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

Lego price per part over the years

brickinsights.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 179 posts

Re: Lego price per part over the years

#151

Post by sandreas »

exar0815 wrote: post #140
sandreas wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LEGO is indeed pretty expensive these times. Not every set is that bad, but the most cars are not only expensive, but not even the best sets on the market... There is a lot of comparisons, but the most convincing one maybe the LEGO Ferarri (42125) vs. CADA Italian Super Car (C61042W) video[1] of "Held der Steine" (german youtube channel). The LEGO is "parts only" - the CADA is remote controlled with led lights near d…

Just one "Datapoint", but I have a colleague that works in injection molding. Granted, he works on the "other end" of the size scale (complete car underbodys in one part), but he always said it was more or less a given fact that the two companies wo had "dialed in" their molding processes to near perfection and quality were Lego and Games Workshop in the UK.

So, this is something LEGO is desperately trying to preserve: The opinion that LEGO's prices are reasonable due to better quality and more creative design / higher quality engineering.

The quality in all terms is not better at all... they may be CAPABLE of better quality, but they don't provide it just to reduce costs. That's why they provide stickers instead of prints and holed out plastic parts instead of solit ones. It's cheaper in production. If you compare LEGO parts from 20 to 15 years ago and todays parts, you immediately notice the difference.

There ARE indeed manufacturers and brands that deliver bad quality, but if you pick the non-ripoff brands, the quality may even better.

Re: Lego price per part over the years

#152

Post by bluetomcat »

noneeeed wrote: post #147

I wonder how much the trend towards smaller pieces has affected this. There seem to be many more very small detail pieces in the kits now, which makes for lovely detailed models, but increases the part count without increasing the size noticably. One of my frustrations with trying to get my kids into lego is the proliferation in these one and two stud pieces in relatively small kits that are otherwise perfect for kid…

> One of my frustrations with trying to get my kids into lego is the proliferation in these one and two stud pieces in relatively small kits that are otherwise perfect for kids.

With my 5-year-old, we keep groups of sets in separate stackable plastic boxes. In one plastic box, we have only City vehicles (vans, tractors, cars, SUVs) which are mostly in an assembled state. He would play with them on the ground and would occasionally want to disassemble one. He then builds his own wacky wheeled creation, pridefully shows it to me and then asks "daddy, can you give me the instructions so we can build the original tractor again".

We also have another box with mostly gray rectangular bricks from 31120 "Medieval Castle". We would both stand on the ground for hours, doing stuff like small towers, houses, or just wacky things resembling real-world objects he has seen.

Re: Lego price per part over the years

#153

Post by sandreas »

iakov wrote: post #141
4ggr0 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are you so sure that the other bricks are of lesser quality?

Empirical evidence. I've tried some fake brick sets, most of them were obviously not as good. The QC is worse for sure, but it's the little things - sometimes it's weight, sometimes it's texture, sometimes it's color that is slightly "off". Those "other bricks" are quite useful when you want something that Lego won't produce. For example gimp figurine for your Pulp Fiction diorama.

I don't think that LEGO is better. They also have slightly off color, non fitting parts. Especially the "glass" parts are worse than Cada or BlueBrixx, but I'm not trying to convince anyone.

I think that everyone can pick whatever liked. However, the term "fake LEGO" is a bit weird, because the other manufacturers also have well designed parts LEGO does not provide...

Re: Lego price per part over the years

#154

Post by GatorD42 »

sandreas wrote: post #120
ryukoposting wrote: post #47

I made a script last year that scraped LEGO pricing data from their website. Besides finding out that the Bugatti Bolide Technic set is a pretty good deal as a parts bag, I found that there's only a weak correlation between set size and PPP. The Dots sets throw a wrench in things, of course, and large Technic sets often have expensive electronic and pneumatic parts that must be considered. My conclusion was that PPP…

LEGO is indeed pretty expensive these times. Not every set is that bad, but the most cars are not only expensive, but not even the best sets on the market... There is a lot of comparisons, but the most convincing one maybe the LEGO Ferarri (42125) vs. CADA Italian Super Car (C61042W) video[1] of "Held der Steine" (german youtube channel). The LEGO is "parts only" - the CADA is remote controlled with led lights near d…

The Cada cars definitely look good, the Amg one and Alfa Romeo f1 car are licensed too. Has anyone here actually built them? The interiors seem to be all black parts which could be a headache to get the right piece. Technic sets have good instructions and helpfully colored pieces which makes for a great build experience. Just wondering what it is like to actually bulls a Cada set.

Re: Lego price per part over the years

#155

Post by sandreas »

WilTimSon wrote: post #134
beAbU wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you can compare LEGO with not-LEGO... Firstly it feels a little sacrilegious, but religion aside quality is often uncomparable and there was this common meme from my childhood that your parents did not love you if you got knockoff LEGOs. Part of the reason why we buy LEGO is because it's LEGO. Buying some other brand (regardless of quality) does not hit the same way.

But that's a learned behaviour, and one learned specifically thanks to decades of marketing. Sure, LEGO is quality, but it's not some unbeatable gold standard. At some point it simply becomes one of those things where people ask for Coke instead of Pepsi, even if they can't tell them apart - brand loyalty trumping the desire to simply get the product.

That's what I think. And even if the quality of the parts was less good, it's just not worth the LEGO price in many cases.

The video I linked shows the difference.

Re: Lego price per part over the years

#156

Post by r_c_a_d_t_s »

bleepblop wrote: post #9
bombcar wrote: post #4

> Many people quote that a set should be priced at around $0.10 per part to be worthwhile. Is this the average? This has been the average, and it's so "perfect" that it has to be that Lego has been aiming for it. They've accomplished this by having more and more detail (read: smaller pieces) in newer sets. They appear to have been forced (or trying) to jump to $0.20 per piece in some sets (e.g., https://www.lego.com/…

I have a new metric when it comes to lego kits these days. How many stickers are in the kit? And honestly it's too damn high. I have been pretty vocal to lego about this in the past and current times. If they can mass produce an uncountable amount of minifigs with detailed paint schemes; they can do the same for bricks in the set. I have a hard time believing it's nothing more than a cost cutting measure. And to add…

I've only had one missing piece and that was in a 3696 piece set. Luckily it was non-structural so we could finish building it. Then we went on the Lego website - you can report missing pieces and they will send you a new piece in the post - it took about a week to arrive. Which was fine... I guess if it had been a structural piece we may have been less impressed.

Re: Lego price per part over the years

#157

Post by sandreas »

Freak_NL wrote: post #135
beAbU wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you can compare LEGO with not-LEGO... Firstly it feels a little sacrilegious, but religion aside quality is often uncomparable and there was this common meme from my childhood that your parents did not love you if you got knockoff LEGOs. Part of the reason why we buy LEGO is because it's LEGO. Buying some other brand (regardless of quality) does not hit the same way.

A local toy store here has one set of shelves filled with Sluban (about ⅓ the size of their Lego offering), and it's just bleak to see. The shop focused their Sluban offering on military hardware for some reason (perhaps because Lego doesn't do any of that), so you end up with drab boxes of greens and browns, in addition to looking just off in terms of accuracy of the parts. There's also a bunch of the 'fake' stuff o…

The problem is, that the GOOD part sellers (like CADA) are always put into the same spot as these cheap aliexpress rip-offs...

I think LEGO has done a great marketing job here... never buy something that is not LEGO, it might be bad quality or scam.

You have to choose wisely, but if you've found the good stuff, you probably won't go back.

Re: Lego price per part over the years

#158

Post by sandreas »

bluescrn wrote: post #149
bluetomcat wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general, their brick quality isn't on par with Lego. The clutching of Lego bricks is finely weighed and consistent. The colouring is brighter. They don't have nasty toxic smells and paints. The set catalogues are more diverse with many more themes. Set designs are original and matching the age group. There is also historical significance and nostalgia for certain sets and themes, and they can be re-released as new…

They really aren't that far off these days. Certainly no 'nasty toxic smells/paints'. Brick fit/clutching can be a bit sub-par on certain parts, but is generally not far from the real thing. Lego does a much better job of instruction books than the 'fake Lego' sets I've seen, though. Also, Lego has higher standards for the model designs themselves, whereas some of the 'fake Lego' model designs can be rather more frag…

> Certainly no 'nasty toxic smells/paints'.

There are manufacturers that provide laboratory analysis of their bricks to prove the quality.

Re: Lego price per part over the years

#159

Post by sandreas »

GatorD42 wrote: post #154
sandreas wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LEGO is indeed pretty expensive these times. Not every set is that bad, but the most cars are not only expensive, but not even the best sets on the market... There is a lot of comparisons, but the most convincing one maybe the LEGO Ferarri (42125) vs. CADA Italian Super Car (C61042W) video[1] of "Held der Steine" (german youtube channel). The LEGO is "parts only" - the CADA is remote controlled with led lights near d…

The Cada cars definitely look good, the Amg one and Alfa Romeo f1 car are licensed too. Has anyone here actually built them? The interiors seem to be all black parts which could be a headache to get the right piece. Technic sets have good instructions and helpfully colored pieces which makes for a great build experience. Just wondering what it is like to actually bulls a Cada set.

If you are not afraid of german content, you can take a look at "Held der Steine" Twitch channel and Youtube Channel... he does build most of his reviewed content.

Re: Lego price per part over the years

#160

Post by cuddlyogre »

sandreas wrote: post #157
Freak_NL wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A local toy store here has one set of shelves filled with Sluban (about ⅓ the size of their Lego offering), and it's just bleak to see. The shop focused their Sluban offering on military hardware for some reason (perhaps because Lego doesn't do any of that), so you end up with drab boxes of greens and browns, in addition to looking just off in terms of accuracy of the parts. There's also a bunch of the 'fake' stuff o…

The problem is, that the GOOD part sellers (like CADA) are always put into the same spot as these cheap aliexpress rip-offs... I think LEGO has done a great marketing job here... never buy something that is not LEGO, it might be bad quality or scam. You have to choose wisely, but if you've found the good stuff, you probably won't go back.

> I think LEGO has done a great marketing job here... never buy something that is not LEGO, it might be bad quality or scam.

I don't think that was LEGO. I think that was just the off brands being pretty university awful and people caught on.

I'm going through a bucket of loose parts right now, separating the off brands from the LEGO. There are at least 6 different brands in there. The difference is almost always obvious.

And when it's not and the part sneaks its way into my main collection, I can instantly tell when I use it because it either doesn't fit, or fits incorrectly.

Post reply on HN