 | | Re: A new scan for 371 (some proof?)
|
|
(...) Muwahahh..:-) I knew that Gary would jump on this..:-) You make a lugnet search for "junior 717" everyday, don't you?..:-) Selçuk (25 years ago, 7-Apr-00, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A new scan for 371 (some proof?)
|
|
(...) It's impossible. If we are talking about the 60's, only possible way to make this thing printed is huge offset printing machinery, which for sure owned by some other company that works for TLC, not the TLC itself. That is still true, paper (...) (25 years ago, 8-Apr-00, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A new scan for 371 (some proof?)
|
|
I never previously doubted, nor do I now doubt that you actually have the instructions in your possession. What I do doubt is that they are instructions from any actual Lego set. These are either created (somewhat poorly) by a fan, as an internal (...) (25 years ago, 19-May-00, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A new scan for 371 (some proof?)
|
|
(...) Regardless of whether this set is fake or real, I would have to say that this is the most valuable instructions you got on ebay, in that it's kept a good controversy going here for several days. Hold on to that puppy. If it can keep us (...) (25 years ago, 19-May-00, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A new scan for 371 (some proof?)
|
|
"Michael Huffman" <mhuffman@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:392592E1.D493EE...ing.com... (...) No need for an apology, I too meant no offense nor hostility. I was just making my stance clear, that's all :) (...) Which suggests that maybe they (...) (25 years ago, 19-May-00, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A new scan for 371 (some proof?)
|
|
I just wanted to thank Michael Huffman for this scan. I mean that sincerely too. This has been very exciting. I never posted to this web site before, but this was the catalyst for my participation. I am still a bit confused, but must admit those (...) (25 years ago, 19-May-00, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A new scan for 371 (some proof?)
|
|
(...) Sorry. No offence/hostility intended. (...) They are printed, with the same 'feel' as the 331/332/333 instructions. They don't feel like they were printed out on a color printer on glossy paper -- say at Kinko's or something -- they're very (...) (25 years ago, 19-May-00, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A new scan for 371 (some proof?)
|
|
Jason Proksch wrote: <major snippage> (...) Did someone say "Junior Constructor"? Set 717..... from 1961-64. Is that the one you are talking about Jason (by the way, glad you decided to "de-lurk"). If so, are you talking about the earlier gabled (...) (25 years ago, 22-May-00, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Junior Constructor #717 (was: A new scan for 371 (some proof?))
|
|
(...) Heck no, I just go home and get out the box, open it up, and smell the Cellulose Acetate bricks.... a much nicer aroma than ABS ever had. Actually I have the model house built. I have the 1963-64 version, which is of a flat roofed modern (...) (25 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A new scan for 371 (some proof?)
|
|
(...) My set is the flat roofed one. I know very little about it but got it on ebay last year pretty cheap $20-30. I only have the instructions on the box (I would assume that is the only instructions included) Do you mean to say this is the very (...) (24 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A new scan for 371 (some proof?)
|
|
(...) Jason, OK, yes the 4 pictures on the inside lid of the box are the only building instructions that were included in this set. I first got it as a kid, and within 6 months my mother threw away the box (I still have the original contents mixed (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.general)
|
