How many sets are to true minifig scale? They can be UCS or normal sets. I'm trying to start a collection of minifig scale sets.

Tricky question, as minifigs are a bit too wide relative to their height. From the UCS line, I guess the 10212 Shuttle and the 75060 Slave I are minifig-scale. The 10179 Falcon is a bit off, as far as I know.

No idea about other sets, but I'm quite interested in the answer to that as well

I feel like the AT-STs Lego has released have been relatively well scaled, and the Shuttle and Slave I Rob0 mentioned are definitely close. I also feel like some ships, i.e. the later renditions of the Naboo starfighter, B-Wing, and X-Wings are close to minifig scale. Other than that, some location-based sets are probably to scale (ones that come in pieces, like Niima Outpost) but not many come to mind. Good luck in your search

The latest B-Wing (from last year?) seems pretty close to perfect mini-fig scale, I think, although I haven't done the measurements/mathematics., and have never seen the UCS in hand to know better about it. Would I also be right in thinking that the 2014 (?) A-Wing is close as well? It seems just a little bigger than the new one (in the set with the Advanced Tie), and it's always struck me as a very compact ship, so looks right, particularly compared to the various Jedi Starfighters with the sort of bubble canopy, which really seem too small (although I like the second-most recent one a lot in terms of shape).

This is a good question, though. I love mini-figure scale when it comes to spaceships.

It depends what you mean by 'true' minifig scale.

If you for example mean the height of a minifig compared to an average height man in relation to the overall proportions of the model, only few sets come close. In this case the UCS Falcon, Shuttle and Slave 1.

I think the system sets in general are too small to be "true" minifig scale.

The falcon 75105 fits perfectly in minifig scale:

You've got a lot of guts coming here, after what you pulled. by hachiroku24, en Flickr

mortesv is correct. The only sets that have been promoted as being "minifigure scale" are the UCS Millennium Falcon, Imperial Shuttle, and Slave I sets.

Many other sets from the Star Wars theme could be considered to scale with minifigs, but it wouldn't really logical to physically measure them all.

Edited September 6, 20168 yr by The_Chosen_1

I thought the latest snow speeder to come out was pretty close.

Well, minifigure scale isn't that easy to define as Rob0 already pointed out their proportions are not accurate to the human body. However, if you go with the usual "3 studs = 1 metre" and are very strikt with your measurements then almost none of the sets are minifigure scale.

Except for the UCS Falcon, Slave I and Imperial Shuttle the ones closest to minifig-scale are usually the medium sized sets like the X-Wings or Y-Wings. They are always off by a couple of studs but they're meant as toys after all.

The bigger ships like the Falcon playsets and Republic Frigate, etc. are obviously way out of Scale. They are usually referred to as being "play-scale".

While the big ships are usually scaled down, the smaller ones (Rey's Speeder, Speederbikes, Snowspeeder, etc.) are often larger than they should be in order to be sturdy and playable while still fitting minifigures.

As Irish437 mentioned the Snowspeeder, lets take that one as an example. The Snowspeeders in Empire Strikes Back are slightly longer than five metres which equals a bit more than 15 studs (5m * 3 = 15 studs) in minifig scale. The most recent playset is 21 studs long which isn't a terrible difference but still it's notable.

Now that's an interessting question - though the many difficulties can be read above.

I think the last Rebels A-Wing, Y-Wing & X-Wings were pretty close. Not including TFA X-Wing's since the one from the movie was actually pretty "small" & the Lego set was more of an upgradet EP IV X-Wing.

- the last EP IV Escape pod

- some of the Jedi Star Fighters

- some speeders, for example the last Landspeeder

- the RO AT-ST

- UCS Slave I

I guess if you are not that strict you could use most 1-2 pilot crafts + many of the small & mid sized ground vehicles.

There's a few things that make it almost impossible to make any set minifigure scale, being:

- Minifig scale to width, lenght, or head size e.g.

- Minifig scale in height including helmet/hair or without

- then again this is different for all minifigs, as not every fig has the same height (with gear) and also the characters from Star Wars don't have a set height.

- The actual canon lenght of vehicles is sometimes not set, and subject for change. The lenght of the falcon has changed a few times over the years, for example.

In conclusion, there's no way to have something really be minifig scale, something will also be about right, so I wouldn't focus on trying to have the dimensions of your Lego creations right, rather the proportions, sometimes even make it a few studs longer if that will make it look better in the end

Some weeks ago I tried to do some rough comparisons of sets to minifigs with length data used from wookieepedia, and a lot is actually pretty close!

Examples include: X-wing, Y-wing, A-wings, Ties, Snowspeeders, Droid fighters (except droid tri-fighter, that one is barely 3 minifigs in universe), Jedi starfighters I & II, Republic Gunship, AT-TE, AAT

I can only think of Jedi starfighter, ucs slave I, and ucs shuttle

I started to disassemble my Red Five X-Wing to just display minifig scale ships.

I agree that for UCS sets 10179 Falcon, 10212 Imperial Shuttle and 75060 Slave 1 are all pretty much there... No matter how much people say system scale Falcons are minifig scale they're not... Nowhere near.

9493 X-Wing was pretty close but it could do with a canopy update from the TFA sets, the Snowspeeders are petty close as they are.... Same with Speeder Bike, 9495 Y-Wing and 75050 B-Wing are close too. You could say the same for most system scale single pilot vessels such as the A-Wing, TIE Fighter etc

I agree what most people had mentioned. UCS Slave 1 and UCS MF is very close.

The falcon 75105 fits perfectly in minifig scale

I will debunk this claim simply because you can also recreate the same photo with UCS Millennium Falcon. The picture reference is merely a manipulation of depth of field, distance and perceived scale brought by optical illusion.

TIEs are not far off either. :)

Let's not forget the bad guys.

I will debunk this claim simply because you can also recreate the same photo with UCS Millennium Falcon. The picture reference is merely a manipulation of depth of field, distance and perceived scale brought by optical illusion.

Well, that's actually impossible. I can't even put the UCS Falcon in that table because of the size. The distances between the ship and the minifigs where practically the same as in the movie (probably Han was closer to the ship).

Anyway, here I have a couple of more shots that I took with the phone, where there is less room to manipulate the shot:

The garbage will do by hachiroku24, en Flickr

And the best pic to compare the size:

What a piece of junk! by hachiroku24, en Flickr

As you can see, the UCS Falcon in the last one would look absurdly big.

Another couple of non-Lego examples.

If you have played Battlefront, there is a map where you can explore the outside of the Falcon. The Falcon is atually really small compared with the idea that some people have.

Another one, the leaked pics from the Episode VII:

You can see how a X-Wing practically covers the entire circle (you can check it yourself) of the Falcon. The X Wing looks smaller because is just a stick with two wings, but there is not so much difference between both.

If we compare a Lego X-Wing (the 75102 or the 9493) with the 17105, the X-Wing is only a little bigger than the Falcon's circle section, but that's because the X-Wing is a little bigger that it should be.

This is why setting a minifig scale becomes almost impossible. In terms of the Falcon, the ship is 34,75m. It has to have this size for the internal sets to make sense. However most of the exterior shots of the ship in the OT was made with smaller set pieces. They were the size where a normal person would have to duck to get though the hypothetical walkways.

But if you want the falcon to be able to hold wookies and humans 34,75m is the way to go. This is why the system scale version has disproportionate cockpits - otherwise they could not fit the minifigs, meaning the ships in general is not "true" minifig scale.

AT 34,75m the UCS Falcon makes sense - even though the sticker says 26,7m - ;)

Edited September 8, 20168 yr by mortesv

The comparison picture makes it clear that it's not minifig scale. Just by the position of Han as well as the height of the others relative to the cockpit shows that set is too small to be minifig scale

The system scale falcons are definitely not minifig scale. Not even close.

Well, that's actually impossible. I can't even put the UCS Falcon in that table because of the size. The distances between the ship and the minifigs where practically the same as in the movie (probably Han was closer to the ship).

We can hardly judge the scale of a set based on how it fits into your photo setup, especially since in that case, your table would be representing a matte painting of a docking platform, not a physical set that we could measure.

If you have played Battlefront, there is a map where you can explore the outside of the Falcon. The Falcon is atually really small compared with the idea that some people have.

Likewise, while I'll reserve judgment in this particular case since I haven't played the new Battlefront, video games in general are a terrible reference for canon information.

The comparison picture makes it clear that it's not minifig scale. Just by the position of Han as well as the height of the others relative to the cockpit shows that set is too small to be minifig scale

Agreed, if anything, that comparison makes it obvious that the System Falcon is far too small to be minifig scale. The cockpit section is roughly okay, but that's because it's absurdly large compared to the rest of the set.

Another one, the leaked pics from the Episode VII:

[snip]

You can see how a X-Wing practically covers the entire circle (you can check it yourself) of the Falcon. The X Wing looks smaller because is just a stick with two wings, but there is not so much difference between both.

If we compare a Lego X-Wing (the 75102 or the 9493) with the 17105, the X-Wing is only a little bigger than the Falcon's circle section, but that's because the X-Wing is a little bigger that it should be.

In that set picture from Ep. VII, the T-70 doesn't come close to covering the length of the Falcon's disk. It gets from about the engines to just fore of the dorsal turret.

Thanks BrickDoctor. You wrote everything I wanted to say.. :D

About the new Battlefront. From what I've seen on YouTube they put a lot of effort into making it look as close to the films as they could within their practical and financial limits. Especially the Echo Base set is represented excellently and hachiroku is not totally wrong about the Falcon seeming small.

However, in the game you can still walk underneath it (which a minifigures definitely cannot do with the system scale Falcon, just look at the boarding ramp) and then there is the issue of the Episode V Falcon being smaller than the one from A New Hope. For practical reasons they cheated on the size of the Falcon film set, making it as small as possible while still looking believable. If you look closely you will notice that the cockpit is a bit out of proportion on the live action set. Similar issues can be spotted with the Imperial Shuttle set but that's a whole other story. In that case though the film makers later said that the studio scale models are more accurate representations than the full scale mock ups, as no compromises were necessary at the smaller scale.

The canon length of the Falcon is 34.75 m though and that translates into about 110 studs. As the play sets are only around 50 studs long I think that makes the case very clear.

Edited September 8, 20168 yr by Kit Bricksto

And the best pic to compare the size:

[snip]

[snip]

That's a really bad comparison, and actually highlights how much it isn't minifig scale.

Edited September 19, 20168 yr by Brickdoctor
Please don't quote images.

Slave 1 for sure, and perhaps the UCS Imperial shuttle too.

I own the UCS Slave 1 and it seems very well scaled to minifigs, even though parts of it seem a bit small, especially the upper/front part of the ship (but thats just a feeling, have no idea what the original models measurements are).

Aside from that the FO Special Forces Tie Fighter doesnt seem to scale that bad either as does the AT-AP from the ROTS (that one is maybe just a couple of studs too small in terms of height).

Millennium Falcon actual length = 34.52 meters (or 34.75 meters,there are apparently 2 lengths possibly canon for this ship)

UCS Millennium Falcon Length = 84 centimeters Per Lego advert

using 3 studs = 1 meter, the UCS Millennium falcon should have been 82.85cm (or 83.40cm) in length, a deviation of only 1.15cm (0.6cm) or 1.44 (or .75)studs.

so by the numbers the UCS Millennium is virtually perfect for Minifig scale, with only minor deviation caused by being built from Lego. the UCS Slave I, and UCS Shuttle are both equally close to perfect Minifig scale as well. as for other sets it is easy to apply some simple math to sets you think are close as long as you have the reference numbers from the actual object you are comparing it too. (there was another thread once with a sold list for this, which you can find Here *note, I previously used a different scale factor for this same ship, but the conclusion was much the same*)

Edited September 19, 20168 yr by GallardoLU