a Karen in these “troubled” times. $700 LEGO sets, loss of sleep, and feeling helpless that you can’t take apart 3 of the 8000 pieces of your light grey dust collector. Truly 1st world problems that all the best and brightest minds of this century are working on fixing. So relax Karen, go grab a $9 mocha with low fat almond milk in your gas guzzling climate controlled SUV. The greatest minds in the world will solve this problem. "

Why are you whining so much?

@Huw:
I don’t suppose you’d be willing to attempt to disprove my cotter pin theory? Take one of these frames and replace the internal assembly with just a black 2L friction pin, as you mentioned in your article. Attach it to the same style turntable. Then, rather than sacrificing the AT-AT, see how much of a load you can place on it before the frame and turntable disengage from each other, which would result in the AT-AT body dropping off of the upper leg joints.

Just my quick two cents.

1.) Is this a relatively minor issue in the grand scheme of things? Absolutely. But I don’t think it’s fair to just brush it aside given that this set costs $800+. If LEGO wants to act like a premium product, then I will criticize them like a premium product. You need to ensure that there aren’t going to be any issues when you ask this much from people.

2.) I buy LEGO sets because I can do whatever I want with the pieces. If I want to just leave it assembled, then I can do that. If I want to use the parts for something else, I should have that option. Otherwise, I may as well buy a model kit or some other toy.

3.) If the build gets to the point where you need to make the product unable to be taken apart just to be stable, then you might have made the thing too big. I’ve said it in the past that I think UCS sets have gotten too bloated with the mentality of bigger = better. This is not the consumer’s problem. This is LEGO’s problem.

@Binnekamp said:
"That's ehm... one way to address it? Just give a clearly dubious method that 'might' help to disassemble it and call it a day. Wow.

I was giving them the benefit of the doubt earlier. But wow, that's not a good response. At all. At best it might make it look like they care. But they basically tell you you're supposed to be able to disassemble it whilst you clearly aren't able to using any normal method.

"Only the best is good enough" seems to have sunk a bit deeper today. And yes, it's not the end of the world. But you'd want Lego to at least deal professionally with mistakes like these.

Coupled with the Marvel mechs being cancellend AND the GWP being cancelled. All at the last minute. Not a good look. Again.
Well, at least those were corrected by admitting something's wrong..."

Perhaps. There does seem to be some miscommunication or misunderstanding if they’re publicly offering guidance on disassembly that won’t actually work.

If nothing else, though, this response of theirs does indicate the set isn’t officially meant to be permanently partially assembled. Prior to this communication, it appeared they may simply have intentionally designed the set not to be fully disassembled once built, with the expectation no one would ever try to completely break it down. This response appears to disprove that hypothesis.

@bananaworld said:
"
@JayCal said:
"(...)
Interesting to see that Lego replied to Vice instead of Brickset.
(...)"
With all due respect to Brickset, Vice has a vastly wider viewership."
Funny, I visit Brickset daily, but have never heard of Vice before. Not that I care who they are anyway.

@JayCal said:
" @EstragonHelmer said:
"I can see the set getting a free upgrade pack like WALL-E did."

Same here.

Ps. @Huw Interesting to see that Lego replied to Vice instead of Brickset. In all fairness, this looks like a reaction to minimise additional cost. I can understand that from a business point of view.

For me it would have really helped if Lego ended their reply with: "We've seen many Lego fans who outed their concern towards these building techniques when a set needs to be taken apart. Because Lego is meant to build AND rebuild, we'll provide a step by step photographic tutorial in future set instructions to take apart our most challenging construction techniques."

For me, this would would suffice in:
- not providing a fix through a parts pack (less costs)
- remain utilisation of said technique in future sets
- acknowledge the interaction between their brand and their fanbase

anyway, just my 2 cents."

I agree.

Actually, I don't see why they couldn't just release a tutorial video for this? I mean, in this day when we are bombarded by those short 30s videos on every social media, the opportunity is right there for the taking.

*yawns, stretches*

Oh, we're still talking about this?

Here's my solution: Tie a piece of sewing thread around the head of the axle pin before seating it into the frame. Leave a 2 inch tail hanging out, then you can pull on the thread to unseat the axle pin for disassembly. Alternatively, just use an Exacto knife.

@MainBricker said:
"I wonder how many people complaining about this will actually disassemble the set? Or even disassemble it down to single pieces?

OK Lego made a mistake, but it's not as bad as the Marvel mechs that are unstable models and as a result have had to be cancelled and redesigned.

I think due to the price people are looking for a gotcha moment with Lego, something to catch Lego out on. I doubt a cheaper set would've got the same amount of focus."

I think less people noticed this early on because such an expensive set is naturally going to have less people buying it to notice the error. Something like the mechs would’ve been very quickly noticed given their price point of $10 a pop compared to $800.

And again, I think this price point makes it fair to be harsh when something isn’t right. If LEGO asks us to pay top dollar, I expect the model to be top-notch. Also, if we don’t let LEGO know there’s something we’re unhappy with, then they can’t make steps to make the already impressive AT-AT even better!

I don't know why so many people keep saying it's impossible to take this assembly apart.

IT IS EASY TO TAKE APART.

When I built the at-at, I tried (because I had to, having read the post about it here) and it took me all of 9 seconds to do it. I pushed the orange pin, that disengaged the brown axel by one milimeter and I used a finger nail (I could have used an exacto too) and it came out super easily.

Is it difficult to take the assembly apart with a brick separator? Maybe.

But is it impossible to take apart alltogether? Not all all.

Everybody that owns this set and wants to take it apart to the last part can.

Can we talk about tomething else now?

Ha! I just watched that video and was all “ok, this is not a big deal…” So I went and built the sub assembly as per the instructions to try it for myself, and this thing is NOT coming apart with the tools provided in the set AT ALL.

@Rob42:
I was thinking swapping out the green pin joiner for _three_ half-bushes should do the trick. Move them one at a time and they’ll slide along the flanged axle. Slide all three in and then back out simultaneously, and they should have enough clutch to force the flanged axle out of the axle joiner half a stud, allowing you to grab it with your fingers.

@CCC:
I already have to do that for shows. I find that about one week’s growth gives you enough to hook the edges of tiles and cheese wedges, without being long enough to risk cracking the nail.

@PixelTheDragon:
70809

You just finished building your 800$ AT-AT after a week of work, I don't think that leaving 5 steps pre-built 5 years later if you wanted to re live the building experience would be a problem.

@legodoud said:
"You just finished building your 800$ AT-AT after a week of work, I don't think that leaving 5 steps pre-built 5 years later if you wanted to re live the building experience would be a problem."

That, and that guy in the video made disassembly look almost trivial (I know he said it’s not trivial… but to me, it looks almost trivial). Maybe it not 6+ easy to disassemble, but it certainly doesn’t appear to be as impossible as has been reported.

I know there's been a lot of voices decrying their use of this technique, but I think it's well worth the stability of the final model and I don't have an issue with a few parts being more challenging to get apart. I remember the days where there were no brick separators and it was physically impossible to remove a 1x2 jumper plate without groove from a 1x2 regular plate without damaging one or both parts because of the amount of clutch present and that was just the way it was. We have it pretty darn good these days.

@Vindicare said:
"This seems like a bit of a non issue. Of course all sets are meant to be taken apart, but is anyone who bought this really going to disassemble & throw it in the parts bin? "

I absolutely am. Every set I buy ends up in my bins for future MOC building.

Brickset is really going downhill. If you can’t figure out how to take it apart you need a new hobby. Seriously. Lego should have never responded at all, beyond a major roll of the eyes at all the whiny people fussing over it.

@Banners said:
"If someone can afford to spend £700 on a toy, their life is probably able to withstand this very minor infraction."

If you spent $40,000 on a car, wouldn’t you be annoyed if you had to go to the car dealership to change a tire because they used bolts that are impossible for anyone else to remove? …or would you be able to withstand this very minor infraction?

@ASennaFan said:
"Brickset is really going downhill. If you can’t figure out how to take it apart you need a new hobby. Seriously. Lego should have never responded at all, beyond a major roll of the eyes at all the whiny people fussing over it."
You are welcome to stop coming to this site then. You wouldn’t be missed.

@CCC said:
" @elangab said:
"Can someone explain why does it matter, or is it just out of principle?"

Because some people like to take their sets apart to rebuild them.

"

Or heck, even be creative and build something else!

@DoonsterBuildsLego said:
"That's a pretty weak response from Lego, and the methods described are certainly non-standard deconstruction methods. "

what?
Yes they are,...since when is a deconstruction method "legal" only when it is possible when using a brickseperator?

I dont understand what everybody has been smoking, but I dont see any problem in disconecting it...

@Slithus_Venom said:
" @LegoDavid Maybe they know they can't keep that promise?

@ASennaFan Have you tried and figured out how to take it apart yourself? Lego is really going downhill. Prices continue to go up as quality goes down. A company such as Lego that sells premium products needs to be held accountable."

Held accountable for what? For putting a set that is possible to disassemble? I'll say it again, it's fairly easy to take this assembly apart (it's not 4+ easy, but with a little bit of work and no practice, it took me 9 seconds to take apart).

The fuss comes from someone who looked at the instructions and, without having built the set, decided to alarm the community with a claim that does not stand up to reality. And the thing blew up, thanks for a clickbait article by Brickset that claimed, at first, that LEGO was created "sets" impossible to disassemble instead of mentioning the truth ("this assembly might be a little tougher to disassemble than to take two 4x2 bricks apart").

Actually, LEGO's new technic pins are much tougher to remove than this assembly and no one complains...

@ASennaFan said:
"Built the sub assembly, and had no trouble taking it apart. It is a bit tricky but if you have ANY experience dismantling large intricate sets it is no problem at all. And for everybody complaining- what about stickers that span several pieces? You can’t take those apart without ruining the sticker but you don’t see people rioting in the streets over it."

To be fair, stickers across multiple parts haven't been seen in years and rightfully so. I'll allow some rioting over that one

^^ Yep. The STAMP (Sticker Across Multiple Parts) was largely done away with - probably because it was the target of some outrage by fans. So...feedback worked!

What makes me nuts is the 'disparity of outrage' as @PeeZeeDee put it. Why is all the ire focused on the AT-AT suddenly?? Previous posts have pointed out at least three examples of other sets containing building steps that are very difficult to reverse. Yet we all pig pile on the AT-AT???

And don't TELL ME cUz tHe PrIcE...the argument is centered on principle, and all of these nebulous 'Tenets of LEGO.' Where is this giant tome of LEGO Law?? What about all of the previous 'violations' over the years? Where was all the outrage then?? You're basically saying that LEGO can violate its own 'principles' and 'laws' as long as it affects a set that's cheaper and one we don't care about. GTFOH

GOD I hate running to the defense of a billion dollar corporation. Shilling for LEGO is kinda lame...I loathe being the guy White Knighting for a company...but all this sudden and frenzied alarm is weird. Some of our members are definitely goin' for Gold in the Outrage Olympics. SHEEEESH.

@TomKazutara said:
""This set is a complex build intended for those aged 18+ ..."

If that is the case, why the heck are there still so much different ugly colours in a gray display model,
where are the clean looking pins and axles,
where are the prints for 700€ display sets,
and why are the Instructions made for 6 year olds ?

Is Lego knowing what their target audience even is ?"

Absolutely they do. That’s why they (a privately-owned company) managed to unseat Hasbro (a publicly-traded company that can simply dump stock if they want to quickly raise capital) in 2014 for largest toy manufacturer in the world, and why they only lost the title to Mattel (another publicly-traded company) when Mattel bought Mega Brands. The issue isn’t that they don’t understand their customer base, but that lifelong AFOLs don’t.

Brightly-colored parts inside the build, and color-locked Technic pins and axles both ease the assembly process for adults who are building their very first LEGO set, and who have never earned an advanced engineering degree. Really young kids who are still developing manual dexterity get a manageable handful of prints. Whingy adults who signal their capability by buying sets that cost more than a week’s pay get to suck it up and deal with a sticker sheet instead of getting a warehouse-crippling number of exclusive prints. And rather than being set up as a barrier to kids and adults who are not mechanically or mathematically gifted, the instructions are constantly being tweaked to make the experience more open to normal people.

@PurpleDave said:
"...The issue isn’t that they don’t understand their customer base, but that lifelong AFOLs don’t...."
^^ Good point, good post.

@PurpleDave said:
" @RacingBrick :
The issue sounds like it’s that this solution is for a set of flanged axles located in the body, but the problem they were addressing was the hip joints. It works on the body because the axles aren’t actually attached to anything at the time, where this one is plugged into an axle-joiner that will prevent you from just tapping it out. It needs to be extracted by force. Some claim there’s enough flex/slop in the assembly that you can get the flange free of the pin hole in the frame to the point you can hook it with a fingernail and pull it free, but that is not even close to the solution they offered."

There were 2 different issues described in the original Brickset article, but the "main" one and what you can see on the screenshots of this article is for the assembly in step 131 for the legs.

TLG provided 2 solutions for the 2 different issues in their response to Vice, the first one is for the easier challenge where you can shake out the axles, but the second one is for the assembly in the legs.

This is exactly what you can see in my video, and what TLG describes in their solution is basically the same, although I would reverse their procedure (again, check what I did in the video) - first you move the assembly in the frame back and forth, this will make the axle with stop move as well and you'll be able to stick your fingernail under the head of the axle with stop and pull it out.