 | | Cudo's to 4910 and an Ugh to 4950 —Eric Kingsley
|
| | | I just thought I would throw in by 2 cents worth on these 2 sets. First let me say that I do not personally own 4950 but my nephiew got it recently and I helped him put it together so I have first hand knowledge. Personally I think 4950 ( (URL) ) is (...) (25 years ago, 1-Oct-99, to lugnet.underground, lugnet.reviews)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Cudo's to 4910 and an Ugh to 4950 —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | Does it have the sloped control stand in teal, or are my eyes deceiving me? (BTW I need one of those in white if someone has some, I can trade grey or black for it) Just think, a 6990 Futuron monoral with teal accents, wouldn't that look cool? (25 years ago, 1-Oct-99, to lugnet.underground, lugnet.reviews)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Cudo's to 4910 and an Ugh to 4950 —Fredrik Glöckner
|
| | | | | | (...) Yes, it does indeed have the sloped control stand in teal. I was a bit surprised to find this part myself, I admit. And the grey odd "plate" which forms the base of the vehicle is really cute. It looks pretty much like an AT-AT feet, I think. (...) (25 years ago, 1-Oct-99, to lugnet.underground, lugnet.reviews)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Cudo's to 4910 and an Ugh to 4950 —Eric Kingsley
|
| | | | | | (...) I agree that it looks like an AT-AT foot but it would be terribly out of scale I think. It might work better as an AT-ST or AT-PT foot. Eric Remove ".nospam" when replying by E-mail The New England LEGO Users Group (URL) (25 years ago, 1-Oct-99, to lugnet.underground, lugnet.reviews)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Cudo's to 4910 and an Ugh to 4950 —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | | (...) But it could be useful as the top of an AT-AT foot, possibly. I don't like the way TLG has aggresively started to use this piece as a unibody for small vehicles. The only bad part about set #4910. Steve (25 years ago, 1-Oct-99, to lugnet.underground, lugnet.reviews)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Cudo's to 4910 and an Ugh to 4950 —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | | (...) Not to beat the "not to scale" to death, but I was curious the other day, and calculated the height an AT-AT would be if that piece were used for the feet, and it was built to scale with the 'foot's width... It'd be about 20 centimeters tall. (...) (25 years ago, 1-Oct-99, to lugnet.underground, lugnet.reviews)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Cudo's to 4910 and an Ugh to 4950 —Jeff Stembel
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) I believe it is about 3 meters tall. Dunno how tall it'd be in Lego though. Jeff (25 years ago, 1-Oct-99, to lugnet.underground, lugnet.reviews)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Cudo's to 4910 and an Ugh to 4950 —Eric Kingsley
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I am not sure what the exact scale is off the top of my head but I will check my Essential Guide to Vehicles this weekend to see if I can derive anything from that. Eric Remove ".nospam" when replying be E-mail The New England LEGO Users (...) (25 years ago, 1-Oct-99, to lugnet.underground, lugnet.reviews)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Cudo's to 4910 and an Ugh to 4950 —Eric Joslin
|
| | | | | | (...) An AT-ST has markedly differently shaped feet than an AT-AT. I'd actually be kind of upset if they used it for an AT-ST foot. eric (25 years ago, 1-Oct-99, to lugnet.underground, lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Cudo's to 4910 and an Ugh to 4950 —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | Maybe if they marked the 4950 (and most of the Rock Raiders) line as ages 6-8 I wouldn't have such a problem with them. But as an overall value, these sets in general are awful. They just don't have that much building value - my 8 year old likes the (...) (25 years ago, 1-Oct-99, to lugnet.underground, lugnet.reviews)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Cudo's to 4910 and an Ugh to 4950 —Eric Joslin
|
| | | | (...) Not unless you remove the microphone somehow. eric (25 years ago, 1-Oct-99, to lugnet.underground)
|
| | | | |
