| |
In lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, Arne Lykke Nielsen wrote:
> So "Bricks" are hard to label, as they are both an illegal pirate company and a
> more legal clone company.
> "Shifty" was/is maybe, maybe not, connected with "Bricks", but "Shifty" are in
> every case direct copies of LEGO sets, with very poor quality bricks.
Thanks for the clarification--I only have one "Brick" Castle set, and it
included clearly pirated as well as clearly original elements. I don't own any
"Shifty," but I concur with your assessment.
> I have no experience with Tyco, and what little experience I have with
> Built-to-rule don't impress me; good quality bricks, but very few "normal"
> bricks, almost solely customised, special bricks.
Tyco is of excellent quality, and some consider it to be the king among clones.
There sets were, IMO, not especially well-designed, but the elements were very
good. Perhaps the chief shortcoming was that Tyco "plates" were actually
half-height bricks, so they lost some functionality that other clone brands have
enjoyed.
I agree also with your take on Built-to-Rule. FAR too many specialized
elements, with a tiny fraction of any set's inventory devoted to "conventional"
bricks.
Dave!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Clone brand quality
|
| (...) The infamous Chinese "Bricks" company has made several knock-offs of LEGO sets, and have lost several legal cases, but they also make their own legal military sets, with excellent designs and pretty high quality bricks, matching the MB quality (...) (18 years ago, 6-Jul-06, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
