Are you having problems with your Sheriff's Safe?

"Final product may vary from image."
Another instance where the company's designer thought they knew better than the fan designer.

I'm sure there's a good reason why this happened but... Come on, Lego, get your QA together.

3/4 Pins ... 1/2 Pins ... as if 1/4 Pin length would make an essential difference ... its not to play, its just for display ...
At a company like LEGO, which brings out almost 1000 different sets per year, can't everything work, right? Am I right?

“1/2 pins? Oh, those won’t attach securely to the pulley. I’ll just switch them to 3/4 pins so we don’t get complaints about this.”

Yet the designer's own video uses 3/4 pins on one side?
https://youtu.be/prMXRVzfIUY?t=49

@Astaldo27 said:
"3/4 Pins ... 1/2 Pins ... as if 1/4 Pin length would make an essential difference ... its not to play, its just for display ...
At a company like LEGO, which brings out almost 1000 different sets per year, can't everything work, right? Am I right?"

No. You're not.

@Astaldo27 said:
"3/4 Pins ... 1/2 Pins ... as if 1/4 Pin length would make an essential difference ... its not to play, its just for display ...
At a company like LEGO, which brings out almost 1000 different sets per year, can't everything work, right? Am I right?"

Clearly you're new to Lego.

@tfcrafter said:
" @Astaldo27 said:
"3/4 Pins ... 1/2 Pins ... as if 1/4 Pin length would make an essential difference ... its not to play, its just for display ...
At a company like LEGO, which brings out almost 1000 different sets per year, can't everything work, right? Am I right?"

Clearly you're new to Lego."

correction: Clearly you're new to the LEGO community. aka a group with way too many people who call themselves loyal and enthusiastic fans yet the only thing they seem to do is look for and whine about every minor mistake they can find. No, I'm not saying LEGO is doing a good job with their QC, marketing and a lot of other things... but I feel more people should think like Astaldo here.

Sure, this is a very sloppy mistake, but it's not that big of an issue. Complaining on social media won't gain anybody anything anyway, only directly contacting LEGO may make a difference (though sadly that's debatable too lately). Everybody's likely already got tons of those pins laying around and they're dirt cheap on Bricklink as well. Of course this shouldn't have happened, but it's and incredibly easy to fix so please don't drag on about it so much.

@mr_Fikou said:
" @tfcrafter said:
" @Astaldo27 said:
"3/4 Pins ... 1/2 Pins ... as if 1/4 Pin length would make an essential difference ... its not to play, its just for display ...
At a company like LEGO, which brings out almost 1000 different sets per year, can't everything work, right? Am I right?"

Clearly you're new to Lego."

correction: Clearly you're new to the LEGO community. aka a group with way too many people who call themselves loyal and enthusiastic fans yet the only thing they seem to do is look for and whine about every minor mistake they can find. No, I'm not saying LEGO is doing a good job with their QC, marketing and a lot of other things... but I feel more people should think like Astaldo here.

Sure, this is a very sloppy mistake, but it's not that big of an issue. Complaining on social media won't gain anybody anything anyway, only directly contacting LEGO may make a difference (though sadly that's debatable too lately). Everybody's likely already got tons of those pins laying around and they're dirt cheap on Bricklink as well. Of course this shouldn't have happened, but it's and incredibly easy to fix so please don't drag on about it so much."

I’ve said it before in articles and I’ll say it again here. If LEGO wants to act like a premium brand, then I will judge them harsher. If there is something wrong, then LEGO needs to know about it so they can make course corrections as needed.

We’re seeing a lot of these quality control issues in sets that are quite expensive. That’s concerning given the amount of money LEGO is asking people for these products. I don’t enjoy seeing this stuff happen. There is a way to provide feedback in a way that’s not hostile, but people tend to be upset when something they’re asked to pay $50+ doesn’t work properly.

Also, if there is one thing a big company is scared of, it’s bad PR. Sometimes that’s a good thing.

@Astaldo27 said:
"3/4 Pins ... 1/2 Pins ... as if 1/4 Pin length would make an essential difference ... its not to play, its just for display ...
At a company like LEGO, which brings out almost 1000 different sets per year, can't everything work, right? Am I right?"

Apparently so far nobody caught your sarcasm......

@Astaldo27 said:
"3/4 Pins ... 1/2 Pins ... as if 1/4 Pin length would make an essential difference ... its not to play, its just for display ..."
Considering the defining feature of this entire set is a play feature of a working lock... I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the main feature to work correctly from the get-go.

@tfcrafter said:
" @Astaldo27 said:
"3/4 Pins ... 1/2 Pins ... as if 1/4 Pin length would make an essential difference ... its not to play, its just for display ...
At a company like LEGO, which brings out almost 1000 different sets per year, can't everything work, right? Am I right?"

Clearly you're new to Lego."

Clearly they’re being sarcastic.

This was a real frustration, having to explain to a 11 year old on Christmas day that they have indeed built it all correctly but it still doesn't work consistently. Disappointing.

Anyone who has tried to build something similar would know that the pulley wheel does not have as secure of a fit for pins as other technic elements, lacking the counterbores for pinholes and being overall thinner where the pinholes are. This causes pins to be particularly rattly, especially when attached by only one side. However, the greater friction of studs as with the use of the 1/2 pins make for a much more rigid connection.

I suspect this is the reason for the change--with the tan 3/4 pins, the 1L beams are probably able to wiggle out of place enough to catch on each other in an unintended way due to the greater slop.

Lego's QC has been inspired by Hasbro lately.

"Only the 51st percentile is mediocre enough."

Sarcasm always translates well on the internet, amirite?

@PixelTheDragon:
The circumstances on this one fall partly outside their control, and partly somewhere that was recently outside their control and still acts with a degree of autonomy not enjoyed by other parts of the company. This project is headed up by Bricklink, not the main company. The set is designed by someone who is not on their payroll, and it is not given a ground-up redesign like traditional Ideas sets. It was up to the fan designers to make any changes necessary to comply with official LEGO set design standards. It’s entirely possible this was a planned announcement, with the tan 3/4 pin being required to pass LEGO set design standards, and the “fix” being a way to backdoor a non-compliant design through a process that might have otherwise resulted in being kicked back to the archive. Or it could be that someone further down the line saw what they thought was an error and “fixed” it. Or someone could have introduced the change without realizing it. Or the fan design may have been submitted with the 3/4 pin in blue by accident, and someone further down the line just switched it to tan because it’s color-picked.

Whatever the case may be, this is a unique situation that doesn’t really compare to the Gargantos issue.

@CCC said:
" @LegoSonicBoy said:
" @Astaldo27 said:
"3/4 Pins ... 1/2 Pins ... as if 1/4 Pin length would make an essential difference ... its not to play, its just for display ..."
Considering the defining feature of this entire set is a play feature of a working lock... I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the main feature to work correctly from the get-go."

Well they did make a "playable" piano that is playable in the sense that the entire keyboard is a switch to play the next note on your mobile phone."
Yeah, and it works as intended, even if it's egregiously not what most people would've expected. In this case, the lock straight up doesn't work.

So a fan designed this set, and it worked. Then Lego says: "Were going to make this a real set, but were not going to trust your building skills and were going to change it for no reason!"

Images and video of the original Ideas project show tan pins, blue pins, and black pins. I know people are quick to pile-on Lego these days, but I think there is some shared blame here and "fatal mistake" might be hyperbole.

https://ideas.lego.com/projects/ef3b2103-0002-4b76-9346-dd6b1f5815ec

@medleyj said:
"So does anyone in the US actually have this set already? mine is still showing processing just like the castle and aces of flight sets that I all bought on day one about 30 minutes after it went live back in July. All were in the first 5,000 ordered. Seems like other countries are getting theirs first. "

Likewise, I've preordered those three myself, @medleyj, and it still indicates "in process." I guess they aren't shipping to U.S. customers yet?

I'm with PixeltheDragon here, who commented, "I’ve said it before in articles and I’ll say it again here. If LEGO wants to act like a premium brand, then I will judge them harsher. If there is something wrong, then LEGO needs to know about it so they can make course corrections as needed."

While I would like to give the benefit of the doubt where it is needed, this is starting to seem a little ridiculous. I remember the errant design of the 21303, WALL-E, relating to its swiveling head movement being too flimsy, and had to request two replacement packs (since I had purchased two of those), but that was several years ago. I figured at the time, one significant omission (and acknowledgement by TLC that they'd made a mistake) in several years is a pretty good track record.

But now, within the space of a few months, we have four (that I'm aware of):

1) Three Marvel Mech sets, such as 76203, being delayed or canceled indefinitely until a design error is rectified.

2) The 75313 AT-AT with its apparently impossible-to-take-apart subassembly, that prompted an official response from TLC and its designer. (Personally, I don't care that it's "barely" able to be taken apart, that's just not proper LEGO technique. The whole point is to build and to take apart with ease.)

3) The possible design flaw in 76205 Gargantos Showdown which may or may not be an illegal building technique but probably would elicit stress on that connection given enough time.

4) The presumed replacement of ``1/2 technic pins with 3/4 technic pins by someone in Bricklink, apparently, followed by the original designer alerting folks about it in a follow-up comment post on his set page. Although, as PurpleDave, indicated, there may be several caveats with this one (not within TLC, etc.).

Starting to wonder, if it's not "only the best that's good enough" for TLC, what is then?

This is completely unacceptable. First I did my math wrong on my last Bricklink order and didn’t get enough parts for my MOC, and now this. I’ve had it with Bricklink, until they can read my mind and make operable locks, I’m going to give all my business to psychics and locksmiths.

I am surprised by the response to my comment. And it was meant both ironically and seriously.
First of all: I've been a Brickset Member for many years, I just rarely comment, read more.

On the actual topic:
LEGO has a problem with the QC. Certain things are not allowed to happen with a market leader (massive color deviations within a set, problems with the online shop - incl. Bricklink, availability of sets, etc.). BUT minor, easily correctable mistakes, like this one, can happen and are made up by the customer service. As an AFOL, I've only been really annoyed once, and that was with the Lamborghini Sian. Otherwise everything was correctable for me so far (wrong or missing parts).

While I understand some frustration, I would suggest that venting outraged spleens in this fashion is the kind of thing that could torpedo the Designer program, a program which in my opinion is one of the best things LEGO has ever done in that it gives us a greater variety of sets.

So yes, it's not perfect. Mistakes happen. But what we have now is sure better than not having the Designer program at all. Chill .

@alfred_the_buttler said:
"This is completely unacceptable. First I did my math wrong on my last Bricklink order and didn’t get enough parts for my MOC, and now this. I’ve had it with Bricklink, until they can read my mind and make operable locks, I’m going to give all my business to psychics and locksmiths. "
See, now THIS is how you do sarcasm. Lol

@PurpleDave said:
" @PixelTheDragon:
The circumstances on this one fall partly outside their control, and partly somewhere that was recently outside their control and still acts with a degree of autonomy not enjoyed by other parts of the company. This project is headed up by Bricklink, not the main company. The set is designed by someone who is not on their payroll, and it is not given a ground-up redesign like traditional Ideas sets. It was up to the fan designers to make any changes necessary to comply with official LEGO set design standards. It’s entirely possible this was a planned announcement, with the tan 3/4 pin being required to pass LEGO set design standards, and the “fix” being a way to backdoor a non-compliant design through a process that might have otherwise resulted in being kicked back to the archive. Or it could be that someone further down the line saw what they thought was an error and “fixed” it. Or someone could have introduced the change without realizing it. Or the fan design may have been submitted with the 3/4 pin in blue by accident, and someone further down the line just switched it to tan because it’s color-picked.

Whatever the case may be, this is a unique situation that doesn’t really compare to the Gargantos issue."

LEGO owns Bricklink, and these sets are being sold for money. It’s LEGO’s responsibility to ensure that things are going smoothly if they’re going to sell these fan-designed kits. At the end of the day, these are a LEGO product.

@gylman said:
"While I understand some frustration, I would suggest that venting outraged spleens in this fashion is the kind of thing that could torpedo the Designer program, a program which in my opinion is one of the best things LEGO has ever done in that it gives us a greater variety of sets.

So yes, it's not perfect. Mistakes happen. But what we have now is sure better than not having the Designer program at all. Chill ."

I understand your point, and it is a valid point. If the Bricklink Designer Program were to be cut, it would be a measurable loss, certainly. But, as others have pointed out, clone brands are improving their craft and some are offering impressive products these days. They could easily fill the void if the Bricklink Designer Program ended. (In fact, I seem to remember one of the finalists in round one, I think, had to bow out due to a commitment to a clone brand.)

However, this recent news comes on top of the other recent issues in the last few weeks. If it were an isolated event, or the only thing to occur in years of TLC business, I'd let it slide (much like the WALL-E issue seemed to be isolated).

But TLC has rightly positioned itself as a prominent corporation with an extraordinary long, positive track record and they are among the top in their field worldwide. As such, they shouldn't be surprised if they are under increased scrutiny. Instead of lowering their standards, they should take pride in their work, even in their Bricklink side offerings, by assuring quality products virtually every time. (again, with only an occasional oversight / error, not four within a few weeks, as we've now seen)

So, for me personally, even though I fully acknowledge that this is a "first world problem" and nowhere near a "life-essential issue" that I, and others, may make it sound like, I do still want to hold TLC to their historical standard, and expect them to continue to be "only the best."

I think the thing that's getting under people's skin is the fact that this is now the FOURTH quality control issue to crop up in a Lego set in less than a month's time. The Lego community is used to these kinds of issues only happening once every few years at most, so of course such a rapid and sudden surge in QC issues is bound to give everyone here a bit of whiplash.

Like others have suggested above, I'm sure much of it can be attributed to having to work from home. But maybe that means Lego needs to delay their releases by a month or two to allow for additional quality control. This many QC issues in such a short timespan is practically unprecedented in Lego's history, and with the impending winter 2022 waves about to launch, it's not unreasonable to start wondering if this is perhaps just the tip of the iceberg.

*adds 10 1/2 pins to a bricklink want list*

Not a big deal for me, I place orders regularly and these are common/cheap parts. I probably do have them somewhere in my collection, but I moved cross country earlier this year and just easier to add them to an order.

But, I don't think the argument is good that people may have them in their collection or can call LEGO to get them (which is fine too). I feel like LEGO should proactively send them to everyone that has already shipped...they already have that information and shouldn't put the responsibility on the customer if it's a known mistake. These weren't like regular sets, they had to be pre-ordered strictly from LEGO, so LEGO could easily ship the parts with a letter to everyone who has received theirs. Not everyone who builds LEGO sets places Bricklink parts orders like some of us do. I also feel that everyone that hasn't yet shipped should have the parts corrected before shipping...or at least have the parts shipped with or at least the same time as the sets.

LEGO now owns Bricklink, so this is their responsibility.

I'll second or third the question, has anyone in the US received any of this rounds sets yet? I heard folks in Europe were getting them, but I've been busy until today with work and haven't kept up. I checked any my sets are "in process". LEGO did send me an email a couple/few weeks back to make sure my payment method was still good or whatever it said. I'm not in a huge rush, but really looking forward to the sets. I got them all except the Castle, because I was on a delayed flight when they first went on sale and they sold out before I landed. I really wanted the boat most, so I was happy to be able to order it the second round. I've also heard speculation that it was the first round ones sold that were shipping, but not sure what the current situation is.

Mistakes happen. And while every effort should be made to avoid and minimize such occurrences from happening. What is most important, to me, is how they are handled when they do occur.

This set was advertised as having a working locking mechanism. If the set is not working properly, LEGO should do everything in their power to rectify the situation...and pretty easy for them to just ship out the correct parts.