Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

LEGO Building Instructions

archive.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 144 posts

Re: LEGO Building Instructions

#131

Post by jmmv »

BanazirGalbasi wrote: post #109
jmmv wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like you should watch The Lego Movie (:

I think having sets that you like to keep together and you don't want to mix up is fine. Too many people saw the Lego Movie and took it to mean that keeping sets as sets is bad. Note that the person you responded to isn't stopping their kids even as they cause more destruction than the Lego Movie showed, they're simply complaining about it here because what _they_ had is gone. Yes, let kids mix and match and play. Bu…

Uhhh... the GP was written in a kinda funny way, so it just seemed fitting to plug a reference to the movie. If you want to keep sets together, power to you. My kids have a mixture of both (sets they want to keep as is and a mountain of pieces from other sets) and... that's just fine.

Re: LEGO Building Instructions

#133

Post by TylerE »

epiccoleman wrote: post #37
Waterluvian wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I looooove that sound. But with young kids there’s no point trying to sort. And without sorting, every piece takes a while to find.

One of my "core memories" wrt Lego is meticulously spending days sorting small parts into some of those Sterilite multi-drawer things and then knocking it over, spilling all my hard work onto the floor and undoing it. I was probably 8 or 9. From that point on, fuck it, they all go in one big box. My brothers and I would compete to see who could find the most valuable pieces. Mostly treasure chest coins, little gems,…

I'm guessing that back in the day it all came in one bag?

When I built Titantic last year (first Lego I'd done in maybe 30 years) it was split out over dozens of small bags, and all the parts you'd need for one section would be in that one bag with no more than, say, 200 pieces in it. Often there's be a smaller bag inside for holding the 1x1 stuff.

So I built the whole thing with two tupperware containers..one decent size square "bowl" and s much smaller one for the tiny stuff.

Killed a month off and on putting that thing together. I was recovering from foot surgery so stuck in bed.

Luckily, the Titanic actually builds as 6 sections, with 3 pairs that join more or less permanently, while there are then a couple of pins and rods that hold the whole thing together (along with a rather clever tensioning gear... the main lines are there as strings, and do hang in a true catenary. )

So each of the 6 sections I basically built on a hardback book.

A few build pics:

https://imgur.com/a/yqHR3m4

Made for a very doable build, even given pretty hefty physical limitations.

Re: LEGO Building Instructions

#134

Post by suddenclarity »

aleph_minus_one wrote: post #123
roryisok wrote: post #102

Lego themselves have an archived copy of every instruction set going back to the 80s, available here - https://www.lego.com/en-us/service/buildinginstructions But for whatever reason, the scans are poor quality and very dark, and it can be hard to make out what piece is which. These ones look much better

> Lego themselves have an archived copy of every instruction set going back to the 80s, available here - https://www.lego.com/en-us/service/buildinginstructions This can't be true: I am very sure that there exist Lego Technic models from before 1996, which is the oldest year that can be selected.

Indeed, doing an empty search only returns sets from 1996 and forward. Not even entering set numbers from my childhood (pre -96) return any results.

Re: LEGO Building Instructions

#135

Post by Loic »

FeteCommuniste wrote: post #83
JNRowe wrote: post #2

I sincerely applaud everything ending up on IA. However, if you're searching for specific instructions brickinstructions is excellent as it is far more navigable. For a random example see Starguider¹. I wonder if someone has already scraped that site for IA, beyond simply praying to the Wayback Machine. ¹ https://lego.brickinstructions.com/m/lego_instructions/set/6...

Wow, that just gave me a crazy flash of nostalgia. I think I must have had this set, or at least a very similar one.

https://lego.brickinstructions.com/en/lego_instructions/set/...

I played so many hours with this one...

Re: LEGO Building Instructions

#136

Post by gaazoh »

lapetitejort wrote: post #50
gaazoh wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can try to find the parts that stand out on bricklink[0], which will point you to the sets they were used in. It's pretty quick, once you figure out what the part can be called or what category it fits in. If you can't figure it out, you can ask for help on the "bricks" StackExchange site[1]. [0] https://www.bricklink.com [1] https://bricks.stackexchange.com/

I've attempted to find some sets based on a single complicated brick and it can be challenging. How do I find the "official" name of the brick based on my own vague description [0]? What is the true color? How do I find special printed bricks? I'm sure with practice it gets easier. How open is bricks stack exchange to posting just an image of a brick with not much more to go on? [0]: As an example, here the descripti…

> How open is bricks stack exchange to posting just an image of a brick with not much more to go on?

Judging by the 623 answered questions with the "part-identification" tag (out of 636)[0], I'd say pretty open. A lot of them are just what you are asking for, people helping IDing a single part from a picture. Some are much more specific, asking about minor variations on parts, and still get a detailed answer a lot of the time.

[0]https://bricks.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/part-ident...

Re: LEGO Building Instructions

#137

Post by fragmede »

jmmv wrote: post #131
BanazirGalbasi wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think having sets that you like to keep together and you don't want to mix up is fine. Too many people saw the Lego Movie and took it to mean that keeping sets as sets is bad. Note that the person you responded to isn't stopping their kids even as they cause more destruction than the Lego Movie showed, they're simply complaining about it here because what _they_ had is gone. Yes, let kids mix and match and play. Bu…

Uhhh... the GP was written in a kinda funny way, so it just seemed fitting to plug a reference to the movie. If you want to keep sets together, power to you. My kids have a mixture of both (sets they want to keep as is and a mountain of pieces from other sets) and... that's just fine.

That sounds... reasonable! We can't have that! Lord Business? Bring out the Kragle!

Re: LEGO Building Instructions

#138

Post by fragmede »

pbronez wrote: post #80
suddenclarity wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It also made me realize something: half the value of buying a kit these days is that you aren’t spending hours finding needles in a 300lb haystack. It's a bit of work but I found enjoyment in sorting my old childhood Lego. Don't do colors, do categories (bricks, slopes, plates, etc). Once done, I could complete my old childhood models even faster than the unsorted ones you buy new. It also lowers the threshold to b…

Absolutely categories are better than colors. It doesn’t LOOK as pretty but it’s way more functional.

https://xkcd.com/2791

Re: LEGO Building Instructions

#139

Post by rozhok »

gleenn wrote: post #64

I was sad not to see the original Technic Super Car. It had a working V8, 4 wheel drive with 4 wheel steering and 3 way differential, and even an actual gear box with shifter. You could see the pistons pump when you pushed it around. One of the best birthday presents I ever asked for.

I was dreamed about this set back in mid-90s. Unfortunately my parents wasn't able to afford it, and I only had small and mid sets and not a single "technics" set.

So I was doomed to re-read a paper catalog countless times hoping someday I'll get it.

Re: LEGO Building Instructions

#140

Post by lloeki »

netsharc wrote: post #75
gleenn wrote: post #64

I was sad not to see the original Technic Super Car. It had a working V8, 4 wheel drive with 4 wheel steering and 3 way differential, and even an actual gear box with shifter. You could see the pistons pump when you pushed it around. One of the best birthday presents I ever asked for.

The 8880: https://brickset.com/article/20017/8880-super-car-the-best-e...

I had Test Car 8865, which was quite a bit more primitive but still fairly complete (a 4 cylinder reciprocating engine in a V configuration, a 3 speed transmission, a working rear differential, working front and rear double wishbone suspension, rack and pinion steering, retractable headlights, and adjustable and reclining seats)

http://www.technicopedia.com/8865.html

The evolution history of such cars, beautifully presented on SE, is fascinating:

https://bricks.stackexchange.com/a/14539

Post reply on HN