| |
Simon,
What you have is Lego made from Cellulose Acetate (or CA). That is a kind of
plastic that Lego used until 1963. After that, they switched to ABS still in
use today.
The descriptions you use are classic CA. The color is lighter. It warps
easily. It is different kind of plastic. The mold marks are are on the side
of the bricks & much more noticable (current bricks have the mold marks on
the studs). The Lego logo is different. They used several styles of logos,
and early pre-1958 bricks actually had logos under the studs instead of on
top of them.
I know of no Lego clone that has actually put the Lego word on their bricks.
There are a few that very closely match Lego bricks, but none with LEGO.
More info can be found with a search on Lugnet for Cellulose Acetate (esp.
Gary Istok's posts). There are also a few pics in my comparison gallery
(link below).
Hope that helps,
Clark
Visit my Vintage Parts pages, submissions always welcome:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=8642
Looking for a minifig, head, or torso? Try my helper:
http://home.att.net/~clarkcorner/VisualMiniHelper.html
In lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, Simon Gammon writes:
> Whilst on the subject of Lego / not Lego, I have a question.
> I have recently bought at a boot fair a bag of Lego, most appearing to
> be the same era as the stuff I have from childhood, c 1970's. A fair bit
> of the Lego is obviously different though. The plastic is of a poorer
> standard, showing distortions and mold marks on normally perfect
> surfaces. The "LEGO" embossed on the studs is present, although the font
> appears to be different. The colours are slightly weaker than the
> "standard" Lego and in this case are Yellow, Red and White.
>
> The question is (finally) this. Is this genuine Lego of perhaps earlier
> origin than the rest, or is it fake and if so, any clues as to its
> source?
>
> =========================================
> Simon Gammon (simon@gammon.demon.co.uk)
> Helensburgh, Scotland
> =========================================
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: LEGO parts -- genuine?
|
| I was going to take a couple of shots and stick them on my web site as suggested by Pedro (thanks), but having seen Clark's site I feel there is no longer any need. The stuff I have is clearly CA and the logo in particular looks just like the (...) (22 years ago, 25-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LEGO parts -- genuine?
|
| Whilst on the subject of Lego / not Lego, I have a question. I have recently bought at a boot fair a bag of Lego, most appearing to be the same era as the stuff I have from childhood, c 1970's. A fair bit of the Lego is obviously different though. (...) (22 years ago, 22-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
5 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
