text:
Why are new LEGO bricks softer than old ones?
The older bricks that were made back in the day, "pre-2K", seem to be made out of a harder and more durable brick that would hurt your feet when you walked on them. Now it appears that since the other brother of the LEGO family took over, things have changed and you are seeing tons of themed sets coming out, (which is awesome), but at the same time they seem to have changed to a softer mixture of plastic.
Some AFOL's think that this is due to the fact that the bricks are now being made in China; they used to be made in Mexico.
If you compare a sword piece made in 1995 and compared it to the new stuff, you'll notice that even the color is different. The old Medieval swords were bright and shiny and hard as a rock. The old pirate swords you could be used like a tooth pick. Now they both seem to be made out of an entirely different plastic and bend with no effort.
I personally have not spent more than $200 in this last year down from $2000 the prior year for this reason. The only reason I bought anything at all was the new Friends sets. I loved LEGO until they took out the main reason I was buying their toys; their durability aspect. It was one of the only toys on the market that didn't turn towards profit and become mass produced in China, now I will have to start buying Playmobil.

You may want to clean up the question by removing speculative bits in it; as it is now it's quite hard to figure out what it is you're actually asking.

AFAIK, relatively few bricks are made in China.

As @Kramii mentioned, my understanding is that most of the parts coming from China are textile parts like the capes and strings.

Some very special parts (licensed headgear, big dinosaurs) may also be produced there, but definitely no regular bricks whatsoever.

Considering Lego is the world's largest toy-maker, they have grown 15% per year for ten years, and AFOLs make up only about 5% of their revenue, I think your entire last paragraph needs to be reconsidered.

Some of it may be your own perception changing, such as a room you remember being big when you were a kid, but which you find small as an adult. So when you perceive bricks as being softer, it could actually be that they aren't, but that your perception changed. (If you were to walk barefoot on LEGO bricks for one hour per day, your feet would eventually harden enough that you wouldn't feel it anymore.)
However, some may actually hold true, especially for weapons. Swords that are produced nowadays are indeed not as hard as they were back then, and that is simply for safety reasons, as safety controls put in place become harder with times. In extreme cases, they'll even use rubber, for example for the tip of the big spike introduced with exo-force. Another more subtle example is the circular saw blade: ever thought how dumb it was that they didn't use a cross axle hole in that? Wonder no more: it's just so that kids wouldn't put it on a motor (I know I would have as a kid).
As for the perceived quality changes, well, it's a bit of the same, there's a lot of it which is just that, perception; but there are of course real quality issues that pop up from time to time, which LEGO usually assesses the best they can. One key factor here is that there's a huge stock in their factories, so any changes they make can take a while before they appear in released sets. For example, they have switched at some point from buying precolored plastic granulate to adding the color themselves to white granulate, but at some point they didn't add enough color, resulting in translucent and more fragile bricks. They fixed that, but a lot of the already produced bricks made it into sets.
Also, LEGO can only learn about quality issue when customers actually complain about them, so when facing a real quality issue, it's always best to contact the customer service and explain the problem. Not only will they usually be able to provide replacements for you, but this will eventually reach the production quality assurance.

I recently sorted through some of my bricks from the early 00s (so they're not nearly as old as 80s 90s bricks) and their clutch power is immense compared to my brand new bricks - after connecting two it was extremely difficult getting them apart even with a brick separator without damaging the plastic (with the separator!). I don't think it's just perception. I'm pretty sure there's real aging of the plastics at play here (though I'm less concerned about that aspect and more interested in knowing how I can soften them back up again - which I may open a new question for).

I can't definitively answer, but I can say that this has been a common observation around the late 1990's and early 2000's-- nothing to do with Chinese manufacturing.
I personally made the observation when comparing construction in large-scale creations in 1999/2000 and later in 2005. The large scale creation in 1999/2000 was a very large building, commissioned for a music school, and used elements that were likely molded in the 1996-1999 timeframe (they were brick and plate accessory packs). In 2005, we worked on the LEGO Millyard, producing similarly large buildings using very similar techniques for roofs.
Each project used stacks of large plates (black in 1999 and dark stone in 2005) for the roofs, and the behavior of the elements was distinctly different. In 2005, the plates had a tendency to "moosh" their way apart unless connected fully (and even then sometimes worked their way apart as the sections were handled), whereas in 1999, I didn't have that experience.
Around that time (2000 or so), hobbyists were commenting on the fact that it seemed like newer molded elements were softer, and didn't have a tendency to "click" together quite as much as they had in the past. And again, this is prior to Chinese manufacturing or dye-injected coloring changes.
The theory had by some was that this was a conscious change on LEGO's part to make the elements easier to use for younger children. Around that time (1997), LEGO was attempting to lower the age range on Town sets to bridge the gap between Duplo and System, and such a change may have been a part of that effort. According to one account by an AFOL that was involved in plastics manufacturing, this is often achieved in ABS plastic by adding more vinyl to the ABS mixture, giving it a more spongey quality.

Plastic pieces will become harder over time. Not sure why, but I think it is that the substance that were added to make the plastic a little softer evaporates over time.
I have been told that the people designing sets for LEGO never use pieces older than 2 years. This is because harder pieces will have more clutch power than softer pieces and because of that, they might accidentally design a set that will fall to pieces when built with only new pieces.

Don't you contradict yourself here? They never use old pieces, and they don't use new pieces?

@Gruber - nope teabox said that they don't use old pieces because they might have more clutch than newer ones - so by ensuring that their parts are no more than two years old they can ensure that the model will stay together with new bricks.


text:
Is this a LEGO Friends set?
Got a bag with a lot of pink bricks. I think it is one of the LEGO Friends sets but don't know which set. Can anybody help me identify?

The door is probably  Frame 2X4X6 in Medium Lilac. This depends on the thickness of the piece 1 or 2 studs as this is not clear on the picture.
This piece in combination with the white door only comes in 2 sets :

4625: Pink Brick Box
10660-1: House Suitcase

Neither set contains the other pieces. I can't find the other pieces on Brickset. Are these pieces coming out of an official Lego sealed bag?
Based one the quality of the darker green one, I'm not sure if these are Lego parts as there are blisters and leftover plastic on them (between top leaf and rest of the part).

The vine/beanstalk elements are from the Mega Bloks Moshi Monster Sets.

I think the blisters are water droplets.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

sort: votes


text:
Power for LEGO Creator Expert Roller Coaster (10261)
In order to power the Creator Expert Roller Coaster (10261) can the 'Power Up' components Technic XL Motor (88014) and Technic Hub (88012) be substituted for 'Power Functions' components M Motor (8883) and AAA Battery Box (88000) which have both been discontinued?  Thank you for your assistance.

Yes, Powered Up is the replacement for Power Functions. However, Powered Up requires a smart device (smartphone/tablet) to control the hubs.
Used Power Functions parts are also available for sale on sites such as Bricklink, Brick Owl and Ebay.

Thank you for your feedback David which reassures me somewhat.  I am still concerned about whether the PU components that I have are adequately compatible with the roller coaster.  I am unsure whether the relative power will work the same way that the PF components would have.  I am worried that it may be too powerful and drive the cars off the track or too weak to get them up the hill.  May just have to resort to used PF parts as you suggested.  Any further thoughts appreciated.

There is a nice comparison of LEGO motor speeds and torques at https://philohome.com/motors/motorcomp.htm. And you can always add gears too.

They've introduced a Powered Up battery box this year, 88015, that works on its own and doesn't require Bluetooth, but I don't know if it's widely available.

The battery box hasn't been released yet. It was part of the 42113 Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey set that was canceled.

Just noticed on Brickset, that battery box from 421133 Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey - set # 88015 - HAS been released by LEGO and is available for purchase S@H.

Yeah, just saw the news today after I commented yesterday :-)

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Which BIONICLE set did this mask came from?
I just unearthed a rather wealthy stash of semi-rare Great Kanohi masks. Never knew I collected them! Anyway, among them was this clear transparent Kaukau (Great Mask of Water Breathing):

You may recognize this mask in transparent blue as worn by Toa Gali and some Ga-Matoran (notably Hahli) on Mata Nui.
But what stumps me about this mask is the fact that it's not blue; it's colorless. I've looked in Peeron but it doesn't list this as one of the colors it occurred in.
Does anyone know which BIONICLE set this mask may have come from?

I found the answer while I was writing this question, but I'm posting question and answer just for dibs on the bionicle tag ;)

The Peeron page for that mask I just linked to lists the part number as 32571. I do a search for the part number, and come across the Brickipedia page for that part. Scrolling down, I find the source:

Transparent:

8525 Masks (random)
8530 Masks (random)

Apparently, I found this mask along with the numerous bronze and silver Great Kanohi masks in one of those mask packs.
Fun fact: this colorless Kaukau was designed to be wearable by Toa Kopaka, and possibly also the Ko-Matoran. The Toa is known to have had this mask equipped in BIONICLE Chronicles 1: Tale of the Toa, but it's not entirely clear if this is part of the canon. There aren't any named Ko-Matoran with this mask as far as I know.

Feel free to keep custody of the tag all by yourself :-)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
Which BIONICLE combiner sets do official instructions exist for creating?
There is a diversity of BIONICLE combiner sets (sets made by combining multiple individual sets together) for various groups including Toa, Matoran, Bohrok, Rahkshi, Dark Hunters, and a number of Rahi species, listed here. They're encountered in the physical sets, in the comics and even in some of the movies.
Instructions for building some of these combiner sets can be found in the manuals for each of the individual sets used in making them. Which combiner sets are these?

Some of the "combiner sets" referenced in the wiki link above are in fact alternative builds. I don't think these should be counted... unless LEGO made instructions to build them, which I highly doubt.

Should this include non-bionicle sets too?

@Pubby8: If there are official instructions for combining with non-BIONICLE sets, I suppose they're fine.

I added in ThrowBot combiners. I don't know how to format it correctly.

@Pubby8: Oh, if you're referring to entire combiner sets that are outside the BIONICLE line, then no. Sorry I wasn't clear :S

I'll remove it then. If a ThrowBot question gets made then there is always the revision history to go off of.

@Pubby8 Yea ThrowBots and Hero Factory are outside the straight up Bionicle storyline

This can be the format we use for a community wiki
"official" name:
Set(s) Release Date:
Set(s) required:
Model Picture:
Link to instructions:
"official" name: Akamai
Set(s) Release Date: 2001~
Set(s) required: Tahu, Onua, and Pohatu(8531)
Model Picture:

Link to instructions: n/a
"official" name: Wairuha
Set(s) Release Date: 2001
Set(s) required: Gali(8533), Kopaka(8536), and Lewa(8535)
Model Picture:

Link to instructions: N/A
"official" name: Mata Nui Cow
Set(s) Release Date: 2001
Set(s) required: Pohatu(8531) and Gali(8533)
Model Picture:

Link to instructions: http://www.bzpower.com/Imaging/stories/mukau_instructions.jpg
"official" name: Mata Nui Fishing Bird
Set(s) Release Date: 2002
Set(s) required: Kohrak Va(8551) and Nuhvok Va(8555)
Model Picture:

Link to instructions: http://club.lego.com/en-us/BuildIt/BuildingInstructions/fishing.aspx (link now dead)
"official" name: Bohrok Va Kaita 1
Set(s) Release Date: 2001
Set(s) required: Gahlok Va(8550), Kohrak Va(8551) and Lehvak Va(8552)
Model Picture:

Link to instructions: n/a
"official" name: Bohrok Va Kaita 2
Set(s) Release Date: 2001
Set(s) required: Pahrak Va(8553), Tahnok Va(8554) and Nuhvok Va(8555)
Model Picture:

Link to instructions: n/a
"official" name: Bohrok Kaita Ja
Set(s) Release Date: 2002~
Set(s) required: Lehvak(8564), Kohrak(8565), and Gahlok(8562)
Model Picture:

Link to instructions: N/A
"official" name: Bohrok Kaita Za
Set(s) Release Date: 2002~
Set(s) required: Bohrok(8561), Tahnok(8563), and Pahrak(8560)
Model Picture:

Link to instructions:
"official" name: Wairuha Nuva
Set(s) Release Date: 2003~
Set(s) required: Gali Nuva(8570), Lewa Nuva(8567), and Kopaka Nuva(8571)
Model Picture:

Link to instructions: N/A
"official" name: Akamai Nuva
Set(s) Release Date: 2003~
Set(s) required: Tahu Nuva(8572), Onua Nuva(8566), and Pohatu Nuva(8568)
Model Picture:

Link to instructions: n/a
"official" name: Bohrok Kaita Ja-Kal
Set(s) Release Date: 2003~
Set(s) required: Lehvak-Kal, Kohrak-Kal, and Gahlok-Kal
Model Picture:

Link to instructions: N/A
"official" name: Rahkshi Kaita Za
Set(s) Release Date: 2003~
Set(s) required: Turahk(8592), Lerahk(8589) and Kurahk(8588)
Model Picture:

Link to instructions: N/A
"official" name: Rahkshi Kaita Vo
Set(s) Release Date: 2003~
Set(s) required: Panrahk(8587), Guurahk(8590) and Vorahk(8591)
Model Picture:

Link to instructions: N/A

That's pretty well the extent of my knowledge and instructions, so if anyone knows of any more models, be sure to add them, even if your knowledge isn't complete.


text:
Which buildings in the LEGO Island video game were based on real-world sets?
The Wikipedia article for Lego Island mentions  'Most of these buildings are based on real Lego sets in circulation at the time of release for the game.' I haven't played the game in a long time but the 6350 Pizzeria set reminds me of the Pizzeria in-game.

The jail cell looks like something out of a set whilst the bridge and beach hut don't.

Wow, I never realized that they released sets in conjunction with the game. Although I imagine it would make sense...

@RedriderX: I believe the game was based of sets already in production.

Oh, yes I see. I'll be interested to see the answer to this question too.

While a few are indeed sets there are some I can't recall seeing (such as the Information Center, which was probably too specalised to deserve it's own set).
As already pointed out the Pizzeria set is very similar to the one in-game.
The set "6598 Metro PD Station" was the in-game police station, incuding jail. The helicopter could be build during in a minigame in the police station. Accessories like the box of donuts and flaming pizza were not included in the set.

The set "6334 Wave Jump Racers" was the beach lookout where you could start the jet-ski race around the island.

The Lego race cars in the game were similar to these sets: 1477, 1990, 1517 and 1612. I can't find the racetrack start itself but it was in keeping of the Octan branding that was used.

I thought the ambulance was set 6666 but I was wrong, the one in-game had a much longer sloped roof.

The Bank (which was always closed?) I can't really remember anything along the lines of, and I think the houses up on the hill were just generic lego houses.

The police helicopter did actually feature in the game when you visited the station, there was a minigame to build the helicopter.

@Ambo100, I only thought you had to build the JetSki, not the Helicopter...but then again it was a good 13+ years ago so forgive me if I can't remember exactly.

Here is the Race Track: Set 6337
The Buggy: Set 6518
The shuttle from Set 6339 is seen ingame (Race, Outro).
Also, the fire engine from Set 6340 is in the game, possible that it looks a bit different.
On this site, people show their own LEGO Island Buildings, many of them are pretty good, like the Information Center: http://www.mocpages.com/group_mocs.php?id=8611

Many thanks for pulling those together and persevering with our "new user limits" - I've added those links into your answer for you :)

I think the Space Shuttle was only in Lego Island 2. Some of those fan made buildings for Lego Island are spot on.

I assume that the bank building was based on an alternative build of the 6598 metro pd station. It is not exactly the same, but it resembles the bank a lot.
By the way, I'm currently working on the information center, but I'll have to order more pieces. My ultimate dream is to build a moc of the entire Lego island, but I'm afraid it'll cost me a lifetime.


text:
Which computer games came in jewel cases with LEGO studs?
Two LEGO computer games I've owned since the late 90s or early 2000s, LEGO Rock Raiders and LEGO Creator Knights' Kingdom, came in big boxes like most other PC games at the time. In the boxes were these CD jewel cases lined with 14 studs along their spines:

Of course, these studs are compatible with any LEGO SYSTEM bricks and minifigures. You can also stack these jewel cases on top of one another, as there are tubes along the respective side on the bottom of each case.
Which other computer games came in these special LEGO jewel cases, or at least which era were they from? I think LEGO designated categories for these video games too, but I can't really remember.

Wow, I remember these. Certainly takes me back! These versions of the cases I believe were used right back in about 1997-1999 when Lego first started releasing PC games. Exact information is hard to come by, but I personally still have (in a box in my cupboard) the cases for Lego Chess, Creator, Racers, and Loco, some of the first PC games released, all with the studded case.
My brother's later version of Creator: Harry Potter (2001) came in the much less exciting standard cases:

A lot of the early early games came in a chunky box that had a compartment for the game, as well as a small section for a lego toy.

I know this was the case for Loco, and I believe (if memory serves) was the same for Creator.
Ahh, I remember stacking the studded cases in different ways while I waited for the games to load...

Not fair! My copy of LEGO Loco only came with the manual in a big box, and no studded case or toy :( (have a +1 though!)

Why thank you :) and yes I don't know why Lego stopped them. I also remember in particular they did a lego city hardback book, that came in a cardboard case with big yellow brick-esque studs on it, that also had a compartment for lego pieces that you could build along with throughout the book. Good times!

Never seen that before. I can only imagine...

Yep, I've got a copy of LEGO Creator that came with a "turbo" motor trike (with flames coming out of the exhaust). They still make the hardback books with bricks, I got an Atlantis one for my son last summer.

I had/have a collection of the first set of Lego games. The ones I had with a studded case as are as follows (will attempt to get pictures).

LEGO Creator (Standard, non Harry Potter or Knights Kingdom)
LEGO Loco
LEGO Chess (never managed to beat the final game...)
Legoland
LEGO Stunt Rally (4 players on one computers was, and still is, rare. And squishy)
LEGO Alpha Team
LEGO Creator: Knights' Kingdom.

Here's the two games I can currently find, Creator and Alpha Team.

LEGO Alpha Team was a great theme with a not-so-great game (compared to Rock Raiders, at least) :/

@BoltClock, I liked the Lego Alpha Team game...made me think a bit. Never had the Rock Raiders game.


text:
Which buildings in LEGO Island 2: The Brickster's Revenge were based on real-world sets?
Which buildings in the LEGO Island video game were based on real-world sets? reminded me of LEGO Island 2, which I played when I was younger. I never played the original game so I don't know how many assets are reused.
Aside from the main island, the game also has several different areas. (Screenshots of every area of the game can be found at https://www.oocities.org/wonkeyzonkey/2/)

Castle Island:

Adventure Island:

Ogel Island:

I found the buildings recreated by The Brickster on Rock Raiders United forum. No indication they came from any set.

As the sequel to LEGO Island, many (but not all) of LI2's models are based on sets from 1998 to 2000.
Castle Island is based on LEGO Knights' Kingdom I. The castle itself, therefore, is loosely based on 6098 King Leo's Castle (my 3rd most wanted set of all time).

The battering ram shown in the screenshot is from 6096 Bull's Attack (my 4th most wanted set of all time — yes, right after the castle).

Adventurers Island is based on the Dino Island and Desert subthemes of LEGO Adventurers. The Sphinx shown in the screenshot somewhat resembles the one in 5978 Sphinx Secret Surprise.

The Spaceport is from 6456 Mission Control.

The Res-Q HQ is from 6479 Emergency Response Center.

6332 Command Post Central is split into two parts: the main police station building, and the jail & helicopter/helipad.

An exception is Nubby's gas station, which is a significantly modified version of 6397 Gas N' Wash Express from 1992 which was also rereleased in 2001 with the set number 6472.

The rest of the buildings appear to be unique to the game. Not even the new pizzeria seems to resemble any of the existing pizzeria sets.


text:
When I connect my Samantha Module to my NXT, the NXT shows the wrench icon
When I connect my Samantha module to my NXT, it shows the wrench icon instead of the USB icon.
I have tried updating the firmware, to no avail.
The blue light does not turn on. It sees the WiFi network just fine, the white light flashes, but it will not connect to the NXT.
Any ideas?

You can try http://thenxtstep.blogspot.com/2006/06/nxt-problems-post-problems-and.html Some of the info is a little old, but the site appears to be active.


text:
What tool can get two 1x2 plates apart without damaging them?
Teeth and pliers tend to leave unsightly marks on the bricks.
Fingernails don't work too well.
What tool do you recommend to separate them?

You could try the great brick separator. Designed for this specific purpose, it's probably your best bet.

Perfect image...

I normally use two big bricks: one on the top and one at the bottom.  Then you push down while rotating.

Or you could use, guess what, a new brick separator:

(http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=96874)

In addition to the Brick Separator, there are some parts that work well for this

Original here.

There's the great LEGO Brick Separator that can be bought in the LEGO Online Shop:

I love this thing. It's just great if you want to take care of your nails and teeth.

As of now it has been replaced with a new variation.

I use a fingernail most times,  or a guitar pick if the bricks are stuck too firmly.

I (and my sons) use a plastic knife designed for children. We found ours in IKEA (larger bricks for houses)
I have also used this lego tool with moderate success

A flat-style staple remover (as opposed to the jaws style) does well to maintain the surface of a stuck brickage. It also can be jimmied back and forth without much slippage.

You can always try the Official LEGO Brick Separator. It would probably take a couple to work best on 1x2s though - one on the top, one on the bottom.

Disclaimer: I haven't tried this personally.
You could use two removal-tools (one to grab the top piece, one to grab the bottom piece)

I usually put 1x2 bricks on the top and bottom of the stack of plates. This gives me enough leverage to break up the stack between the two plates. Afterwards, I remove the plates from the bricks.

I've separated several plates (and bricks too) with a simple spring-based hair clip.

Ew! No metal bits!

Why not? It's been quite successful for me.

Because metal damages our precious ABS bits.


text:
How many different types of Lego bricks have been produced?
I was curious and wondering:  How many different types of Lego bricks have been produced since the start of the company in 1949?

How many different kinds of bricks... or how many bricks in total? An all-time tally of all bricks ever made would probably be in the trillions.

Edited question to be less ambiguous.

If BrickLink toutes already 59,338 items in its "Parts" section, how would we consider 2,200 or 4,000 or 219 even nearly in the right ballpark?

I think that all the other answers are wrong since BL holds nearly 60,000 parts in its inventory and yet we say that 2,200 or 4,000 is right when it's not, as @SanderVerhagen said. This question is impossible to solve, and even if we say that 59,338 elements were made since we rely in BL, then we would still be somewhat wrong! There has to be some moment in history where BL messes up, no one is perfect!! I think this question should be closed!!

@SanderVerhagen We are looking for types of bricks. The 60,000 BL parts are not types. This similar question from 2016 asked for "shapes" which can mean "types". One example: Today, there are more than 4000 different minifig torsos in the BL part list (1 type, 4000 print patterns). So, 2000 to 4000 might even be an upper estimate for 2011 (the year of this question). It definitely is the right "ballpark".

So... this is at best an ambiguous question? Who gets to decide what the word "type" means? If we're going to be specific about words, what is a brick? Anything that resembles a brick in the real word, or rather Lego "things" that can be connected together?

@SanderVerhagen It is not that ambiguous. The part catalogs from BL or Rebrickable can be analysed quite well. I started with a reasonable definition of "shape" or "type" and came up with around 17000 (upper estimate) in 2016. With more effort you get better estimates, of course. The term "brick" is well defined in the LEGO world by the BL category.

Around 18,000 as of October, 2020
A 2020 article on Brickset discusses part numbers that give us a rough idea.

Design numbers identify the shape of the part.
...
Our database contains around 18,000 design numbers but many more have been allocated over the years but are now out of use, following parts being discontinued or redesigned, at which point they are given a new one.

One source places the number of different types of LEGO elements that have been made at 2,200. It is unclear whether or not DUPLO, Clikits, or Bionicle etc, etc, are included in that count.

How Many Different Types of LEGO Elements Exist?
2,200 different elements—or types of pieces
How Many LEGO Elements Are Manufactured?
Approximately 19 billion each year
or, 2 million per hour
or, 36,000 per minute

Where did you find that number?

It really depends on your definition of a part. Does Duplo count? Do things like Lego branded paraphernalia with studs on them count? What about pre-ABS bricks? The old architecture sets? Do you count all the minor design changes as 'unique' elements? (The classic 2x4 brick has had probably a dozen minor changes to the molds over the decades, for example). You probably aren't considering color variations, but physical shape. Are pieces with differing paint jobs unique elements? A radar dish that is opaque is probably going to get use differently from a transparent one with space ship canopy lines on it...
I get the nature of your question, but depending on how you define it can have a big impact on the answer. I would throw out an order or magnitude answer and say that there are probably less than 10k physically unique pieces in existence. Anything more is going to involve a lot of decisions around what exactly is 'Lego'.
Any philosophy majors out there that are looking for a thesis, there you go. That one's on me.

One source I found mentions that there are around 4000 different LEGO elements:

There are now around 4,000 different elements, as they are called at LEGO: round bricks, square ones, wheels, gears, and bricks with and without knobs.

Please add a citation...

I have got the info from this German news paper article: http://www.weser-kurier.de/Artikel/News/Politik/505073/Geschenke-Klassikern-auf-der-Spur%3A-Lego.html


text:
What happened to Cuusoo set #6
Lego Cuusoo just announced set #7 Ghostbusters 30th anniversary.  Cuusoo set #5 is the Curiousity Rover.
Why is there no set #6?  What happened to it or did Lego announce it and then change their minds?

Looks like LEGO switched up the numbering of the CUUSOO/Lego Idea sets.  The Ghostbusters set is officially #006 as can be see on the Lego.com site and now that review units of the Exo-Suit have been released to several Lego related blog sites, it has the number #007 on it.
Official LEGO Shop listing of Ghostbusters set Click on the box image
Review of Exo Suit
Hi Res shot of Exo Suit box

Time lapse of Tommy Williamson (BrickNerd) building the ExoSuit. So looking forward to August 1.

The sixth LEGO CUUSOO set is the upcoming Exo Suit. See announcement here: http://blog.lego.cuusoo.com/2013/10/21/results-of-winter-spring-summer-lego-reviews/


text:
Why did Lego use the same number for two different sets?
For example, Ricky Racoon on his Scooter from 1979 is a completely different set from House with Garage from 1996, but they share the same number (324). Why did Lego recycle numbers like this? Do they contunue to re-use old numbers?

I recall someone asking this to a Danish employee at a public event in the US around 2003. In a very humble voice the LEGO employee simply said "We forgot." LEGO employees were admitting before that to using brickshelf for old instructions because they didn't have digital company archives yet.
It's possible they knew about the numbers and saw no problem with reusing the retired number. It's we obsessive fans that are the problem! When I was a kid, making my first LEGO master catalog, I was upset to discover 540 had been reused, for Swiss Villa, 1973 and Police Units, 1979 (before they assigned it to Basic Building Set, 1985. Argh!)
You can find many examples with this Peeron search Change the -2 to -3, etc to find more layers. Open a set, then edit the URL to -1 to see what it clobbered (sometimes Peeron has the newer set inventoried first as -1.)
So you can see how they are still doing it. But mostly it is done to impulse items, promos, basic bricks, and non-brick lines. I can't find a core set bumping off another set number after 2000 (see Scorpion Buggy for example.) Maybe they have stopped after that?

I'm fairly confident they try to avoid it nowadays, but as you say, at the time they simply didn't care.


text:
What are the names for these two pieces of a car chassis and a piece for above the wheels?
I have the following pieces but cannot find their names nor precise usage on BrickLink or elsewhere
The black one has a wheel well on each side - sorry for the poor image quality.
Both the red and black will touch the wheels I have unless I stick a thin piece between them
Please show me an example on how I use them and what the blue piece is for.
[

: 3787 — Car Mudguard 2 x 4 without Studs
: 4211 — Car Base 4 x 5
: 4732 — Bracket 8 x 2 x 1 1/3

In the link for each piece, you'll find actual sets containing them, from which you can find set instructions. In particular, the two mudguard ones need to be one plate apart from regular wheel sets.

Excellent. Thanks - did you know this or can you reveal your deduction?

http://www.peeron.com/scans/6632-1/2

I don't know all of this by heart, no. For the red and black one, I searched for "mudguard", and for the blue one for "bracket" (I knew at least that). Sinc the black one did not have "mudguard" in it, I had to use another approach: look for a set which had it, knowing ambulances would be a good start, and then look at the inventory.

That is so strange - when I search for mudguard, I get single mudguards... Anyway, thanks


text:
Extra pieces in my set - Eiffel Tower
I recently purchased a Eiffel Tower Architecture kit and I found it having 9 extra pieces.  I know it is normal to have extras but I think the amount is a bit high.  Any ideas or explanations?
Does anyone else have high numbers like this in their architecture sets?

Most of the times it's not really a matter of number of extra pieces but what they are. If a set uses 9 different colors of 1x1 round plates, for example, you'll get an extra for each color no matter what? So, what are the extras?

According to the BrickLink inventory, there should be three extra parts, so 9 seems a bit high.
It could be a mistake from LEGO, but honestly it's more likely that you forgot them yourself. Knowing what the 6 parts are through Bricklink, I suggest you check the model once more to verify where they could go.


text:
What are the best options for building a LEGO RC car?
I would like to build a remote controlled car. And if someone already has a good solution for that I would be glad to try it.
It's been a while since I had the time and material to build some LEGO creations. And now I am willing to start anew.
Last time I toyed with LEGO there were electric engines and such, but all I had was remote controlled with a cable and the functions were very basic. I am looking for a more advanced and wireless solution.
I am aware of the Power Functions. But I have no experience with these. Would these be a good start? What are the other options?

Edit: Mindstorms as suggested in a few answers could be the solution, but I am not sure it will be practical yet...
It seems there was an official line of LEGO RC cars at some point. I was thinking about something more like it.
Although I'd like to avoid cutting and gluing 3rd party components I don't mind hacking a few parts together to get something really cool.
As suggested by @pcantin there are adapters I could buy to interface LEGO with 3rd party engines etc... I will look into it. But I would appreciate some better pointers in this regard.

Edit I am already aware of the Power Functions IR remote control It's a good solution to start with (now), but I was looking for something more advanced.
I have never heard of Arduino before, but as a developer I am absolutely thrilled by this solution. I won't have the time to test it now. But it could become the answer I was looking for.

Some inspiration on YouTube: LEGO technic car with Power functions. Hats off to this chap!

This is probably my favourite all lego rc car - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHWDSnWk2jU

Here's one I made last year. (http://phillipecantin.blogspot.com/2011/10/lego-rc-car.html)

@pcantin I like the form factor! very efficient!

I use a Mindstorms NXT brick and an Android smartphone for my remote controlled tank. The downside is that the NXT motors are slower than the regular Power Functions motors, and connecting PF motors to the NXT brick requires additional components.
Personally, I am satisfied with NXT motors and don't bother kludging PF motors. (Yet.)
Here is a modular truck design as an example: http://www.nxtprograms.com/MTV/index.html
I use this app for my remote control: https://market.android.com/details?id=org.jfedor.nxtremotecontrol

Personally I would go with Arduino (on the car) and an Android phone as the controller (via bluetooth). There's plenty of reference on the web about mixing the two.
The main problem is interfacing with non Lego parts (motors, PCB, ...).  Luckily, you can find Lego adapter parts in many Robot/Electronic sites. For example at Pololu:
http://www.pololu.com/search?query=lego&x=0&y=0
Edit 1 (Howto)
Android bluetooth communication:  There's the main page and the sample (I started from that one and modified it). You can also use the 'Sena Bterm' app to send and receive characters (no programming necessary but very basic).
Arduino bluetooth communication: This is the most simple part.  All you need is a bluetooth breakout board and connect it to the Arduino like so.  Using the board is as simple as any normal Serial communication ex:
void setup()
{
  Serial.begin(115200);
}

int inByte = 0;

void loop()
{
  if (Serial.available() > 0)
  {
    inByte = Serial.read();

    if(inByte == '1'){
       Serial.println("test1");
    } else {
       Serial.println("test2");
    }
  }
}

This code reads the incoming bytes and write 'test1' or 'test2' in return.
Hardware: this is the coolest part because you get to do what ever you want.  I personal use a lot of Lego Technics and sometime modified them to interface with foreign parts.  Search the web and you'll find cool Lego-compatible stuff like this servo joint, this servo bracket or this wheel.

You have the most interesting answer ATM, but do you know any good tutorials which could help me with the planning of such a project?

I've added more details in 'Edit 1'

Thank you! I have never heard of Arduino. After checking out the main website it seems to be a solution I would enjoy a lot. I will probably start with the LEGO Power Functions and as soon as I get one of the Arduino boards I'll start playing with that.

Cool. When you get there, if you have any questions I'll be there

LEGO have produced an IR Speed Remote Control unit as part of their current "Power Functions" range.
This offers:

Features 4 RC channels, 2 stop button and 2 direction control switches!
Use the jog wheels to control your motor speed!

You will also need the receivers as well.

This controller is now scheduled to be retired soon.

The MindStorms NXT controller can work over bluetooth:
http://mindstorms.lego.com/

Bonus points for using your android phone accelerometer to determine the vehicle direction. Super fun to do, and the effect on people is great.

The 9398-1: 4x4 Crawler is an interesting candidate with the new servo motor. It comes in 2H2012.
There are more pictures on TechnicBricks.

I saw an official Lego remote control car at the Lego Store once and I should have gotten it that day because I haven't seen it again.
That said, with Mindstorms and a bluetooth enabled phone it should be possible to build one one your own.

Mindstorms and bluetooth? Do you have any links?

@Coyote I wish I had links! But since the NXT 2.0 supports bluetooth it should be possible to control it from a phone and I'm sure I've seen that (though it was probably too laggy).

I would not recommend Power Functions if you are just getting started, as that system is being retired. It sounds like Technic Control+ should meet your needs. A set like the Off-road Buggy (42124) might be a good place to start:

That set provides two motors and a Bluetooth hub for forward, reverse, and steering controls from your smartphone. You can create customized controls for nearly any setup in a MOC using the Powered Up app.
Physical remotes are a more complicated story. There have been a few train sets that use physical remotes (28739) for the Powered Up products:

The remotes are sold separately, but are not very flexible out of the box. They can pair with hubs that control Technic motors, but they simply provide on/off control and can't be easily used for speed control or a return-to-center servo like you'd likely want for steering. However, sets like the Batmobile work alright with a physical remote, thanks to the skid steering.

If you're a technical individual, it is possible to upload custom code to Powered Up hubs using Pybricks or similar software. This is commonly used to create autonomous robots, but it can also be used to customize the interface between the hubs and a physical controller.
Here's a Github repository that includes code demonstrating how to program hubs to work nicely with the physical remote for certain sets. For example, here's the code needed to get the Off-road Buggy to work well:
from pybricks.pupdevices import *
from pybricks.parameters import *
from pybricks.tools import wait

steering = Motor(Port.B)
driving = Motor(Port.D)
remoteControl = Remote()

#steering calibration sequence
steering.run_until_stalled(500)
steering.reset_angle(0)
steering.run_until_stalled(-500)
maxAngle = steering.angle()
steering.run_target(500, (maxAngle/2)+10)
steering.reset_angle(0)

#main loop
while True:
    #update pressed buttons information
    pressed = remoteControl.buttons.pressed()

    #commands to drive forwards or backwards
    if Button.LEFT_PLUS in pressed:
        driving.dc(100)
    elif Button.LEFT_MINUS in pressed:
        driving.dc(-100)
    else:
        driving.brake()

    #commands to steer
    if Button.RIGHT_PLUS in pressed:
        steering.run_target(1200, (maxAngle/2)-5, Stop.HOLD,False)
    elif Button.RIGHT_MINUS in pressed:
        steering.run_target(1200, -((maxAngle/2)-5), Stop.HOLD,False)
    else:
        steering.run_target(1200, 0, Stop.HOLD, False)

    wait(100)

One possible replacement for the soon to be retiring Power Functions remote is the one included in Remote Controlled Stunt Racer, however this remote appears to be more limited, only offering 2 "forward/reverse" channels (one of which could be configured to control a steering column), rather than the 4 channels offered by the original.
This is also available separately.


text:
Is a N2 or CO2 paintball tank a viable power source for a LEGO pneumatic Engine?
I would like to know how a LEGO pneumatic engine would perform when powered with a nitro (N2, HPA) or CO2 tank. I have seen a few RC cars powered with air (from soda bottles), so I am wondering if it would be advisable to power such an vehicle with a much more powerful but also heavyer paintball tank.
There are few pneumatic engines designs, like this Lego Pneumatic Engine switchless LPE-V4-DIHC or this Lego 1500 rpm V8 or this (defective) LEGO V8 pneumatic.

I am not building one yet. But I am very... very curious about how effective such an engine would be when powered with a paintball tank... for how long would it be able to run? Has someone already tried that?
There have been RC cars with LPE engines but all I have seen was powered with soda bottles. I am planing an RC car of my own and I'm going with a simple electric solution but, an LPE would be sweet if it worked for more than a few minutes.

Precisions: I would like to know how long such an engine could run with a 45/4500 N2 tank for example.
@Joubarc found that such engines can run with a max of 90psi. The inline-4 on that page runs at max speed with a 4bar (58psi) intake (like most other LPE I saw). It means that we can expect slightly higher pressure requirements if the engine is delivering power to a system.
N2 tanks are simply filed with air which is cheap (when you have a compressor ;) With the example of a 45/4500psi tank how long could the car run?
Also comes the question of the weight, with a carbon fiber tank weighting over 0.8kg is it really a good idea?
Would CO2 be a viable solution? With a maximum of 6bar should I expect condensation in the pistons? Would it really be a problem to consider?
Simply put do you know if this would work. If not, have you heard of any example that was successful or an epic fail?

Edit: I received an answer from LPEpower:

I have no experience with long term running engines using co2 tanks, but the engines do run fine with them. Perhaps you could warm up the co2 coming out of the cartridge a bit, to prevent condensation. The real danger in my opinion is the low temperatures that the expanding co2 gas creates. Those are not good for the rubber seals. So if you'd manage to heat up the gas using a coil wire wrapped around the intake tube, connected to some batteries, you could prevent that from happening.

I guess I should probably forget about the CO2 and invest in some HPA gear.

You could power it with a LEGO compressor :-/

@Joubarc could, but it defeats the idea of running from a pneumatic engine if you need another engine and power source to power it.

Hence the smiley. That said, it's not totally nonsensical if only for educationnal purposes.

Sorry I wasn't attentive yesterday :)

Please take proper precautions! The on-tank regulator of the compressed air tanks used for paintball typically output close to 800 PSI (55 bar), and even "low-pressure" tanks output around 400 PSI (27 bar). You will absolutely need a secondary regulator to avoid creating LEGO shrapnel!

@echoback I figured that out :)

Apprently, it is possible to generate up to 37psi with LEGO pneumatics parts only.
LEGO penumatics can withstand more, however. Engines similar to the one you want to build can work with a recommended pressure intake of 90psi; a maximal (but not recommended) of 120psi is mentionned.
So I think it all boils down to the pressure your N2 or CO2 tanks can generate, under 100psi should be OK. If not, I suppose there could be some way to get it down to that level.
As for using N2 or CO2 instead of air, I don't think there is much reason for concern, since both are faily harmless and present in air anyway.

I am not sure about CO2... On a few occasions I have noticed "snow" coming out of my markers. When the marker gets some liquid CO2 from the tank (or from condensation?) it tends to shoot pellets faster with white jets of CO2 coming out of the muzzle. The way CO2 is expelled in violent successive releases might be why it happens. I'm not sure about what would happen if the gas was released uniformly. That's why I really would like to have an answer from someone who tried that kind of thing.

Also currently this is more of an "academic" question as I don't intend to build one of these immediately... I might end-up buying one from LPEpower as I don't have the parts, the time, tools and experience of modifying the required parts to get one running properly. So before investing in parts that are heavily modified I want to make sure this is a viable/fun solution.

You shouldn't use a CO2 tank with the pneumatic cylinders because it could pop the pistons out of their casings. I would take some pop bottles (2 liters), glue some T-shaped connectors in the lid and fill it with air using bike pump.
Warning. Do Not Go over 100psi with these pop bottles or they will explode. So wear saftey glasses when filling them.


text:
What is known of the capacities of the MINDSTORMS EV3 when it comes to interconnection with a network (WiFi, bluetooth)
What is known of the new MINDSTORMS EV3 capabilities when it comes to netwoked functions. What type of interface can be plugged to interact with a PC or portable device (smartphone/tablet)?
In term of interconnection (WiFi/bluetooth) and in term of protocols available what are the options?
Are there any libs (C/C++) which are already available and compatible with the brick?

The Mindstorms EV3 brick uses Bluetooth 2.1EDR. What protocol they use on top of that is still unknown, but will probably be released publicly by LEGO at some point. It's likely some compatibility with the NXT is possible (that is, an EV3 and a NXT bricks should be able to communicate together), but this is pure speculation and I doubt they just reuse the exact same protocol without at least expanding it.
For USB, apparently the regular USB port is 2.0, but there's also a host USB port which, according to the previous link, is only 1.1 (which seems strange to me, and the official PDF product sheet for the EV3 brick specifically mentions "USB 2.0 host enabling brick daisy chaining, wifi communication, and USB memory sticks") and can be used to daisy-chain up to 4 devices. The very fact they state a limitation hints that their software itself has this limitation, as I don't see any hardware reason to do so. This means that with an alternate firmware, you can probably do more.
WiFi is only possible using a WiFi dongle connected to the USB port, which seems to be allowed. If the host port is really 1.1, that may limit the speed to 12MBit/s. You can find  its PDF product sheet here which says:
The EV3 Wi-Fi Dongle fits with the LEGO® MINDSTORMS® EV3 platform and uses wireless communication. It plugs into the USB host port of the EV3 Intelligent Brick and provides wireless communication with a computer. A wireless access point is required between the LEGO EV3 Intelligent Brick and any Wi-Fi -enabled computer as well as your Apple or Android device. All you need to do is set up the connection inside the software and you’re ready to go!
Also, considering the OS is linux-based (on an ARM9 processor), and considering LEGO's history of letting people hack Mindstorms in any way they can think of... there'll probably a lot of other possibilities (USB Ethernet, for example).
APIs and/or libraries aren't available yet, and probably won't be until the kit is released, but it seems there'll be at least an official iPhone & Android app to control all robots you can make with the kit.

WiFi Dongle? Great!

Yes, I updated with a link to its product sheet

As I understand it, the existing NXT can't be controlled from iOS Apps, as Apple doesn't allow pairing with untrusted devices. Given that Lego have said it'll be possible to control the EV3 from an iOS, we can presume they've solved this. However does this also mean that third-party (non-Lego) apps will be able to communicate with the EV3 too?

I didn't know about that restriction from Apple - what do they mean by "non-trusted devices" in this context? It it's a matter of approval process, maybe LEGO did the necessary paperwork this time - they do have some iOS apps, so I guess their relation with Apple isn't too bad

The new EV3 Intelligent Brick has the following announced features:

IR sensor
Bluetooth connectivity*
SD Card Slot
USB Port
Linux-based firmware
Full iOS and Android compatibility out of the box

In terms of libraries for connecting with it - if it's based on a standard core, then I would assume that a standard bluetooth stack should be able to communicate with it, but unless it's based around an arduino core we will need to wait until full specs are released before the libraries catch up.
* Assumed based on current NXT feature-set and connectivity for phones.

A bit late but well:
For source code you can check out  https://github.com/mindboards/ev3sources
The EV3 comes with:

Bluetooth, two protocols on top of it, one used by the iPhone App and the other is RFCOMM with application data the same as over USB and TCP.
USB: over HID
TCP: Device uses UDP broadcasts to announce itself and can then be contacted over TCP.

You can plugin a WLAN Dongle into the USB Port or a USB-Ethernet adapter. It was the case that only a particular Netgear dongle was supported. Don't know if that has changed.
Protocol spoken is specified by this manual.
ev3duder, which I wrote as part of c4ev3, tries to detect an EV3 and can send system commands (e.g. Uploading/Downloading) or open a persistent tunnel which you can use to tunnel your own direct commands (check out moveEv3.pl for an example).
If you want to send stuff over USB, you got the ~/dev/lms_usb device file. For WiFi, just open a socket and do your stuff. Bluetooth I can't recall, unfortunately. Check out ev3duder's source for specifics if you don't want to use it directly.


text:
Can I write programs for the LEGO RCX 2.0 in Java/C++?
Is there a library which makes it possible to write LEGO Mindstorms programs for RCX 2.0 in Java or C++? With the LEGO software it takes so much time to write good programs.

I was looking into this just recently. There are libraries and also it seems there are other firmwares offering alternative operating systems you can embed on the Mindstorm.
For C++ you could try:

nxtOSEK is an alternative OS offering a C++ api
BrickOS is an alternative OS with a C/C++ development environment
NXT++ is a C++ lib for controlling the original Mindstorm with a C++ API (through BlueTooth or USB)

For java solutions might be:

leJOS an alternative OS with a JVM
The NXTComm Processing Library


text:
Can I use RCX sensors and motors with the NXT brick?
I have a bunch of motors and sensors from the original Mindstorms set. It seems a shame I can't use these with the more recent NXT set. Are there any unofficial modifications that allow you to convert the cables?

LEGO used to sell Converter Cables for Mindstorms NXT at a price of £8.99 / US$9.99 for 3 cables at their online shop, they can still be bought online from stores like Bricklink.

Considering the price of each cable converter it may be worth purchasing newer sensors/motors that are more advanced. The NXT system cables are separate from sensors and motors and come in different lengths.

I wish there was studs on the black adapter part!

Yes, you can use all RCX sensors and motors with a NXT brick. Don't forget about lamps, too.
The connections are different though, so as Ambo100 says, you will need converter cables. However, if you don't want to pay the full price for them, you can also make some yourself which isn't really that difficult.
The other thing you need to consider is how to use them with your programming environment; for the LEGO-provided NXT-G there is a special library of blocks which you can add. You can find it on the LEGO Education downloads site. The description of this library is as follows:

Description
  The Legacy Sensor Block Library is available for users who have purchased the LEGO MINDSTORMS NXT Software Version 2.0. The library adds support to RCX actions and sensors to the NXT Software. It includes blocks for the RCX motor, lamp, touch sensor, light sensor, rotation sensor and temperature sensor. The blocks are available in English, French, German, Japanese, and Dutch.

On a related note, if you want to use Power Functions motors and lights, you can do so by using the two converter cables (NXT-9V + 9V-PF). There is currently no NXT-PF conversion cable, but you could make one as easily as you would make a NXT-9V cable. There is also a third-party infrared link "sensor" which allows an NXT brick to control PF elements via the normal infrared receiver.


text:
What LEGO wheels would look like the three types used on the JPL Mars Rovers?
I would like to build the three types of JPL Mars rovers (Sojourner, MER and MSL) with the right size ratio relative to each other.  For that, finding the right wheels would be the hardest thing.  I can build the rest of the robots as long as I know the wheels will have the right look.
Here's a pictures of the three wheel types:

Important Notes:

The overall size doesn't have to be at the scale of the minifigures.  Even though this would be really cool, it would turn the Sojourner project into a micro build.  This would be much harder.
The look of the wheel hubs is not relevant. What is important is the look/ratio of the tire's outside dimensions.  Note that Sojourner's wheel (the small one) has a flat rolling surface while the others two are rounded.

Edit: The medium wheel is (appropriately) 1.8x the size of the small wheel while the big wheel is (appropriately) 1.7x the size of the medium wheel.

Here's what  found after playing with all kinds of combinations.  With this the three rovers will be at the same scale (about 1:5.8).  This scale is small enough that the big rover (MSL) would not be a monster to build.

The ratio is almost spot on and the only main problem is that the MSL wheels (the big ones) will have those big cleats.
On the positive side, they all have the right shape.  Only the medium wheels have that bulgy look while the other two have a flatter driving surface.
Here are the parts numbers:

Sojourner (small): 6014ac01
MER (medium): 6580c01
MSL (big): 64711

Well found and good luck with the build :)

I'm only missing 1 wheel (2x 64711) for the MSL rover so I'll order that online.  It won't slow me down too much since I'll start with the small rover and build my way up.  I'll probably document the build (or show the result) on my blog.

The first that came to my mind (for the MER-wheels) is the Wheel 70 x 28 mm Futuristic, with Black Tire:

You might also be able to make wheels out of parts, such as a circle of hinges with brackets and cheese slopes.  I'm sure there are better ways, but that was the first that came to mind.

This reminded me of an old BrickVista post where that guy build a Sojourner wheel out of Technic pieces http://www.brickvista.com/features/roverWheels/roverWheelsHome.html

It would probably be easiest to work out the which piece should be used for the biggest wheel.
The largest wheel I could find came in the 8420 Technic model. Two of which can be used in tandem to increase the surface area of the wheel:
Wheel Technic Street Bike (8420)

The medium wheel could be a rather blocky Wheel 20 x 30 Technic, the 68.8 x 24 or the incredibly useful 30.4mm D. x 20mm (four of which come with the NXT 2.0.)
The smallest wheel can be any of the tyres from a medium sized LEGO CITY vehicle such as the Prisoner Transport set.
I'd recommend having a look at Bricklinks database of wheel pieces to see what else is on offer.

Thanks for the links.  I'll dig around on Brinklink to see if I can find the right combination of sizes(ratio) and of looks.  I'm also interested in the full wheel-tire BTW (not only the wheels).


text:
LEGO for a 1 year old
I have a son who has just turned one. I like my LEGO and my desk at work is covered in minifig's etc, the problem is my wife isn't as keen on them. I was wondering can anyone recommend a set that would be appropriate for me to get for my son so I can bring my hobby home without feeling the wrath of my wife, or is it a bit too soon to introduce him to LEGO?

Be honest. You're buying these for yourself? or your son? :) If for yourself, don't bother. Duplo is incredibly frustrating to play with if you're used to Lego. If for your son, I suspect at 1 he won't be that into it, but eventually he'll figure it out. But there's no hurry, and it won't scratch your lego itch.

LEGO Group also did a range called LEGO Baby or Primo, which was pretty much suitable from birth.
It's not currently in production, but does come up on ebay and the like now and again, and is slightly inter-usable with Duplo and hence standard LEGO blocks.
Items ranged from things like this rattle, with chewable petals:

To the more "advanced" building sets:

My sons both enjoyed their Stacking Jungle Set, and the Bathtime Boat is still going strong ;)

Lol, this pic is epic :D Flower Teething Rattle

LEGO bricks aren't suitable for children under 3 as they are considered a potential choking hazard.
LEGO also sell a DUPLO brand of construction toys which are twice the size of regular bricks. DUPLO bricks are designed for children aged 1½ to 5 years old.

Note that some of the DUPLO sets include shovels, flags, and other small items which could be dangerous.  So stash those bits away for a couple years...

There is also a non-Lego product from Megabloks that is really good for young children.  They studs on those blocks are rounded so they're easier to kids to get them to "lock" together.  While not as sturdy as some of the Lego products, they do seem appropriate for real young children.

Seconding this, they are actually QUATRO-scaled and would sorta link up to the DUPLO/regular sized stuff but only on the bottom. Either way I got 2 large boxes of them and all 3 kids love them also because the builds get HUGE very quickly.

In addition to DUPLO, there is also QUATRO. They are, as expected, 4X the size and impressively compatible with standard sized and DUPLO. I inherited some, so have no idea if they are still made or sold.


text:
Exact dimensions of studless Technic beams
I'm looking for the exact dimensions of the studless Technic beams. I found a number of answers for studded beams but there are some more aspects for the studless beams which are not covered.
I'm especially interested in these parts:

Technic, Liftarm 5 x 7 Open Center Thick
Technic, Liftarm 1 x 9 Thick (or any other length)

What level of precision do you need?

Liftarms are 1 stud wide (8 mm) and 7 mm high so they have a 7:8 aspect ratio. (width is the direction parallel to they axis of rotation of the peg holes).
As pictured in the link, the 1x9 liftarm has the hole orientated vertically. So the height is 8mm. The width is 7mm and the length is 9 x 8 mm = 72mm.
Similarly, the 5x7 open center thick has
height=8mm
width=5 x 8mm=40mm
length = 7 x 8mm= 56mm
opening width=3x8mm=24mm
opening length= 5x8mm=40mm

That sounds reasonable. I'm just curios: Where did you find this?

Sorry, should have included a reference:
Chapter 1 of
THE UNOFFICIAL LEGO® TECHNIC BUILDER’S GUIDE
Paweł “Sariel” Kmiec
This is a great technic reference and doubles as a primer on mechanical engineering. Available as a free ebook in pdf form.

PS For fun, you can also look at CAD representations of the pieces. For example, Google Sketchup, free version. You can download technic pieces into it from the marketplace and measure in the app. Assuming you trust these to be authentic and faithful renderings. You get the same dimensions I quoted above. The stud proportions are actually quite important to keep in mind when designing models.

Technic, Liftarm 5 x 7 Open Center Thick

Height = 7.86mm
Width = 39.80mm
Length = 55.85mm
Opening width = 24.08mm
Opening length = 40.20mm

Technic, Liftarm 1 x 9 Thick (oriented as shown on Bricklink image):

Height = 7.86mm
Width = 7.44mm
Length = 71.36mm

(measured with digital caliper, precision +/-0.05mm)

Thanks for doing the measuring! Since I don't have an approriate tool, that's already helpfull. Actually I was hoping someone does now the exact values as they are weill known (and alredas answered in this forum).

Thx for the dimensions, Philo did you measure other parts?

To increase precision, you can stack multiple beams


text:
Damage Boiling LEGO Bricks
I bought some LEGO bricks from shop on Bricklink and received them yesterday. In order to make sure that the pieces were nice and clean (they were used) so that my two year old can play with them, I boiled them for a minute first. I've done this several times before and never had any problems, however this time, I think I had some pieces warp significantly and I think one was discolored (black piece that turned half white). They warped so bad that I had to throw some of them some away.
I've seen people on this forum talk about boiling LEGO bricks before and I've personally done it before without problems. Was this just a fluke or did I boil too long (maybe 2 min max)?

Hi @mj_ - you might well find some of the related questions (over on right) helpful, especially this answer recommending a mild solution of detergent suitable for cleaning nappies/diapers.

The boiling temperature of water is 212 Fahrenheit (100 Celsius). The melting point of ABS plastic (the material LEGO is made of) is 176 Fahrenheit (80 Celsius). Therefore LEGO should NEVER be put in water that reaches boiling point or anywhere close to it.
If you want to clean your LEGO, the best way is to just put it in a tub with luke-warm water and a mild soap. Let is soak overnight, then rinse it off with clean water. Here are some further references you can use:
http://thebrickblogger.com/2010/12/cleaning-dirty-lego/ and
http://thebrickblogger.com/2010/12/cleaning-dusty-lego/

I can also suggest putting them in a solution of vinegar mixed with water. Its excellent at killing germs and cleaning the legos. See more on vinegar in cleaning here: http://www.versatilevinegar.org/usesandtips.html


text:
What would be a simple trebuchet design at the Minifigure scale?
I would like to have a trebuchet design at the Minifigure scale and simple enough for kids 10+ to build.

Note 1: The counter weight can be any non-LEGO heavy object.
Note 2: On top of the standard LEGO bricks, we have a lot of LEGO Technics and my kids are using them all the time. So, Technics are OK in the design.

I assume you're happy with a non-LEGO weight? Most elements are quite light unless you've got a few weight bricks lying around?

@Zhaph-BenDuguid Good point. I'm adding this to the question. Thanks!

Does it need to be functional?

Just as a bit of information, minifig scale isn't terribly restrictive as a trebuchet can be relatively massive compared to people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Trebuchet_at_Warwick_Castle,_2009.jpg

@jncraton That's right. That gives more freedom for your design.

@Joubarc Off course it needs to work.  We have a castle to attack.

@Ambo100 No specific problem. I could build one and I could also design one for my kids.  I'm looking for other design(s) and (most probably) get really good ideas out of them. My kids and I will build 4 or more and it would be cool to have different ones.

I occasionally use the rubber wheel tires for small weights. They work pretty well if you need something kinda heavy. I don't know if you want to use them 'cause they don't exactly look super pretty...

If you don't need to worry about aesthetics, you could also use a small battery box

The set Knight's Stronghold includes a functioning, if dinky, trebuchet.

There are a number of designs on the net that I found with a simple search. Google image search produces images from the merely functional ones like the instructions linked here through to quite realistic looking ones that appear likely to work.

or this big one

The key for a simple, easy to build one is to use wheels on the base. It will shake back and forth when fired which means the structure does not need to be as strong. If you don't do that then the base will need to be similar in size to the arm, as in both pictures above. I am a little surprised that there's so little bracing on the arms of these models, as you can make a much stronger model using a tension member at least on the top of the arm, if not below.
But with Lego the main issue will be the density of the weight. Lego doesn't do high density part, so most people use non-Lego weights. Since you're willing to do that it's easy - the first picture shown has a lead weight, which is why it's hard to see that there's a weight at all.

You could probably still pull off an official-pieces counterweight with the right size battery piece; there are several in Lego's history that are rather hefty and would adequately fill that role, and many of the physics training aid sets I've seen include them for the purposes of training motor-based construction functions.


text:
What is the purpose of the Technic Axle 6 in set 6847?
In set 6847 (Space Dozer, http://www.peeron.com/inv/sets/6847-1) there is a black Technic Axle 6 that has no structural or cosmetic function in the set. I don't have the original instructions or box, so it might have been included to build one of the alternate sets. Or some other reason?

It's structural, but not really mandatory:

The full (4 pages) instruction can be found by googling or e.g. there: http://lego.brickinstructions.com/lego_instructions/set/6847/Space_Dozer

Well, it's not really of structural importance, as the 4 x 6 plate in step 2 holds them together. I had the scanned instructions already, but was wondering if on the box, any of the alternative builds sometimes pictured used it.

Well, it will, to some degree, keep the 1x6 technic beams from coming off the plate above when too much pressure is applied from above. Without that axle, I see the 1x6's coming off all too easily.

if they'd put a plate under those beams to keep them in place the vehicle would have no ground clearance (or possibly negative clearance). You could always build it and find out...

When weight is applied on the structure, the wheels are are creating a twisting motion that will eventually dissasemble the 1x6 beams.

With the extra structural part when a load is applied there is a lot of flexing but the 1x6 beams are staying in place.

Effectively, the axle is preventing the beams from rotating out of place.

Yay for Science! Nothing like the experimental approach. :)


text:
How can the new LEGO pneumatics be used for trains?
LEGO came out with new pneumatics. Since I'm a train guy (my wife is more into technic and already saving money for the Mercedes ;)) I was wondering, how could we apply the new things for Trains?!

The "obvious" way would be using pneumatic cylinders in steam engines, but they would be probably way too large and out of colour. The air supply would also not be trivial, hoses would look and work awfully, and integrated compressors would take up a lot of space in addition to the usually installed electrical components. This could be eased by building a separate wagon (or more) for them and routing the electrical current and air hoses between the wagons and the engine.
For some examples watch these two videos.
Another way would be building tipper wagons that use pneumatics, then you'd probably have less color clash, the same with using pneumatics to open and close the doors on passenger carriages (maybe linking more doors to a single cylinder).
A pneumatically powered rail crane would also look and work great, provided that you can fit all the control valves into the structure.
For stationary applications track switches are mentioned in the other answer, but you can also power boom gates at level crossings and cranes at cargo terminals. In these cases you would have a much easier time fitting all the components, but the hoses could become way too long.

The first thing that came up in my mind when reading your question is: operate switches on your track using pneumatics. You'll require a lot of hose, and would need to experiment a bit with how long the tubes can be without losing too much pressure, but the actuators could operate the switch handles easily, and you can route the hoses under buildings or even under your train table.


text:
Instruction for installing rc to LEGO unimog
I'm searching for an instruction to install a remote control to my LEGO unimog.
There are a log of youtube videos showing completed unimogs but I can't find any instruction.

I found this utoob video as the first hit for a search using "install pf lego unimog" and also this thread on EuroBricks Which recommends a different video. So instructions are definitely out there.
I think you'd be better off trying it yourself. Don't be intimidated by the size or complexity of the unimog, have a go. Worst case you'll have to reassemble it using the TLG instructions and then try some of the online instructions.


text:
Trying to work out where a 'spare' part goes on Wall-E (21303)
I've built a wall-e (set number 21303). This is the corrected version - and I've found, in addition to the 'obvious' spares, like 1x1 flats and round antennae, I have a 4x4 dark grey (4243831) left over. I can't work out where it goes

Image taken from google images, but its the same part
The only place where I can find one in the instructions in in step 65/page 54, and the parts count in instructions confirm there are two. The set's built and I don't notice any cosmetic or structural deficiencies in the design, but its bothering me
I've checked through the instruction manual a few times, focusing on the main body (since the arms, and head is paired parts, and there's no space on the neck for a 4x4)
What am I missing?

One is used in step 54 on page 49 and another one in step 65 on page 58. It's likely you missed the one from step 65 as it is just reinforcing the "flap" on the front of Wall-E - not a structural component.

I missed the one on step 54 on page 49 - I did think the use of grills over single studs was odd. Fixed.


text:
What is the difference between the plastic used in mainstream minifigs and the plastic used to make the popular collectable series of minifigs?
What is the difference (if there even is a difference) between the plastic used in mainstream minifigs and the plastic used in the popular collectable minifig series?
It seems to me that the collectable minifigs are a bit more brittle than their average brethren.

We certainly had some issues in the past with the quality of pigments in the Collectable Minifigures line supposedly due to different compounds.

My understanding is that the collectible minifigs are all made in China, and not at the main LEGO factories. And while the plastic composition is the same, the pigments are different. This gives the pieces a less saturated and more translucent appearance, which makes them look lower quality. However, at least in my experience, this is a superficial cosmetic difference, and the pieces are just as durable as regular minifig parts.

I would also add that LEGO makes other parts in China as well, like all the keychain and magnet minifigs, as well as specially moulded heads and body parts (like for Star Wars non-humans). If the piece comes in its own little clear bag, it is usually a sign that it was made in China. I never found any quality issues with them.

Adding on to @TheBrickBlogger, some of the parts are made in China. Perhaps the "collectable series of minifigs that you are talking about isn't even lego, but is the company "Shen-Yuan"(might have spelled it wrong, google it).  Their products are similiar to lego's, except that their paint is extremely cheap and wears off after a few days. For reference, check out this video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dcExGBJN2g

I know the color of some lego parts (notoriously the lime green ball joints from bionicle in 2007-2010) can have an effect on the durability of the piece. But I'm not sure which specific minifigures you had problems with, or what color they were, so no definitive answer. Just a thought.

On thebrickblogger.com (February 9, 2017) there was a call to report issues with minifigures. Reading the answers I get the impression that issues with clutch-power, cracks and other problems are occurring with all sorts of minifigures, not only with the collectible series. This would mean that it is not a persistent problem with Chinese factories:
http://thebrickblogger.com/2017/02/lego-collectible-minifigures-quality-issues/
Looking at Ebay I also get the feeling that 90% of all problems will never be noticed because the owners won't open the bags!


text:
Can't open the page to enter my LEGO Advent Calendar code
I'm on a Mac and have been using the link provided in other posts to try to enter my Advent Calendar code.  But the page doesn't work for me.  This is the link I'm using:
http://starwars.lego.com/en-us/advent/Default.aspx
When the pop up finally opens it is just a blank page.

Hmmm.  I've tried with Safari and Firefox and get the same result.  The rest of the site seems to work.  I'm in Canada, does that make a difference?

The Star Wars pages (and many others on the LEGO site) are very heavily Flash based, are you able to view other Flash powered sites with any of your browsers? Do you see the flash animation on Adobe's site?

Thanks for getting in touch with us.
We're sorry about the frustration you must be feeling. Unfortunately
  there was a misprint on the packaging. The real website to enter the
  codes is www.starwars.lego.com.
When you get to the site in the middle of the page is a place for you
  to enter in the codes. I hope this helped.
Thanks again for getting in touch. We're always pleased to receive
  feedback from LEGO fans! If you could take a moment to complete a four
  question survey by going to the link below, it will help us make sure
  we are providing the best customer service to you.
http://www.econsumeraffairs.com/lsi/ensurvey.html?F1=032315854A
Please let us know if you need anything else.
Happy building!
Arianne K LEGO Consumer Services

If this post is from an e-mail you received from LEGO please state so, I've placed the contents of the message in a quote so it doesn't appear to be attributed to you.


text:
Are there any African American LEGO minifigures besides the ones from the "Sports" basketball series?
I was wondering if there were any African American LEGO minifigures besides the ones from the sports basketball series... I got a brown head from a LEGO Stormtrooper set instead of a black one. I then painted it. Do any other sets have them?

See also: http://bricks.stackexchange.com/q/287/132

I know this is an old question, but it's still a problem that Lego, inc. has (it seems like Lego's official position is that lego minifigs are non-racial - but they pretty obviously read as european or white to most people) -- interestingly Lego Duplo does not agree at all: http://www.amazon.com/LEGO-Education-People-4591514-Pieces/dp/B0085Y3JNS This is something I don't get. It bugs me as we've been transitioning our son to "little legos" and suddenly the worlds he has to build seem mono-cultural, un-diverse, and also a bit of a sausage party (he's gotten 6 or 7 sets, totalling about 20 minif

I found a few at https://minifigs.me

There are a few on Bricklink, if you search by part colour:
 3626bpb212
 3626bpb159
 3626bpb749
 3626bpb424
 3626bpb214
 3626bpb573
 3626cpb1088
 3626cpb1124
 3626cpb1067
 3626cpb0906
 And the standard smiley is also available.
If you search for the older Brown colour (instead of the current Reddish Brown) you find that there are basically only the very rare Lando head, as well as the old NBA heads.

nice search idea

Minifigs from licensed sets are made to look like their license counterparts, so there are some there, most notably Star Wars Mace Windu and Lando Calrissian which have both been made in 4 different versions.
There's also one in Prince of Persia: Seso, and maybe you can count the gunner zombie from Pirates of the Carribean.
As for non-licensed sets, I don't see any other than the NBA ones.

Technically the NBA ones were licensed ;)

Color me wrong on that one

2018 and still no better in the African American minifig or any kind of diversity. I need more diversity for my Brick Films. Although we did get Mae Jamison in the new Women of NASA set:

The main LEGO minifigure is yellow to offer a "non-denomination play experience", rather than trying to represent specific races and regions - Only licensed sets have "realistic" colours, and that sadly seems to reflect the make-up of the specific licenses - there have been few recognised women in NASA so there will be even less BAME women :( See also female:male ratios of gendered mnifigures. There are three new sets based on Black Panther which add a further 4 heads.

The Jurassic World theme also included a limited number of BAME heads as well.


text:
Does longterm storage in a connected state harm the studs/tubes?
Does storing bricks in a connected state lessen their longevity?

After researching the question further via some local AFOL, the answer appears to be "No". The tube/stud system remains robust if stored in a connected state. Connectivity issues arise after the studs/tubes begin to wear down due to excessive usage or the elements become cracked. Simply storing a model intact does not lessen the life of the bricks. However, storing LEGO elements out of direct sunlight is recommended.

I have some standard Red 2 x 4 Bricks that have been stuck together in the same configuration since the early '90s, I just separated one and tested it compared to another Red 2 x 4 Brick from the same era, (and probably the same basic building set), but stored loose, and I could not discern any real difference in clutch power.
This is of course highly subjective and a very small sample size, but for at least this one brick 20+ years of being stuck to another brick has not had any noticeable effect on its clutch power.
I would think that other factors such as temperature, exposure to UV light and frequency of use will have a much larger effect on the clutch power of LEGO than being stored stuck to other LEGO elements.
An interesting and related point is discussed in another LEGO Answers question, 'Are transparent neon Lego bricks made from a different plastic than usual?', in which it is stated that elements made of polycarbonate should not be stock together as polycarbonate in contact with polycarbonate creates a very tight bond. (Transparent elements are usually made of polycarbonate, wheres other elements are usually made of ABS plastic post circa 1963*).
Further reading:

LEGO Answers question: 'How can I store LEGO bricks as long as
possible?'
Brickset forum question on maintaining clutch power:
How do you maintain Clutch on Built Sets?
Answer to another LEGO Answers question mentioning 'optimal clutch power': 'Why are old LEGO bricks more brittle than new ones?'

*Link shamelessly plagiarised from @Joubarc's answer.

I can tell you for a fact that removing the tire from some of the older wheel design has a pretty sizable chance of breaking them.

the wheel breaks when removed from the tire. It is especially true when removing them from the smaller tire. Keeping them assembled is the only way to not break these.
Do you feel it is useful on a longevity question enough or do you want me to delete this. I do not mind.

I had my childhood lego in a bucket for about 20 years. After opening it up again, I didn't notice any real damage. The older part molds for some pieces are more prone to breaking as they have thinner connections etc, but just because they were in storage does not seem to have affected anything.

Yes, but not very noticeably or quickly.
Keeping bricks assembled will always create stress on the bricks, and will gradually warp the plastic. However, the rate at which clutch power is affected, and to what degree is unclear, and depends on other conditions.
My most pronounced experience with this was a set (6085) that I purchased which had likely been assembled for 15-20 years. Although the elements were shipped disassembled, I had been informed that the model had stayed together, placed on a shelf, and had been dusted before shipping to me.
Although most elements assembled fine, without any discernible clutch loss, a few connections were slightly loose. Upon closer inspection, the loose connections were those where the "dust marks" lined up perfectly-- IE, those particular elements were assembled in that particular configuration for a long time.  Rotating those same elements' connection points resulted in normal clutch power, but using the same orientation was looser.
Granted, there are other concerns which may have affected this particular example, such as humidity, UV exposure, ambient temperature, etc. I expect that fluctuations in these other conditions will likely expedite the degradation of clutch in assembled elements.

Having them connected may actually increase longevity, at least for parts of the brick. This shields out light and air pollution. I have several LEGO bricks that were connected for 30+ years, and the sides exposed to air (and Los Angeles air pollution) were significantly more yellowed than the sides that were connected.


text:
Is there an organization who repackages old LEGO bricks into sets to give to underprivileged children?
Does Lego have a program by which we can return old LEGO parts so they can be reassembled into packages for underprivileged kids? My kids, and now grandkids, have always played with LEGO bricks and I have a large collection of parts, not in their original boxes and would like to give them to an organization who would reassemble them into workable sets for disadvantaged kids. I hate to just throw them away as I must have several hundred dollars worth of parts.. Any ideas?

Another option is to locate a nearby BrickLink vendor and request them to sell the pieces and donate the proceeds to charity. So far as I know, this is the best way to donate, as the pieces are sold for their appropriate value and the money can be donated as you wished. You may consider donating the pieces to Creations for Charity as well.
If you really want to donate parts, the best way would be to use the money from other suggestions to purchase general purpose block sets, and donate those.

I don't know of any such global organization, but if you're willing to part with LEGO toys, you may want to consider helping an organization in your neighbourhood. Hospitals will most certainly welcome any donation for their children's ward, and I suppose schools may have a use for it as well. I don't think they would care that much if sets are incomplete, as long as the parts themselves are still in good playable shape.
That's the path which has been chosen for the Brickset charity raffle, for example.

Recreating a LEGO set from mixed up pieces is extremely time consuming. Even if you are just missing a few pieces, since LEGO makes tens of thousands of shapes and sizes. Even simply verifying that a "set of 352 pieces" has exactly the correct "352 pieces" is very time consuming. The good news is kids and adults LOVE using mixed up pieces to create their "MOCs" (MOC means My Own Creation).
www.BrickRecycler.com is a great place to send LEGO pieces, and know they will end up being used, and loved. They even offer to pay for postage if you are sending from anywhere in the US. They work with nonprofit organizations too, and have shipped hundreds of thousands of pieces. There is more information on the web site, including a link a really encouraging video of kids in Haiti having a blast with bulk LEGO pieces.

You seem to have something odd going on in the mark-up of your website resulting in a rather massive table of white text on a white background, which is considered a little suspicious by some, as if you're hiding something?

sorry I am a little late to the game...I am founder of a new charity in Kansas, USA that accepts donated LEGOs and sorts them into sets based on original LEGO sets. We gift these sets to underprivileged kids through foster care associations.
If you are still looking for a place to donate your sets - I will take them. Unsorted, any condition, with instructions or not. Feel free to contact me for more information.
Matthew Gould
(as yet unnamed Lego charity)
USA-9 one 3 - two 0 six - six three 0 0
@mdgouldkc

Hi Matthew, and welcome to LEGO Answers. It would be good if you could add the contact details you've included here on your Public Profile. In general (a bit like Wikipedia) self promotion isn't encouraged ;)


text:
Preparations for outside display
I am thinking of using LEGO to make some outside yard art, (large minifig scale castle) and wondered what I should do to prepare them for being outside in variable weather conditions (in the Seattle area).
I am aware that Legoland glues their displays, but have not found any other details on their technique.
Discoloring in the sun is not a big concern of mine, other than I will probably avoid too many white elements which tend to discolor more noticeably.
As it's ABS plastic I imagine water wouldn't be a problem, and I should just be able to wash them down if they get dirty.  What about snow/ice freezing temperatures?
Does anyone have any experience with outdoor displays?

Check out another post here: http://bricks.stackexchange.com/questions/1037/what-glue-should-i-use-for-permanent-lego-construction/1038#1038  that asks a specific question about glue.

I once talked with a Lego Builder at the Florida park. He told me they use a glue that actually melts the Lego blocks together. With that in mind, I searched and found this article (on Facebook). It says Lego Park Model Makers

use a solvent based plastic weld. It heats the bricks up so the edges bind together. Obviously it has to be very strong to withstand weather conditions.

A quick search on that found this from Google shopping.
The article also talks about color fading and model life time (about 5 to 7 years), after which the model can either be rebuilt or cleaned:

We clean them using a shot blasting technique. They are sprayed with a fine salt spray, which takes a very thin layer off the bricks, and then they are lacquered with a UV coating. This gives them another 3 years or so.

I hope the project goes well.

good link, I've seen more info on how the LEGO parks glue their models, here but this one mentioned they spray models with a clear UV coating, and gave some outside display lifetime estimates (5-7 years) also mentions salt water shot blast refurbishment method.  Thanks


text:
Have any Lego sets been released with errors/mistakes in the build instructions? If not, why not?
I was thinking about the documentation process of a large set like the Death Star and it got me thinking; surely at some point Lego must've released a set of instructions that contained a mistake?
You know, referencing a part that wasn't in the final set, skipping an instruction step, nonsensical instruction etc.
If they have somehow managed to avoid this over the years, what processes/validations do they have in place to prevent such errors creeping into the eventual consumer sets?

I saw this picture on failblog.org. There is a high likelihood that it has been photoshopped but maybe someone can identify the instruction sheet it is from and verify if it is fake or genuine.

@mcqwerty - It's real, you can find it on page 62 in book 2 of the instructions (pdf) of the set 8038 - Battle of Endor. (And that was fun to search, thanks for the challenge!)

Uh oh, looks like your question was plagarized.

@Joubarc That doesn't exist anymore.

It's still on brickinstructions.com https://lego.brickinstructions.com/08000/8038/125.jpg

My 7190 Millennium Falcon kit has a mistake where the inventory for the page doesn't include two pieces on it. So, invariably, when I'm building it I forget to include those two pieces, and they are left over until the very end, at which point I have to follow this process:

Say "Dammit"
Flip backwards through the booklet to find the page that last added those parts
Disassemble the model part-way
Add the parts back
Re-assemble the model
Say "There. NOW it's finished."
Swoosh the model a bit.

Here are the two instruction pages showing the error. On the second page you can see that the dark grey upward sloping pieces at the front are added, yet don't appear in the page's inventory list.

So... maybe add a Post-it note to remind yourself?

@gev that's probably a good idea. Next time I build it I'll try to remember to make the post-it.

LEGO has made mistakes several times in the past and will continue to do so, as is the norm for a toy manufacturer of its scale.
I can only advise that the best way to ensure instructions are correct would be to build the model using the instructions. You'll be able to pick up more than just missed steps that way.

I'm fairly confident they do so at some stage in the process and, but even that doesn't seem to ensure all errors are eradicated. However, it sometimes can lead to errata sheets being added to the box when reprinting the instructions fully isn't an option anymore.

Mistakes do slip through from time to time, and are actually not so uncommon as you think.
Most of this is hearsay, but as far as I understand, the people in charge of making the instructions are not the designers themselves. Similarly, there is certainly a Q&A process which aims to ensure that the model is as faultless as possible, including the instructions. Building it is most certainly a part of the process.
But once again, errors do creep through, and sometimes they are discovered by the time the instructions are already printed. In these cases, it's not uncommon for LEGO to add an errata sheet to the model rather than reprint the full instruction book. See here for an example on LEGO wikia.

I have a set that has an error in the original instructions. 7184 Trade Federation MTT has a double sided page of the correct steps as below.

The original basically used a 1x6 in place of the 2x6. I am not sure if the correction was because the model design was modified to be more sturdy or if the maker of the instructions got it wrong, but when I tried to build this set the first time I had used some other 1x6's as the instructions had said. Later I had no 1x6 pieces to build with and noticed the 2x6's. Then I remembered the extra page and was able to work it out.
This is the only set, and I have over 50, where I have had an addendum to the original instructions.

I know that I've found errors in multiple sets of Technics. Technic 42055 page 210 calls for 27 of part "4121715" but only show 25 used. I have several of these left over and cannot find where they go.
Other Technic kits I've built have shown parts put together wrong on subsequent pages after showing them correctly.
With Technic sets I expect to find mistakes anymore. I've never found one in a standard set, but I don't buy the big standard sets.

I'd like to nominate today's find, an admittedly minor and inconsequent error in the instructions of the 24065 RC Tracked Racer, which I would call "The case of the spontaneously moving pins":
Here we start with four partially inserted long black pins:

Which suddenly, and without being instructed, get fully inserted in the next step:

Only to retract just as spuriously in the next step:

And stay so for the next 57 steps, when they are finally inserted with the full consent of the designer(s):

It doesn't take a detective to find out who was moving them: the instruction designer, without noticing. I really doubt that a cat or something stomped all over his keyboard and messed up the position of the pins.

In the LEGO Technic set 42100 (Liebherr R 9800), on page 211, step 268 says to assemble parts that were already added in the previous step.
Steps 267 and 268 are actually swapped.

The part list page for the Ultimate Collector Edition Millenium Falcon (10179) contain 5 mystery pieces that aren't included in the set, and aren't even used in the build.
See What is piece 4211642 from 10179 - UCE Millenium Falcon?

In the review of 31107 Space Rover Explorer over at Brickset, the author, Mr_Cross has pointed out the following error, where the same six 1x2 modified plates are to be added in both substeps 2 and 3 of step 3 and in step 8:

These images depict steps 26 and 27 of the 8868 Air Tech Claw Rig, where the pulley wheels are changed:

My Death Star has a mistake in the building instructions. One of the pages is messed up because on one page one plate is 6x1 and then suddenly on the next page it's a 7x1 plate. And it doesn't tell us to add anything on the latter page.

If I remember correctly, on the LEGO website a few years ago there was an incident with their Batman Tumbler. They had to reissue new instructions as they left something out. It was a long time ago and I didn't buy the set. I also noticed when building the Death Star minifigure set 10188, specifically the Emperor's room, I got some of the pieces wrong because the colour on the instructions was so bad I couldn't make out what colour they were supposed to be. Alas, when I almost finished it I found my error and backtracked, taking the whole thing apart.

Set 10243 Book 2 appears to have an error in the fireplace build. Pages 16-19.

Hi Kibedango! I have added pictures of the steps you have referred, but could you please point out the exact error(s) in them?

Unclear instructions on how to place the masonry bricks, but not in error in my opinon..

My son owns 6912 Super Soarer. In the picture, as can be seen below, on the fuselage, between the wings and the tail, there's a black roof tile with lattice (1×2×2), on a dark grey 1×4 plate, with a dark grey 1×2 flat tile in front of it.

According to the build instructions, that sub assembly should be the other way around, with the roof tile in front of the flat tile.

In set 76140, TLG made a typo with what sticker number you should put on one of the bricks.

The SPIK3R PDF file for set 31313 also has a typo. The number in the white circle next to the dark-tan axle tells that it measures four studs long, when in reality the part is only three studs long. At least it doesn't affect the build, because there are no errors in the given image of it AFAIK.

I have a page that was folded in before final cut in the ninjago city book 2

Hello John and welcome to Bricks.SE. I think the question was mostly about mistakes in the content of the instructions. However, it is always nice to illustrate your answer. This will attract more responses, upvotes and feedback. Mistakes in LEGO's production process are also interesting. Can you show a photo of your messed-up instruction book?

In the Changing Seasons 2015 set the winter instructions has a mistake, not huge and doesn't prevent you building it correctly, but it is there.  Page 29 doesn't show the top hinge, but on page 30 it is there!  It isn't until page 33 when the instructions tell you to place this piece.

I've looked at a PDF file of the instructions, and I do not see the error where you've pointed out. Can you be more specific?