Subject:
|
Re: Is it that big a deal??
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:08:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1132 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Ken Nagel wrote:
| |
| |
Uhhhhhh . . . if there are like 100 + colors, what are we angry about??
|
Yes, it’s a big deal. LEGO has been a rock. The bricks today still mate with
the bricks that say PAT PENDING. The 1st red is today’s red.
|
Actually, today’s red is much different than ‘70s red. This color shocked me
when I exited my dark ages and compared my ‘60s-‘80s bricks with my ‘90s+. The
old bricks are a deep rich color while the new ones are brighter and more
transparent.
Part of this is due to the thick walls the bricks used to have versus the thin
walls with ridges grasping studs we now have. Sure that was a cost cutting
measure but it left me with the impression bricks were being cheapened.
I also remember mushing these new bricks together. It was too easy and made me
think they were about to fall apart again. Bricks were not meant to ooze
together, they were meant to click or snap together. If the studs change
again, it would not suprise me as I can show you 3 distinct stud shapes in my
current collection.
Doug
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Is it that big a deal??
|
| (...) Yes, it's a big deal. LEGO has been a rock. The bricks today still mate with the bricks that say PAT PENDING. The 1st red is today's red. Change for the sake of growth is good. Change for the sake of change is very bad. They can come up with (...) (21 years ago, 20-Nov-03, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
7 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
