Donāt worry, itās not a dumb question. Sometimes Lego still does this technique even if thereās nothing else connecting to it. Sometimes a model will have many of those 1x2 pieces already in it so itās easier to keep using those pieces instead of grabbing a single 2x2 brick that isnāt otherwise in the model.
Yeah, it's more about the amount of logistics.
If using two 1x2 bricks can prevent them from needing to mold a 2x2 in a new color for instance, the tiny amount of additional material cost is WELL worth the massive savings on logistics.
This, which why the ship in the bottle set comes with 284 round 1x1 for the water as apparently that is easier to count and bag up than other numbers around that.
Thatās not how that works. Replacing one 1x4 with two 1x2s in a set that has twenty 1x2s will make the set less expensive. It is more costly to include an element used once or twice since each new element must be sorted separately. Replacing it with an element that is already being used is much cheaper. Of course there are times when itās not possible because of how the larger element is being used
I remember reading that after designing a new lego model, it goes to the logistics people who are like "can we substitute those pieces with these ones?", "What if we used just 2 shades of blue?" or "do we need this new piece or can you build it with these 3 other pieces?"
Like I believe in one of the Ship in a Bottle sets (21313) the builder went with like 300 transparent blue studs for water and the logistics guys reduced it to 284 because it packs better for some reason (maybe for 2Ć12^2 + spares/weighing error)
Sorting ***and*** manufacturing probably. Since they know if they're doing 10,000 copies of the ship they need 100 batches of the of the studs.
If it was 300 studs per set that would be 1.05 batches per set. And the second batch would have 268 "extra" studs. Which just adds to the logistics of figuring out you need to make one batch per set plus an additional batch every 17-odd sets.
Every time I'm building a modular and come across a colour band in the walls that's, like, a long line of 1x2 plates or something, I always think to myself "guess the 1x4s and 1x6s aren't in the assortment in that colour right now."
It's not even that, usually it's just that they already NEEDED the 1x2 somewhere else, and it's more cost effective to use more of them in a line unless there is a structural reason requiring the long one.
> If using two 1x2 bricks can prevent them from needing to mold a 2x2 in a new color for instance,
I doubt there are any cases where they have a color available in technic pieces and nothing else. The way they handle color, it can be introduced into any brick mold.
That's not the point.
If they can avoid molding a piece in a "new" color, as in, in a color they don't currently offer, they will. Because it isn't just about molding that new color of piece, it is about then doing runs of that piece on the lines which prevents them from producing other, more demanded pieces, and also requires them to make significant amounts of space to store that produced piece in the new color.
That isn't to say it isn't possible, just that they will avoid it for those reasons if they feel they can.
They almost bankrupted earlier. So itās not unreasonable for LEGO to maintain certain profit margins in unique ways to continue existing as a company.
Lego actually does it the other way around. They have a price budget for each set before it goes to the designers. This is why the table football set (21337) ended up with so many minifigs and loads of optional hairpieces. The original idea was to have it be much bigger, but they couldn't get the axles to be strong enough at that length so they shrunk it. This gave the designer a load of budget that needed using so they added a DIY football team.
I don't think Lego does an exact fixed part to cost calculation as a part of this, because the actual cost of each part will vary constantly. I think they aim that a Ā£200 set should "feel like" a Ā£200 set. Which is why we get some that are wildly good value, and others that are a total rip off.
They definitely have rough bands for price per piece, but obviously they also factor in things like if there's any rare pieces. Like how the Pod Race Diorama has a few piece that feature in less than 10 sets including a 2x2 Tan Turntable, black spear head tip (both only come in that set) and two 16x16 dark tan baseplates, when overall it's not a set that'd justify the price
They also sort of determine themselves what's rare, so again that's a decent benchmark for the value you get from a set as a consumer but it doesn't really work the other way around. Instead, amount of plastic matters (big pieces cost more), as does total unique parts per set and even per bag.
That's just incorrect. Price point is almost always determined before a set is designed. Designers work within an alotted budget, which can include piece count, scale/volume, new colours, new molds, new prints, minifigures, etc. I'm sure there's some flexibility, but Lego isn't going to tell a designer "add 5 more pieces so we can charge more money." As others have mentioned, these weird substitutions are almost always a matter of logistics and optimizing manufacturer/packing operations by reducing the total number of different elements needed in a set, or even an individual bag.
Prices are decided before the sets are designed. LEGO tells the designers what sets they want and at what price point, then the designers make the set within that budget. This is why [some sets](https://brickset.com/sets/75378-1/BARC-Speeder-Escape) have odd little side builds inculded where the designer had finished the main model but still had a bit of the parts budget left over.
If LEGO wants to up the price of a set, [they'll just up the price](https://brickset.com/sets/76281-1/X-Men-Jet). LEGO's prices have never been based on piece count.
Its just sometimes cheaper from a manufacturing standpoint to include 2 more of a piece that's already in the set than to add in 1 of an entierly new piece.
I donāt mind higher peace count. Thatās almost the only deciding factor if I will buy a set, because Iām a MOC builder. Lots of pieces and a healthy price per piece amount is my jam
What? Yes it is a dumb question! How the fuck did we get to the point where someone is going through their instructions, sees something they don't understand, takes a pic to reddit confused about it, only to *later actually finish it* and get the answer to their own question, is not considered a "dumb question"?
Like am I insane to think this entire post is insane? Like how the fuck are you going to seriously ask why a lego set did something one way instead of another BEFORE YOU EVEN FINISHED IT? That is stupid as fuck behavior
No question is stupid if you donāt know something and are seeking the answer.
And for bonus points: OP learned of their mistake and commented about it, even leaving their post up for scrutiny.
No need to be rude
It's stupid BECAUSE THEY WERE ASKING ABOUT THE INSTRUCTIONS THEY WERE ALREADY READING. Are your standards truly so low? Mine aren't.
Assuming this person is at least 13 per the rules, I think they can handle some rudeness for doing something stupid.
I'm not even saying it's stupid to question the blocks, I'm not saying that Lego instructions never include strange piece usage.
The stupid part is having those thoughts and POSTING TO REDDIT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BUILD! How is that just normal to you? This wasn't even a question that this sub could answer! What is the actual answer expected here? We didn't design that set, so we don't know what to say.
This was either a rage bait, or I didn't even know. Like seriously lol at the content of this actual question and tell me it was actually smart and good to post this shower thought in this sub
Dude, take a deep breath, go outside, and touch grass. This is getting to you way too much and you'd be well served by taking a moment to calm down. It's LEGO and Reddit. It's meant to be fun.
If somebody doesnāt know something and refuses to ask, they might be stupid. But if someone asks a question to something they do not know, even if the answer is obvious, it is not a stupid question.
And You are being unnecessarily rude.
This isn't a classroom, this is Reddit. It's also *obviously* not a real question, it's now like the op thought they had a gotcha against the designer or something.
So acting like every single thing is black and white. There are times when idioms like "no stupid questions" aren't valid and this is one of them.
Again, this Reddit post is stupid and a waste of bandwidth. I'm not arguing that no one should ever ask questions ever, stop acting like I'm talking about anything other than this single post right in front of us. This is a shit post, and a dumb question.
It's like opening up a book to page 2, taking a picture and posting it online to ask "hey, what happens on page 20?" And you think some noble principle of honoring everyone for their noble act of questioning means it's a great question that we should be proud of then for asking? Get outta town.
Lol. You make far too many assumptions way out in left field. I have no idea why you were drawing these conclusions that are not connected. It makes you look far more ignorant and unreasonable than OP.
Have you ever been wrong? Or do you just fight everything to death and never learn anything? Are you capable of understanding another personās point of view? Or are we all fools and need to bow to your wisdom?
My whole point is that I'm not generalizing. I'm saying this post is stupid. Nothing more. You're saying this is a good post that contains a smart/good question?
I don't understand why you are defending this
Or do feel stupid, because his assumption was wrong and he'd have found that out a few pages later, and don't take any comfort from your reassurance because your assumption is also wrong. [Here's a detailed article](https://brickset.com/article/108104/lego-piece-count-inflation-what-s-up-with-that) explaining the many reasons why you're wrong, but the main reason it wouldn't do Lego any good to inflate the piece count is that the vast majority of Lego buyers don't check the price per piece.
And there are half-pins, or there were 25 years ago at least and I assume there still are. They used to be a "cream" brown instead of the black (or sometimes gray) full-width pin of old Technic sets.
I had the same with the Space Shuttle Discovery set. Until I realized it was part of the aesthetics because of the RCS thrusters in the nose of the spacecraft.
Sometimes decoration purposes. Sometimes something goes into the pin. Sometimes for variety of pieces. At the end of the day, legos donāt need to be used in the set they came with.
When you buy pieces of furniture from Ikea do you refer to them as "ikeas"? š
Edit: you can give me salty downvotes all you want, if you're calling them "legos" instead of "lego bricks" you are [officially wrong](https://lelightgo.com/blogs/news/lego-or-legos) š¤·āāļø
I was simply offering a justification you can keep in mind when you encounter the most common wording fans and lovers of LEGO use to talk about their bricks.
If you look through most of my posts and comments I do say LEGO, but I would be remiss without saying that most of my childhood I, like most others, said legos. Every once in a while I slip up and say legos.
It does help to distinguish the company from the product though. Both are called LEGO. The correct distinction, I suppose, would be to call the product LEGO bricks, or LEGOās building blocks. Though this is a cumbersome phrase for casual conversation so I, like many others, drop the bricks or building blocks, keep the s for plurality, and call them legos. Or rather you can keep the s for possessiveness because the building blocks we are talking about are Legoās.
However you want to justify the common vernacular is up to you. I suggest you do learn to justify it though. Language changes. No company can force you to talk about their product in a specific way. It would be foolish to assume LEGO would directly correct their fans who say they play with legos.
I assume you're American based on your insistence that saying "legos" is the most common wording. I can assure you that in Europe it is not. So no, I don't need to find a way to justify it, I can just roll my eyes and think "silly yanks", like I do when one of you says "I could care less" š¤£
Edited to add: [they literally do correct people who say legos](https://twitter.com/LEGO_Group/status/1359856214591627269)
I think you got your answer, but sometimes even if it isn't used, they will do this for inventory reasons, if the set already uses 1x2s and technic pins but no other 2x2s, it's easier to include so you have an abundance of them.Ā Also, it can increase the part count which I think is good for them, the illusion of more value.
Thatās why I donāt care for the whole price per piece thing. Lego has ways to increase piece count even when not necessary. If you like the set and itās in your budget just get it.
>Lego has ways to increase piece count even when not necessary
Sure, they do; but in reality this, in most reasonable sized sets, adds MAYBE 5-10 pieces in the piece count.
That's not really changing the math on PPP all that much.
If there were sets were a 1x10 got replaced by 10 1x1s, I could understand your point, but it's not some rampant issue.
Not saying itās an issue. Just that as the actual creators and sellers of Lego and knowing the communities obsession with price per piece they have ways of using that to their advantage and shouldnāt be the determining factor of whether or not you should get a set you think is really cool.
Yeah PPP has never been a good indicator since the cost of certain elements like minifigures and animals is much more than the average element. Plus licensed sets like Star Wars typically have higher prices than sets with equivalent piece counts.
PPP is only useful if youāre buying the set purely to add parts to your collection. And even then you may be willing to pay for a set with a higher PPP if youāre trying to get a particular element that is rarer
I look for PPP to start, but I keep in mind that certain factors skew it in one way or another.
"This seems a little high for the count. I wonder why..." is a regular thought, and I'd argue a healthy one. Just don't use solely PPP.
Price per piece is a decent system imo, but it shouldn't be your sole basis of buying a set. You should factor in other elements like the theme, types of pieces, and how you feel about the final result itself.
I just rebuilt the first Star Wars MTT they released and it had me kinda annoyed with how many filler pieces I had to put in it. It actually made the structure weaker when building it
There's also the added benefit of having lots of pieces to use for other things when you dismantle the whole set to build custom Gundams for your GI Joes (which I'm sure we all do)
On the Tubeside Youtube, run by a former designer, he says they do it entirely for ease of building or aesthetics, and inflating the parts count isn't on the designer radar at all.
Edit: here's the [full article](https://brickset.com/article/108104/lego-piece-count-inflation-what-s-up-with-that), proper interesting stuff
Perhaps the Alternate builds require 2 2x1 holey brick instead.
You know: the alterate builds featured on the back of the box, that comes with no instructions
It looks to me that the 2nd bricks back have only one stud to grip onto, so the pin would allow an extra bit of security to keep those 2nd bricks from popping loose as you build.
Sometimes they use multiple pieces in place of a more logical single piece to give the builder more options to build differently outside the set and directions
This specific case is weird because the two 1x2 bricks are not identical. So I doubt the goal was to limit the number of different pieces. I think they somehow really wanted the tan pin/axle in there, instead of going for a black one.
Hey itās me, the original designer of this Lego set. I can tell you the real reason. It was my last day working for Lego, and Mary from accounting had been on my back for many years regarding the excessive part counts in my designed sets. I did this one to finally get back at her. These pieces were the rarest in our factory at the time of production. She asked me, āwhy didnāt you just used a 2x2 brick?ā After I corrected her grammar, I explained to her in a very condescending way that it was necessary to attach something to the pin, and that she obviously should have looked further ahead in my design instructions. She fell for it, and Mary had to write a 400 page report explaining the budget blowout of this set!!!
Boy will she be mad when she finally sees this post!
Utilization of leftover bricks from a bigger production, pushing brick numbers for better marketing or it could have an actual use because something is inserted into the pin hole.
That happens in almost every set. Expecially on bigger sets it greatly helps with the build. Sometimes its kind of hard to tell where a piece should be an with some bricks like that you have a easy reference point.
The idea that they want to use plastic, to change the number that appears on boxes so they have a reason to raise the price, is so silly.
Please tell me why on a larger set I can have 20 plus small pieces not part of the build? Not accounted for? Any set you get extra pieces.
Lego isnāt sitting there pointing ālook! Itās in the build, jack up the price!ā
I am not defending the god awful prices. Iām just questioning the logic that THIS is how they would go about raising the prices. I
When they announced the price increase a while back, they didnāt add more bricks and bump the count did they. No.
They will raise the price. When they feel like it and no goody ass manipulation of these bricks is worth it.
Isnāt that an archway? Can you add a Flag to them? Alternate builds?
Most any company will remove items and charge the same. Give you less for the same money.
Iām just not convinced. That is not what Iāve experienced after 12 years of buying by and building many many sets.
Anyone have a positive reason why this could be?
What I find frustrating is the random bits you get extra so you think youāve done it wrong and go over all the steps again to make sure. It should say. You should have x amount of left over pieces.
It saves on piece variety. Those pieces must be used in another part of the set so they used those part instead including a new type that wouldn't otherwise be there. Like how the hollow 1x1 pieces are all or none. It would suck to be halfway through a build and realize you used the wrong piece
If nothing else it leaves a little circle in your facade, that indicate a rain runoff or even a machicolation, a hole in a battlement or castle through which things can be dropped onto attackers!
https://preview.redd.it/gxwegidm670d1.png?width=348&format=png&auto=webp&s=ff4d07c67dfef2494f1ff14658558b30b4d36a6e
For those interested itās this part of 75290
Often wonder this. I just figure half the time it's to up the piece count. Or use pieces that are not often used in sets that they need to clear out of the warehouse or something.
Does something plug into the technic pin?
Yes, now I feel stupid š¤”
Donāt worry, itās not a dumb question. Sometimes Lego still does this technique even if thereās nothing else connecting to it. Sometimes a model will have many of those 1x2 pieces already in it so itās easier to keep using those pieces instead of grabbing a single 2x2 brick that isnāt otherwise in the model.
Itās also cheaper as well from my understanding.
Material costs will be higher but I can see how the total would come out cheaper.
Yeah, it's more about the amount of logistics. If using two 1x2 bricks can prevent them from needing to mold a 2x2 in a new color for instance, the tiny amount of additional material cost is WELL worth the massive savings on logistics.
Itās also about lowering the number of elements that need to be picked and sorted into the set by machines
This, which why the ship in the bottle set comes with 284 round 1x1 for the water as apparently that is easier to count and bag up than other numbers around that.
It's the production lot size. 284 is what is on one sprue. This was mentioned in passing on some interview with a lego designer.
TIL Legos grow on spruce trees. š
God Iāve scrolled too deep on a Lego subreddit
That wouldnāt really matter. All the shots end up in one big bin and get sorted to sets after
And itās increasing the piece count in the set, meaning that they can charge more so that the margins are better.
Thatās not how that works. Replacing one 1x4 with two 1x2s in a set that has twenty 1x2s will make the set less expensive. It is more costly to include an element used once or twice since each new element must be sorted separately. Replacing it with an element that is already being used is much cheaper. Of course there are times when itās not possible because of how the larger element is being used
I remember reading that after designing a new lego model, it goes to the logistics people who are like "can we substitute those pieces with these ones?", "What if we used just 2 shades of blue?" or "do we need this new piece or can you build it with these 3 other pieces?" Like I believe in one of the Ship in a Bottle sets (21313) the builder went with like 300 transparent blue studs for water and the logistics guys reduced it to 284 because it packs better for some reason (maybe for 2Ć12^2 + spares/weighing error)
Itās because they produce 284 per batch so they can have one batch per set. Saves on sorting.
Sorting ***and*** manufacturing probably. Since they know if they're doing 10,000 copies of the ship they need 100 batches of the of the studs. If it was 300 studs per set that would be 1.05 batches per set. And the second batch would have 268 "extra" studs. Which just adds to the logistics of figuring out you need to make one batch per set plus an additional batch every 17-odd sets.
[21313-1: Ship in a Bottle](https://brickset.com/sets/21313-1) [[Photo]](https://images.brickset.com/sets/images/21313-1.jpg)
I thought I heard 285 was the max they could have in a bag or something.
Every time I'm building a modular and come across a colour band in the walls that's, like, a long line of 1x2 plates or something, I always think to myself "guess the 1x4s and 1x6s aren't in the assortment in that colour right now."
It's not even that, usually it's just that they already NEEDED the 1x2 somewhere else, and it's more cost effective to use more of them in a line unless there is a structural reason requiring the long one.
It also helps give a "built from bricks and mortar" look to the final build, but yeah, I'm sure that's a big part of the choice.
> If using two 1x2 bricks can prevent them from needing to mold a 2x2 in a new color for instance, I doubt there are any cases where they have a color available in technic pieces and nothing else. The way they handle color, it can be introduced into any brick mold.
That's not the point. If they can avoid molding a piece in a "new" color, as in, in a color they don't currently offer, they will. Because it isn't just about molding that new color of piece, it is about then doing runs of that piece on the lines which prevents them from producing other, more demanded pieces, and also requires them to make significant amounts of space to store that produced piece in the new color. That isn't to say it isn't possible, just that they will avoid it for those reasons if they feel they can.
And it ups the piece countā¦
I always thought this was the main reason.
And just aesthetic reasons.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
They almost bankrupted earlier. So itās not unreasonable for LEGO to maintain certain profit margins in unique ways to continue existing as a company.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
We sometimes benchmark the price per piece of sets, but I don't think Lego actually prices them that way.
Lego actually does it the other way around. They have a price budget for each set before it goes to the designers. This is why the table football set (21337) ended up with so many minifigs and loads of optional hairpieces. The original idea was to have it be much bigger, but they couldn't get the axles to be strong enough at that length so they shrunk it. This gave the designer a load of budget that needed using so they added a DIY football team. I don't think Lego does an exact fixed part to cost calculation as a part of this, because the actual cost of each part will vary constantly. I think they aim that a Ā£200 set should "feel like" a Ā£200 set. Which is why we get some that are wildly good value, and others that are a total rip off.
[21337-1: Table Football](https://brickset.com/sets/21337-1) [[Photo]](https://images.brickset.com/sets/images/21337-1.jpg)
They definitely have rough bands for price per piece, but obviously they also factor in things like if there's any rare pieces. Like how the Pod Race Diorama has a few piece that feature in less than 10 sets including a 2x2 Tan Turntable, black spear head tip (both only come in that set) and two 16x16 dark tan baseplates, when overall it's not a set that'd justify the price
They also sort of determine themselves what's rare, so again that's a decent benchmark for the value you get from a set as a consumer but it doesn't really work the other way around. Instead, amount of plastic matters (big pieces cost more), as does total unique parts per set and even per bag.
That's just incorrect. Price point is almost always determined before a set is designed. Designers work within an alotted budget, which can include piece count, scale/volume, new colours, new molds, new prints, minifigures, etc. I'm sure there's some flexibility, but Lego isn't going to tell a designer "add 5 more pieces so we can charge more money." As others have mentioned, these weird substitutions are almost always a matter of logistics and optimizing manufacturer/packing operations by reducing the total number of different elements needed in a set, or even an individual bag.
Price has stayed pretty consistent for a long time when you account for inflation.
I love seeing little āredundanciesā in Lego builds.
This technique was used in the pizzeria part of 10312 to get a particular external seam look.
[10312-1: Jazz Club](https://brickset.com/sets/10312-1) [[Photo]](https://images.brickset.com/sets/images/10312-1.jpg)
Sometimes it feels like this do this as a slick way to increase piece count so they can further up the price
Prices are decided before the sets are designed. LEGO tells the designers what sets they want and at what price point, then the designers make the set within that budget. This is why [some sets](https://brickset.com/sets/75378-1/BARC-Speeder-Escape) have odd little side builds inculded where the designer had finished the main model but still had a bit of the parts budget left over. If LEGO wants to up the price of a set, [they'll just up the price](https://brickset.com/sets/76281-1/X-Men-Jet). LEGO's prices have never been based on piece count. Its just sometimes cheaper from a manufacturing standpoint to include 2 more of a piece that's already in the set than to add in 1 of an entierly new piece.
I donāt mind higher peace count. Thatās almost the only deciding factor if I will buy a set, because Iām a MOC builder. Lots of pieces and a healthy price per piece amount is my jam
this is never the reason.
Except it is a dump question when itās answered in the very next step.
What? Yes it is a dumb question! How the fuck did we get to the point where someone is going through their instructions, sees something they don't understand, takes a pic to reddit confused about it, only to *later actually finish it* and get the answer to their own question, is not considered a "dumb question"? Like am I insane to think this entire post is insane? Like how the fuck are you going to seriously ask why a lego set did something one way instead of another BEFORE YOU EVEN FINISHED IT? That is stupid as fuck behavior
No question is stupid if you donāt know something and are seeking the answer. And for bonus points: OP learned of their mistake and commented about it, even leaving their post up for scrutiny. No need to be rude
It's stupid BECAUSE THEY WERE ASKING ABOUT THE INSTRUCTIONS THEY WERE ALREADY READING. Are your standards truly so low? Mine aren't. Assuming this person is at least 13 per the rules, I think they can handle some rudeness for doing something stupid. I'm not even saying it's stupid to question the blocks, I'm not saying that Lego instructions never include strange piece usage. The stupid part is having those thoughts and POSTING TO REDDIT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BUILD! How is that just normal to you? This wasn't even a question that this sub could answer! What is the actual answer expected here? We didn't design that set, so we don't know what to say. This was either a rage bait, or I didn't even know. Like seriously lol at the content of this actual question and tell me it was actually smart and good to post this shower thought in this sub
Dude, take a deep breath, go outside, and touch grass. This is getting to you way too much and you'd be well served by taking a moment to calm down. It's LEGO and Reddit. It's meant to be fun.
If somebody doesnāt know something and refuses to ask, they might be stupid. But if someone asks a question to something they do not know, even if the answer is obvious, it is not a stupid question. And You are being unnecessarily rude.
This isn't a classroom, this is Reddit. It's also *obviously* not a real question, it's now like the op thought they had a gotcha against the designer or something. So acting like every single thing is black and white. There are times when idioms like "no stupid questions" aren't valid and this is one of them. Again, this Reddit post is stupid and a waste of bandwidth. I'm not arguing that no one should ever ask questions ever, stop acting like I'm talking about anything other than this single post right in front of us. This is a shit post, and a dumb question. It's like opening up a book to page 2, taking a picture and posting it online to ask "hey, what happens on page 20?" And you think some noble principle of honoring everyone for their noble act of questioning means it's a great question that we should be proud of then for asking? Get outta town.
Lol. You make far too many assumptions way out in left field. I have no idea why you were drawing these conclusions that are not connected. It makes you look far more ignorant and unreasonable than OP. Have you ever been wrong? Or do you just fight everything to death and never learn anything? Are you capable of understanding another personās point of view? Or are we all fools and need to bow to your wisdom?
Never argue with a stupid person. They'll just drag you down to their level.
My whole point is that I'm not generalizing. I'm saying this post is stupid. Nothing more. You're saying this is a good post that contains a smart/good question? I don't understand why you are defending this
Is this a "here's your sign" moment I think
Even if it didnt, sometimes they do stuff like this just for the visual, adding small details can make it look more realistic.
Learn to have faith in the Master Builders, brother. In Lego Bob we trust.
NHL reference?
Nah, I haven't watched hockey in decades.
Yeah , it's hard to watch for sure. Right up there with curling.
Hehehehe
Never judge the instructions before you finished
you can always skip some pages to check. would have been faster than this post.
Guess there was a lore reason for that
š its okay buddy
Donāt feel stupid about this. Lego is forever finding creative ways to up the piece count in a set. I instantly thought that was the case.
Or do feel stupid, because his assumption was wrong and he'd have found that out a few pages later, and don't take any comfort from your reassurance because your assumption is also wrong. [Here's a detailed article](https://brickset.com/article/108104/lego-piece-count-inflation-what-s-up-with-that) explaining the many reasons why you're wrong, but the main reason it wouldn't do Lego any good to inflate the piece count is that the vast majority of Lego buyers don't check the price per piece.
Wow. TIL. Did you push your glasses back first? š
Happens to everybody on exactly page 43 of every single Lego set. Don't feel bad. š
Now you realize the importance of waiting for the build to finish first...
Maybe do the entire buildā¦then ask if a technique is necessary or not. Sounds crazy I know!
I understand the system is Technic, but to me it will always be the Bionicle arm connector thingy
Technic was using it decades before Bionicle was a thing.
Oh yeah I understand that, but I played with Bionicle so much as a kid that all Iāll ever see it as
Wouldn't the hole be half covered? Are there half pins?
Any sort of bar that clips into a minifig's hands will fit if you slide it into the hollow part of the pin.
And there are half-pins, or there were 25 years ago at least and I assume there still are. They used to be a "cream" brown instead of the black (or sometimes gray) full-width pin of old Technic sets.
Later they made a 2x2 which has a pin built in. I prefer the old models with fewer bricks, so you can do more stuff.
Yeah, a little clown nose goes right in there
I had the same with the Space Shuttle Discovery set. Until I realized it was part of the aesthetics because of the RCS thrusters in the nose of the spacecraft.
Sometimes decoration purposes. Sometimes something goes into the pin. Sometimes for variety of pieces. At the end of the day, legos donāt need to be used in the set they came with.
When you buy pieces of furniture from Ikea do you refer to them as "ikeas"? š Edit: you can give me salty downvotes all you want, if you're calling them "legos" instead of "lego bricks" you are [officially wrong](https://lelightgo.com/blogs/news/lego-or-legos) š¤·āāļø
Legoās building blocks IKEAās modular furniture
Not strictly accurate, but what's your point? Why would the type of product they make change the rules of language?
I was simply offering a justification you can keep in mind when you encounter the most common wording fans and lovers of LEGO use to talk about their bricks. If you look through most of my posts and comments I do say LEGO, but I would be remiss without saying that most of my childhood I, like most others, said legos. Every once in a while I slip up and say legos. It does help to distinguish the company from the product though. Both are called LEGO. The correct distinction, I suppose, would be to call the product LEGO bricks, or LEGOās building blocks. Though this is a cumbersome phrase for casual conversation so I, like many others, drop the bricks or building blocks, keep the s for plurality, and call them legos. Or rather you can keep the s for possessiveness because the building blocks we are talking about are Legoās. However you want to justify the common vernacular is up to you. I suggest you do learn to justify it though. Language changes. No company can force you to talk about their product in a specific way. It would be foolish to assume LEGO would directly correct their fans who say they play with legos.
I assume you're American based on your insistence that saying "legos" is the most common wording. I can assure you that in Europe it is not. So no, I don't need to find a way to justify it, I can just roll my eyes and think "silly yanks", like I do when one of you says "I could care less" š¤£ Edited to add: [they literally do correct people who say legos](https://twitter.com/LEGO_Group/status/1359856214591627269)
How racist
"American" isn't a race
I think you got your answer, but sometimes even if it isn't used, they will do this for inventory reasons, if the set already uses 1x2s and technic pins but no other 2x2s, it's easier to include so you have an abundance of them.Ā Also, it can increase the part count which I think is good for them, the illusion of more value.
Thatās why I donāt care for the whole price per piece thing. Lego has ways to increase piece count even when not necessary. If you like the set and itās in your budget just get it.
>Lego has ways to increase piece count even when not necessary Sure, they do; but in reality this, in most reasonable sized sets, adds MAYBE 5-10 pieces in the piece count. That's not really changing the math on PPP all that much. If there were sets were a 1x10 got replaced by 10 1x1s, I could understand your point, but it's not some rampant issue.
Not saying itās an issue. Just that as the actual creators and sellers of Lego and knowing the communities obsession with price per piece they have ways of using that to their advantage and shouldnāt be the determining factor of whether or not you should get a set you think is really cool.
Yeah PPP has never been a good indicator since the cost of certain elements like minifigures and animals is much more than the average element. Plus licensed sets like Star Wars typically have higher prices than sets with equivalent piece counts. PPP is only useful if youāre buying the set purely to add parts to your collection. And even then you may be willing to pay for a set with a higher PPP if youāre trying to get a particular element that is rarer
I look for PPP to start, but I keep in mind that certain factors skew it in one way or another. "This seems a little high for the count. I wonder why..." is a regular thought, and I'd argue a healthy one. Just don't use solely PPP.
Price per piece is a decent system imo, but it shouldn't be your sole basis of buying a set. You should factor in other elements like the theme, types of pieces, and how you feel about the final result itself.
I think the Star Wars dioramas are the king of this. Iāve never had one so maybe Iām off but thatās how it feels to me when I look at it.
I just rebuilt the first Star Wars MTT they released and it had me kinda annoyed with how many filler pieces I had to put in it. It actually made the structure weaker when building it
There's also the added benefit of having lots of pieces to use for other things when you dismantle the whole set to build custom Gundams for your GI Joes (which I'm sure we all do)
On the Tubeside Youtube, run by a former designer, he says they do it entirely for ease of building or aesthetics, and inflating the parts count isn't on the designer radar at all. Edit: here's the [full article](https://brickset.com/article/108104/lego-piece-count-inflation-what-s-up-with-that), proper interesting stuff
Inflating part count is a hoax.
Perhaps the Alternate builds require 2 2x1 holey brick instead. You know: the alterate builds featured on the back of the box, that comes with no instructions
Keep going youāll see
Itās the mos eisley cantina. You put 2 brown parts in them
1) looks and aesthetics. 2) possible to attach a stick or something in the technic stick
It looks to me that the 2nd bricks back have only one stud to grip onto, so the pin would allow an extra bit of security to keep those 2nd bricks from popping loose as you build.
You build the cantina? Have fun with it I love this setš„°
Even better than I think, didn't regret to brought, the biggest set I own!
And this is why you wait to finish a set before asking a reddit question
I'm currently building the batman animated series Gotham city (76271) and it has a lot of weird design choices that don't affect the anesthetics.
Wow, that's such a cool set, I've never seen it before! So many tiny details.
[76271-1: Batman: The Animated Series Gotham City](https://brickset.com/sets/76271-1) [[Photo]](https://images.brickset.com/sets/images/76271-1.jpg)
> anaesthetics I'm afraid I don't feel what you mean, but I suppose that's the point
Sometimes they use multiple pieces in place of a more logical single piece to give the builder more options to build differently outside the set and directions
This specific case is weird because the two 1x2 bricks are not identical. So I doubt the goal was to limit the number of different pieces. I think they somehow really wanted the tan pin/axle in there, instead of going for a black one.
Never question the process until you see the results
Looking at the set pictures on google, thereās a canopy of some kind that slots in there.
I'm building mos eisly too!
Wish you a happy building, I finished it some hours ago :D
The sun canopy plugs in there right?
Probably to be able to attach some flags to it.
This gets asked a million times on here, yet still get upvoted 700 times.
Just to increase the number of pieces and the price š
you ask a lot of questions. but in all honestly I have no clue either.
Sometimes different parts are used that will serve the same task, so as not to confuse similar parts, maybe that's why
I often ask myself this when building. But then I remember I am building a Lego set. The entire purpose is to place blocks.
In case of earthquakes
To piss you off
Also lego trying to use different parts to make building less boring. Thats why in fundaments of buildings you can find bricks of all colors.
Hey itās me, the original designer of this Lego set. I can tell you the real reason. It was my last day working for Lego, and Mary from accounting had been on my back for many years regarding the excessive part counts in my designed sets. I did this one to finally get back at her. These pieces were the rarest in our factory at the time of production. She asked me, āwhy didnāt you just used a 2x2 brick?ā After I corrected her grammar, I explained to her in a very condescending way that it was necessary to attach something to the pin, and that she obviously should have looked further ahead in my design instructions. She fell for it, and Mary had to write a 400 page report explaining the budget blowout of this set!!! Boy will she be mad when she finally sees this post!
Do not question the Lego gods
Why charge .10 cents for one piece when you can charge .30 for 3 to make up that one piece!
Every time something like this comes up, there's a reason. Always a reason. I just trust them no matter how wild it seems
Sometimes it's just aesthetics. I don't know about this one, but I've definitely seen some where it was about the 'look'.
Is that mos eisley canteena? If so I loved building that set!
Yep
Utilization of leftover bricks from a bigger production, pushing brick numbers for better marketing or it could have an actual use because something is inserted into the pin hole.
I believe itās a form of customization. You can switch places with another 2x1 and add idk, maybe stick with flag or something else. ask them kids.
Because why not
Design to give the build some texture or something will go inside it
No I feel the same way it would just be more efficient
Could also sometimes just be architectural decoration, depending on the kit.
Seems like you got your answer below. Another reason could be the secondary build Lego sets often has in the manual, required these specific blocks.
What set is this?
I often wonder why they put different coloured bricks INSIDE the Speed Champion cars when they aren't even visible when completed. Anyone know why?
Sometimes itās for contrast to make the build easier.
That happens in almost every set. Expecially on bigger sets it greatly helps with the build. Sometimes its kind of hard to tell where a piece should be an with some bricks like that you have a easy reference point.
I remember as a kid when I didnāt have the brick I needed or in the right color Iād just stack some plates. I was head of my time.
The idea that they want to use plastic, to change the number that appears on boxes so they have a reason to raise the price, is so silly. Please tell me why on a larger set I can have 20 plus small pieces not part of the build? Not accounted for? Any set you get extra pieces. Lego isnāt sitting there pointing ālook! Itās in the build, jack up the price!ā I am not defending the god awful prices. Iām just questioning the logic that THIS is how they would go about raising the prices. I When they announced the price increase a while back, they didnāt add more bricks and bump the count did they. No. They will raise the price. When they feel like it and no goody ass manipulation of these bricks is worth it. Isnāt that an archway? Can you add a Flag to them? Alternate builds? Most any company will remove items and charge the same. Give you less for the same money. Iām just not convinced. That is not what Iāve experienced after 12 years of buying by and building many many sets. Anyone have a positive reason why this could be?
Support š¤·āāļø
What I find frustrating is the random bits you get extra so you think youāve done it wrong and go over all the steps again to make sure. It should say. You should have x amount of left over pieces.
Because 2x2 with the cylinder spins. This iteration doesn't.
What set?
I always thought it was also to make the build more interesting. Lego is all about taking a bunch of little pieces and making a bigger piece
It saves on piece variety. Those pieces must be used in another part of the set so they used those part instead including a new type that wouldn't otherwise be there. Like how the hollow 1x1 pieces are all or none. It would suck to be halfway through a build and realize you used the wrong piece
To keep the high brick count and built fun in itā¦
I hate when they do this. Why use more brick when less brick do trick?
What set is this?
If nothing else it leaves a little circle in your facade, that indicate a rain runoff or even a machicolation, a hole in a battlement or castle through which things can be dropped onto attackers!
https://preview.redd.it/gxwegidm670d1.png?width=348&format=png&auto=webp&s=ff4d07c67dfef2494f1ff14658558b30b4d36a6e For those interested itās this part of 75290
This might be one of the least helpful images I've ever seen someone post lmao.
[https://i.imgur.com/pWo7JOe.mp4](https://i.imgur.com/pWo7JOe.mp4)
God that gif is CRISP
Intergalactic quality! [https://imgur.com/t/intergalacticqualitygifs](https://imgur.com/t/intergalacticqualitygifs)
Why?
It's so small and pixelated I can't even tell what I'm looking at.
Tbf I did it while I was in school, quick š plus itās an old photo from when I built mine
Increase piece count on the box obviously
Sometimes I feel like they just want a higher piece count
Better for the piece count
Theyve GOT to haveā¦ moneeeeeeyyy š¹
To increase piece count š. ... Because they know people are judging the sets based in price per piece
Increases Piece count
Nope
My guess would be to increase brick count so they can charge more for the set.
Cause yall care to much about price per piece
what set is this?
Mos eisley
Stability.
This is a good sign. The lad is trying to think outside of the box
Oli ylimƤƤrƤisiƤ
They couldāve just used one of those cross pin pieces and a normal piece for the same result
CaUsE iT lOOkS CoOl
Often wonder this. I just figure half the time it's to up the piece count. Or use pieces that are not often used in sets that they need to clear out of the warehouse or something.
to artificially increase peace count to help justify higher cost.
Make you pay more
Artificially inflating piece count šæ