Criteria when restoring old sets

[SpacePolice89]

This discussion has come up in some other threads and I find the subject very interesting. What criteria do you have when restoring sets? When I buy old used sets (mainly from the mid 80s to mid 90s) I always try to buy sets that are described to be in good or excellent condition but sometimes for various reasons I buy sets that have missing pieces or have damaged pieces. For example if I buy a Futuron set from the 80s I try to keep the pieces as original as possible when replacing damaged or yellowed pieces. In most cases I have period correct replacements that I can use but sometimes I have to use a newer version of the same piece but I try to avoid that as much as possible. I never mix gray and bluish gray. I accept very little yellowing and scratches. Only if the yellowing is very minor I keep those pieces and I also replace pieces with visible scratches. I never throw away any pieces because of yellowing or scratches even if they are very yellowed or have major scratches or tooth marks, those pieces I use in non visible places in MOCs or inside mountains/hills when building landscapes. When I build MOCs or idea book builds for old themes I don't care if the pieces are new or old, I only try to stick to period correct pieces for official sets. When it comes to stickers (I hate stickers) I use original stickers if they are available and in good condition but that is seldom the case so most of the time I use replica stickers that look the same as the originals. I always want original instructions for my sets. What are your standards when restoring sets?  

[Feuer Zug]

With few exceptions, I haven't tried to restore old sets that I come across in bulk purchases. Those I do rebuild, I try to use period pieces (often from the same bulk purchase) to fill in the gaps. If they aren't there, then I go to my parts bins. Instructions are great, but I'm not buying old LEGO for the sets, just bulk parts.

[Stereo]

I only replace parts if they're functionally damaged (broken or deep toothmarks so they can't be built normally), yellowing and scratches don't really bother me.  I only try to match the era of parts if the set seems worth having 100%, a lot of the time I'm fine with building it 95% correct (eg. using a dark bluish grey BURP instead of dark grey, or 8x16 plate instead of baseplate) cause I just want to try the build, not mark it as a complete set in my collection.

[JesseNight]

I do it simpler. I try to keep it visually accurate, but I won't go as far as spending time into researching all possible variations or what could be the precise year of my bricks. If it looks accurate, it's good enough for me.
In some cases I am not afraid to stray away from being accurate, if it makes a set better without using newer parts that are out of place for the time.

[kevin8]

Interesting threadn. 

In the last few months I have bought several sets from the 70s and 80s, complete with box.

Often parts are a bit marked, sometimes they are missing. I have learned that there are some distinctive signs of specific periods of Lego, such as the position of the injection point of the ABS or the codes indicated below. 

I mostly try to use parts from the right period, sometimes using pieces that I have in bulk, sometimes buying them. Sometimes if they are very marked I polish them with abrasive paste from a body shop.

For the boxes, when they are broken I repair them with strips of paper/cardboard by gluing them in unseen areas. 

It is a bit of a long job, but sometimes it is worth it.

[ChrisXY]

Yeah, opened some threads about that matter. It probaby matters the most for high price sets? I mean buying an expensive 1970 LEGO set but getting piece from 2024 is probably a little off.

[SpacePolice89]

On 5/12/2025 at 12:22 AM, ChrisXY said:

Yeah, opened some threads about that matter. It probaby matters the most for high price sets? I mean buying an expensive 1970 LEGO set but getting piece from 2024 is probably a little off.

I think there's a huge difference if you are restoring sets for yourself or for selling.

[ChrisXY]

On 5/13/2025 at 10:42 AM, SpacePolice89 said:

I think there's a huge difference if you are restoring sets for yourself or for selling.

Definitely. But to be honest, you never know if you might sell. So I will restore as best as possible so if I am going to sell, I dont have to go another round.

[SpacePolice89]

15 hours ago, ChrisXY said:

Definitely. But to be honest, you never know if you might sell. So I will restore as best as possible so if I am going to sell, I dont have to go another round.

I only buy sets for my personal collection (which is not for sale under any circumstances), so if I buy a Classic Space set from the late 70s and it's missing a piece I might use a modern equivalent if I don't have a period correct one. Of course I prefer period correct pieces but I don't always have them available and sometimes I might replace a piece if it's heavily damaged or yellowed.  

Edited May 26 by SpacePolice89

[ukbajadave]

Not hugely classic but currently trying to sort out sets from offsprings Lego city collection (2008-2015 ish).

In the case of big sets like fire and police stations chunks are still intact so I use those first, then look for parts that are similar i.e. correct jumper plates, tiles with grooves etc. then finish with whatever is available from bricklink or PAB.

Everything is for my display only so I'm not too fussy but if I was buying an expensive old set I'd want original or period correct pieces only.

Having said that I have been looking at mould numbers when I have more than one prospective part so maybe it does matter just a little