 | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.color, Michael Huffman wrote:
> In lugnet.color, Karl Paulsen wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > What is happening to LEGO QC?
> >
> > Also, could PAB be a dumping ground for sub par Bricks?
> >
> > Anyone have any explanation or experience related to this?
>
> Here's some of problems that I ran into... I bought a bunch of 2x10 white
> plates, stacked the neatly to fit inside a PaB cup. After stacking about 20 of
> them together, I realized that the sides of the plates didn't all line up
> smoothly. They're off just by a little bit -- enough that you can visually see
> it -- fractions of a millimeter. In larger structures you wouldn't notice it,
> but in micro-structures you might... We found out that you have to 'orient' the
> plates to get them to line up smoothly on the side.
>
> Our group bought a case of tan 2x4 bricks (the cases used to stock the PaB wall)
> for a hospital project. In natural light, you can see color variations within
> the same box of tan bricks -- some lighter, more yellowish; others more dark
> more grayish.
>
> --Mike.
Can we all say Flextronics. What bothers me more is that Lego does not seem to
care about or respond to this ongoing problem.
John P
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.color, John Patterson wrote:
> What bothers me more is that Lego does not seem to
> care about or respond to this ongoing problem.
>
> John P
John,
What would you like LEGO Group to do about the quality? They no longer
manufacture plastic parts. They have contracted with a third party to
manufacture parts who would try to pass as many parts as they can. LEGO might,
by contract, be obliged to allow certain percentage of less than acceptable
parts to pass. Not to mention that parts are being made in 3 countries by
companies not accustomed to LEGO's high level of quality.
Ultimately, I think there is a decision we all have to make. Do we continue to
be surprised that color variations are occuring or do we prefer to pay more for
elements so that the quality control standards can be upheld? I belive that if
we wish to keep LEGO elements at the current price, then we must accept a
certain level of variation within color. I do not believe we should put up with
shape variations or parts that no longer fit, but we must accept some color
variance.
LEGO can continue to maintain the quality and color consistency and let the
costs of the elements go beyond the price parents are willing to pay. Or, LEGO
can let colors vary slightly in order to keep costs down. This is clearly an
either or choice and both cannot be accomodated.
Todd
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.color, Todd Thuma wrote:
> In lugnet.color, John Patterson wrote:
> > What bothers me more is that Lego does not seem to
> > care about or respond to this ongoing problem.
> >
> > John P
>
> John,
>
> What would you like LEGO Group to do about the quality?
That is a silly question. INSIST on quality. Would you buy a car that had
three fenders one shade off from the rest of the car?
Do what they did before, the highest quality in the toy industry. They did it
once, why not put their inspectors in the out sourced Flextronics? It was not a
problem before, Black was black, blue was blue. At one time they did not accept
a 3% varation in color. All of a sudden it is ok? At one time Lego did not
worry about how big the profit was, profit comes to those that do the best job,
not the cheapest. I think that they have cut too many corners. I, for one,
would rather pay a higher cost than buy substandard items. You get what you pay
for.
And why has Lego never responded to this? They ignore the problem as far as I
can tell. Not very good customer relations, but that is slowly slipping too.
They no longer
> manufacture plastic parts. They have contracted with a third party to
> manufacture parts who would try to pass as many parts as they can. LEGO might,
> by contract, be obliged to allow certain percentage of less than acceptable
> parts to pass. Not to mention that parts are being made in 3 countries by
> companies not accustomed to LEGO's high level of quality.
>
> Ultimately, I think there is a decision we all have to make. Do we continue to
> be surprised that color variations are occuring or do we prefer to pay more for
> elements so that the quality control standards can be upheld? I belive that if
> we wish to keep LEGO elements at the current price, then we must accept a
> certain level of variation within color. I do not believe we should put up with
> shape variations or parts that no longer fit, but we must accept some color
> variance.
At one time there was no color variance. Now some is ok?
>
> LEGO can continue to maintain the quality and color consistency and let the
> costs of the elements go beyond the price parents are willing to pay. Or, LEGO
> can let colors vary slightly in order to keep costs down. This is clearly an
> either or choice and both cannot be accomodated.
.
Sorry, I prefer quality. That is why I collect Lego and not Mega Blocks
>
> Todd
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.color, John Patterson wrote:
> Do what they did before, the highest quality in the toy industry. They did
> it once, why not put their inspectors in the out sourced Flextronics? It was
> not a problem before, Black was black, blue was blue. At one time they did
> not accept a 3% varation in color. All of a sudden it is ok?
Yes.
I wish I had the article I'm thinking of-- I'll hunt for it. But according to
Jorgen, people at Lego were using quality 'as a crutch'. They refused to do any
cost saving measure because it might sacrifice quality. And supposedly it was
making the company sort of stuck backwards in time, rather than being a modern
company. The company couldn't afford to continue producing super high quality
elements, or it would go bankrupt.
Or, that seems to be their opinion anyway. I'm continually interested in how
Playmobil survives, as its level of quality seems not to have dwindled at all,
yet they seem to get on just fine, and hit a similar target audience.
> I, for one, would rather pay a higher cost than buy substandard items.
As would I. But fat chance that the people willing to do this can convince Lego
to sell super-high quality stuff again.
> And why has Lego never responded to this? They ignore the problem as far as
> I can tell.
You haven't been looking too hard, I guess. They've been talking about this for
the past few years now, but they don't go shouting it from rooftops that their
quality dropped in order to become profitable again. They mostly just focus on
the "profitable" part within press releases and such, but they've acknowledged
the drop in quality if you read carefully and between the lines.
> Not very good customer relations, but that is slowly slipping too.
If you were Lego, would you announce to the world that you were lowering your
standards? I wouldn't. Not that I'd want to lower my standards, of course, but
they're handling it exactly as you'd think they would.
> Sorry, I prefer quality. That is why I collect Lego and not Mega Blocks
Lego's still higher quality than MegaBloks, but I'm not sure it's much higher.
Mostly, I tend to feel that one of Lego's present strengths over MB is its set
design and element distribution. Many of MB's sets are far more juniorized than
the worst-of-the-worst Lego sets. Not that MB doesn't have some decent models
(they do), but generally it seems that Lego is better about those things.
DaveE
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.color, David Eaton wrote:
> I wish I had the article I'm thinking of-- I'll hunt for it.
Here we go:
http://www.strategy-business.com/press/article/07306?gko=db087&tid=230&pg=all
DaveE
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.color, Todd Thuma wrote:
| |
In lugnet.color, John Patterson wrote:
| |
What bothers me more is that Lego does not seem to
care about or respond to this ongoing problem.
John P
|
John,
What would you like LEGO Group to do about the quality? They no longer
manufacture plastic parts. They have contracted with a third party to
manufacture parts who would try to pass as many parts as they can. LEGO might,
by contract, be obliged to allow certain percentage of less than acceptable
parts to pass. Not to mention that parts are being made in 3 countries by
companies not accustomed to LEGO’s high level of quality.
|
This is misleading. The following is a statement from the LEGO Community
Development Team:
“Product safety and product quality are factors of the utmost concern for the
LEGO Group and have been so during our entire 75 year history. In order to
ensure product safety, we make sure that safety is in the design. This means
that our product safety experts are involved in the designing process. The
majority of all LEGO bricks are still produced in Denmark and more than 50% of
all LEGO owned mould machines are located in Billund, Denmark. The rest of the
LEGO owned mould machines are placed at external suppliers in Hungary and
Mexico.The final packaging of LEGO products is conducted in Denmark, Hungary,
Poland, Czech Republic or Mexico. At the moment the LEGO Company purchases only
approx. 3% of the entire element volume in China. E.g. some electronic elements,
most parts which are individually packaged in plastic bags and textiles are
purchased in China. Our products are tested both by ourselves and our suppliers,
and in some cases also by external auditors (this applies to China). We use very
special raw materials and we thoroughly control that the received materials are
in accordance with our specifications. Due to legislation in EU we have to state
on the box in which countries the individual parts contained in the box are
manufactured.” LEGO Community Development Team – 30.01.2008
I still question the assertions people make about reduced quality - I still have
many of the bricks I purchased in the late 60s and 70s, and they have colour
differences, the edges don’t line up exactly, and stacks of the same number of
bricks are different heights. I would contend that the quality is NOT
decreasing, it’s just that we, as adults, notice the differences much more than
we did as kids.
I have a collection that is probably pretty average around here, 100-200K or so,
and I have only had:
And all parts were replaced without question by LEGO Australia. I think that’s a
pretty good record.
ROSCO
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.color, Ross Crawford wrote:
| |
In lugnet.color, Todd Thuma wrote:
| |
In lugnet.color, John Patterson wrote:
| |
What bothers me more is that Lego does not seem to
care about or respond to this ongoing problem.
John P
|
John,
What would you like LEGO Group to do about the quality? They no longer
manufacture plastic parts. They have contracted with a third party to
manufacture parts who would try to pass as many parts as they can. LEGO
might, by contract, be obliged to allow certain percentage of less than
acceptable parts to pass. Not to mention that parts are being made in 3
countries by companies not accustomed to LEGO’s high level of quality.
|
This is misleading. The following is a statement from the LEGO Community
Development Team:
“Product safety and product quality are factors of the utmost concern for the
LEGO Group and have been so during our entire 75 year history. In order to
ensure product safety, we make sure that safety is in the design. This means
that our product safety experts are involved in the designing process. The
majority of all LEGO bricks are still produced in Denmark and more than 50%
of all LEGO owned mould machines are located in Billund, Denmark. The rest of
the LEGO owned mould machines are placed at external suppliers in Hungary and
Mexico.The final packaging of LEGO products is conducted in Denmark, Hungary,
Poland, Czech Republic or Mexico. At the moment the LEGO Company purchases
only approx. 3% of the entire element volume in China. E.g. some electronic
elements, most parts which are individually packaged in plastic bags and
textiles are purchased in China. Our products are tested both by ourselves
and our suppliers, and in some cases also by external auditors (this applies
to China). We use very special raw materials and we thoroughly control that
the received materials are in accordance with our specifications. Due to
legislation in EU we have to state on the box in which countries the
individual parts contained in the box are manufactured.” LEGO Community
Development Team – 30.01.2008
I still question the assertions people make about reduced quality - I still
have many of the bricks I purchased in the late 60s and 70s, and they have
colour differences, the edges don’t line up exactly, and stacks of the same
number of bricks are different heights. I would contend that the quality is
NOT decreasing, it’s just that we, as adults, notice the differences much
more than we did as kids.
I have a collection that is probably pretty average around here, 100-200K or
so, and I have only had:
And all parts were replaced without question by LEGO Australia. I think
that’s a pretty good record.
ROSCO
|
I have found that the newer sets have a problem. Others have seen the
difference in colors in several sets. I have had a hard time puting some bricks
and other elements together because of the tolerences. I began collecting in
the 70’s as an adult. I never once found a mal-formed brick except in Samsonite
sets. Recently the Aviatar series bricks were very hard to put together. The
molds are one thing, the color of the plastic bricks going into the molds is
what is in questioned and not addressed by Lego. Several people have commented
on this problem. Perhaps the difference is due to the plastic that Flextronics
gets as opposed to what Lego in Denmark gets. I did not even see this
difference when parts were made in Switzerland, the US or Brazil. Also Lego is
getting a little stingy replacing parts. Before if you broke a part they
replaced it. Now they want you to go to the site where they sell individual
bricks. They also used to replace instructions, those are hard to get now. They
are good about taking things back if their is a problem. Their SAH order takers
are not as knowledgable now that department has moved to CA as opposed to being
in the Enfield HQ. I would really like to see Lego address the color problems
and not the mold problem. John P
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.color, Ross Crawford wrote:
> I still question the assertions people make about reduced quality - I still
> have many of the bricks I purchased in the late 60s and 70s, and they have
> colour differences, the edges don't line up exactly, and stacks of the same
> number of bricks are different heights. I would contend that the quality is
> {NOT} decreasing, it's just that we, as adults, notice the differences much
> more than we did as kids.
It's dropping-- not by huge leaps and bounds as people might lead you to
believe, but it's dropping. But there's not much I can say other than "it's
worse than it was before". I compare elements molded in roughly 1999 to elements
molded today, and there's a difference.
The color variations are probably the worst offenders, though. The differences
in heights, etc, really don't seem that severe to me, although I can tell the
difference when I'm looking for them. The color variants are bad though.
Sometimes individual elements are darker on one side than on the other.
With dark green, for instance, I bought a bunch of 1x4? bricks from my local
PAB, and built a wall out of them. It was interesting because the bricks formed
a very distinct pattern of variation, where all the lower right corners (or
left, whatever) were lighter than the bricks adjacent to them. Wasn't just one
or two, but the pattern repeated throughout the entire wall (maybe 80 bricks or
so).
> I have a collection that is probably pretty average around here, 100-200K or
> so, and I have only had:
>
> * 2 <http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=102288 badly molded
> bricks>
> * 1 incorrectly packaged set
> * 1 <http://www.peeron.com/inv/parts/x1144 part> that fitted loosely
I've had 12 sets containing errors with a ~540K collection.
They used to be amazingly good. But errors have increased in frequency so much
that I started needing to keep track. I used to know every single mistake I had
ever received in a Lego set, and could recite them for you instantly because
they were so memorable. Now I find I'm forgetting all the sets that I've
purchased that contained errors, so I've made a list that I'm maintaining.
This data isn't perfectly accurate with respect to *exactly* how many sets I've
purchased per year (some of these were used when I bought them, so they weren't
MISB), but it's increasingly accurate until you get to about 1996, after which
point I'm not sure I've ever bought a used set, so it should be perfectly
accurate for my collection. Anyway, ignoring the stuff I *know* isn't valid
(pre-1980):
Year - #Sets - #Mistakes - % Errors
1980 - 1 - 0 mistakes - 0%
1981 - 5 - 0 mistakes - 0%
1982 - 2 - 0 mistakes - 0%
1983 - 6 - 0 mistakes - 0%
1984 - 22 - 0 mistakes - 0%
1985 - 12 - 0 mistakes - 0%
1986 - 24 - 0 mistakes - 0%
1987 - 26 - 0 mistakes - 0%
1988 - 10 - 0 mistakes - 0%
1989 - 11 - 0 mistakes - 0%
1990 - 14 - 0 mistakes - 0%
1991 - 34 - 0 mistakes - 0%
1992 - 19 - 0 mistakes - 0%
1993 - 38 - 0 mistakes - 0%
1994 - 27 - 0 mistakes - 0%
1995 - 30 - 0 mistakes - 0%
1996 - 41 - 0 mistakes - 0%
1997 - 79 - 0 mistakes - 0%
1998 - 112 - 1 mistake - 0.89% (broken elements)
1999 - 173 - 2 mistakes - 1.15% (missing element, broken element)
2000 - 353 - 0 mistakes - 0%
2001 - 156 - 0 mistakes - 0%
2002 - 218 - 0 mistakes - 0%
2003 - 179 - 0 mistakes - 0%
2004 - 228 - 1 mistake - 0.44% (missing element)
2005 - 109 - 0 mistakes - 0%
2006 - 100 - 4 mistakes - 4% (missing elements)
2007 - 85 - 2 mistakes - 2.35% (missing elements)
2008 - 23 - 3 mistakes - 13.04% (missing elements, malformed element)
Technically, there were 6 sets I purchased with mistakes in 2001 (would make it
3.85% error rate), but these were all Guarded Inn's, which were initially
packaged with the incorrect horse (Indian printing on it instead of plain
white). That was an error, but not strictly a packing error, omission, or broken
element. Plus, I bought 4 of them *knowing* (and with Lego knowing) that they
contained the error, so it would definitely be wrong to count those 4 against
the track record. That'd bring it to 1.28% if you wanted to count those.
Not included are some elements that ... "broke" in normal assembly, such as some
2003 1x2 tiles that had a hairline fracture down the short end when being
assembled onto hollow studded elements. I've noticed this a few times since, but
it's so difficult to see that I haven't really kept track of these sorts of
problems.
I also recall that a friend of mine received an incorrect element in a 1987
(could've sworn it was 1988) copy of the 6990 Monorail Transport System. At the
time, I was amazed at hearing this because I had nearly 100 sets total, and had
never had an error.
DaveE
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.color, David Eaton wrote:
> The color variations are probably the worst offenders, though. The differences
> in heights, etc, really don't seem that severe to me, although I can tell the
> difference when I'm looking for them. The color variants are bad though.
> Sometimes individual elements are darker on one side than on the other.
I believe I read somewhere that the ABS pellets are now transparent, and color
is injected during the moulding process? Whereas before, the pellets came
colored prior to being used. I could be wrong though.
But as for the color variations that people have been reporting over the past
few months, I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the QA people DID realize they
had a large quantity of "less-than-ideal" parts. However, by the time they
discovered this, it was at a critical point of time in the year. It was either
"dump those parts and re-mould them, but disrupt their production cycle
severely" (i.e. lose even more money), or "use them in sets anyway, learn from
this mistake, and make sure it doesn't happen again".
It may be easy for us to make a decision, sitting in front of our computers, but
I bet the person(s) in charge thought long and hard about this before ultimately
going with the latter choice.
-Bryan
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.color, Bryan Wong wrote:
> I believe I read somewhere that the ABS pellets are now transparent, and color
> is injected during the moulding process? Whereas before, the pellets came
> colored prior to being used. I could be wrong though.
>
> But as for the color variations that people have been reporting over the past
> few months, I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the QA people DID realize they
> had a large quantity of "less-than-ideal" parts. However, by the time they
> discovered this, it was at a critical point of time in the year. It was either
> "dump those parts and re-mould them, but disrupt their production cycle
> severely" (i.e. lose even more money), or "use them in sets anyway, learn from
> this mistake, and make sure it doesn't happen again".
The keynote speech at Brickworld 2007 by Richard Stollery, the head of LEGO
community, contained these points and specifically mentioned the orange garbage
truck with pieces you could almost see thorough. They had the choice of not
producing a lot of sets or packaging sub-standard parts because there was not
enough time to redo the botched production runs. He stated these parts would
take about a year to flush out of the system. We first noticed them about 8
months ago so quality should get better about 4 months from now. Also stated was
the fact they are keeping a closer watch on QA to ensure this does not happen
again.
Doug
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
::snip::
> > I have a collection that is probably pretty average around here, 100-200K or
> > so, and I have only had:
> >
> > * 2 <http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=102288 badly molded
> > bricks>
> > * 1 incorrectly packaged set
> > * 1 <http://www.peeron.com/inv/parts/x1144 part> that fitted loosely
>
> I've had 12 sets containing errors with a ~540K collection.
::snip::
I'm sure that packing errors are devastating to kids (who start a model but
can't complete it), but I don't mind so much, in light of how I received at
least 2 bags of extra parts with my new Town Plan! It seems that duplicates
were included for two of the parts bags. The only other packing errors in my
collection that goes back to 1985 or so? Those were in the latest Fire Station
set, the new Creator Townhouse, and Cafe Corner. The statistics would seem to
indicate that something is amiss with the more recent sets. As long as LEGO is
happy to correct these errors, I will not complain much, though.
-Jordan
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.color, Jordan Schwarz wrote:
> ::snip::
> > > I have a collection that is probably pretty average around here, 100-200K or
> > > so, and I have only had:
> > >
> > > * 2 <http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=102288 badly molded
> > > bricks>
> > > * 1 incorrectly packaged set
> > > * 1 <http://www.peeron.com/inv/parts/x1144 part> that fitted loosely
> >
> > I've had 12 sets containing errors with a ~540K collection.
> ::snip::
>
> I'm sure that packing errors are devastating to kids (who start a model but
> can't complete it), but I don't mind so much, in light of how I received at
> least 2 bags of extra parts with my new Town Plan! It seems that duplicates
> were included for two of the parts bags. The only other packing errors in my
> collection that goes back to 1985 or so? Those were in the latest Fire Station
> set, the new Creator Townhouse, and Cafe Corner. The statistics would seem to
> indicate that something is amiss with the more recent sets. As long as LEGO is
> happy to correct these errors, I will not complain much, though.
I find very few, if no packing errors which always amazes me. Thousands of
parts in a set and they are always perfect. When I build sets with my Grand
daughter she will say this piece or that piece is missing. I tell her to look
harder, she does and then finds it. I think what is being talked about is not
packing errors, but color and tolerence errors. It would not be so noticable
today except that it didn't happen in the past. I have thousands of older sets
and i do not find a problems with color matching in any (except for the red and
yellow small parts made of a different plastic, the air tanks and 1x2 plate
ladders and 1x1 clips and headlight holder.) I have 2200 sets under set number
1000. I have just spent the last 2 years going through them and have not found
a color variation in any. When there was a part missing in my set and I went to
put in a spare to complete it, matching it up to the right era brick, no
variation. It is probably something we will have to live with and it is not as
great a problems as them changing the colors of gray, dark gray and brown. If I
remember, they didn't care about anyones opinion at that time.
John P
>
> -Jordan
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.color, Ross Crawford wrote:
| |
| |
What would you like LEGO Group to do about the quality? They no longer
manufacture plastic parts. They have contracted with a third party to
manufacture parts who would try to pass as many parts as they can. LEGO
might, by contract, be obliged to allow certain percentage of less than
acceptable parts to pass. Not to mention that parts are being made in 3
countries by companies not accustomed to LEGO’s high level of quality.
|
This is misleading. The following is a statement from the LEGO Community
Development Team:
“Product safety and product quality are factors of the utmost concern for the
LEGO Group and have been so during our entire 75 year history. In order to
ensure product safety, we make sure that safety is in the design. This means
that our product safety experts are involved in the designing process. The
majority of all LEGO bricks are still produced in Denmark and more than 50%
of all LEGO owned mould machines are located in Billund, Denmark. The rest of
the LEGO owned mould machines are placed at external suppliers in Hungary and
Mexico.The final packaging of LEGO products is conducted in Denmark, Hungary,
Poland, Czech Republic or Mexico. At the moment the LEGO Company purchases
only approx. 3% of the entire element volume in China. E.g. some electronic
elements, most parts which are individually packaged in plastic bags and
textiles are purchased in China. Our products are tested both by ourselves
and our suppliers, and in some cases also by external auditors (this applies
to China). We use very special raw materials and we thoroughly control that
the received materials are in accordance with our specifications. Due to
legislation in EU we have to state on the box in which countries the
individual parts contained in the box are manufactured.” LEGO Community
Development Team – 30.01.2008
|
Ross,
Thanks for this! I appreciate someone representing the truth of what’s going on,
and I admit my statement was over generalized. I would like to point out two
things though. Mold making and parts making are being moved out of Denmark. LEGO
Group stated this at the BrickFest PDF in 2007 in one of their presentations.
They have slowed this move for two reasons sales and profits are back up and
demand for parts makes moving production prohibitive at this point. The second
point I would like to make is that even if you had your production, regardless
of percentage, in China, Denmark, Czech Republic or wherever, color differences
will occur. Molding plastic in different climates with different suppliers and
different techniques will all cause these differences. The only way to prevent
these variation would be to mold in one factory at one location. Clearly, LEGO
Group is NOT doing this.
| |
I still question the assertions people make about reduced quality - I still
have many of the bricks I purchased in the late 60s and 70s, and they have
colour differences, the edges don’t line up exactly, and stacks of the same
number of bricks are different heights. I would contend that the quality is
NOT decreasing, it’s just that we, as adults, notice the differences much
more than we did as kids.
|
I agree with you. I do not believe that quality is different than it has been in
the past or that it is getting worse. Color variations are small issues in my
book, SORRY to those that think otherwise. But the problem Mike H. mentioned
which I saw personnaly was not a failure in making a part but in manufacturing
and building the mold. Clearly, there was an orientation to the plate and
placing them in one direction caused the edges to line up. Orientating them in
the other direction, alternating, caused a noticeable hang over from part to
part. I cannot believe this was the result of the workers in Denmark, but since
the part came from a common mold, one they must have many copies of, I suspect
that it was manufactured out of Denmark by those of a third party company with
less experience in making LEGO part molds or it failed to be tested to LEGO
Groups high standards and it snuck by.
| |
I have a collection that is probably pretty average around here, 100-200K or
so, and I have only had:
And all parts were replaced without question by LEGO Australia. I think
that’s a pretty good record.
ROSCO
|
Agreed. I am constantly amazed as I open set after set how consistent these sets
go together as planned and without issue. The only recent issue I had was a 7893
set I opened last year that had three engines (43121) instead of 4 and a strange
bionicle part of the same color. Clearly, the Bionicle part was in the bin of
parts when the machine counted it as the 4th engine. LEGO Group sent me an
engine and a nicely worded letter after a call to customer service. DOES ANY
OTHER COMPANY DO THIS?
And before everyone thinks Playmobile is so great quality wise. I have nephew
that received the same Pirate set for Christmas one year from two different
family members. Not only was the pirate ship a different color variation from
each set, but the people (figures) were shades of different color too. I dare
say that color variations go un-noticed because no one buys more than one set or
they just don’t care.
Todd
| | | | | | |
