ApophisV Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 Yeah, I did it again. After buying Mega Bloks and "Ligao" I purchased a Best Lock set today. It was only 2,99 Quote
xwingyoda Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 WTF is that horrendous ripp off >:-( Quick, hide this from Phes before he sees it and gets a heart attack :-D :-P It reminds me of the "cheap" imitations and fakes. TLC could easilly undertake an infringement action with this brand... Nice review though Apo ;-) *yoda* Quote
ApophisV Posted March 28, 2006 Author Posted March 28, 2006 It reminds me of the "cheap" imitations and fakes. Actually this is one point that makes Best Lock appealing (in a morally way) more to me than Mega Blocks or all those other fake brands: They didn't try to copy the LEGO bricks, they invented their own parts completely from scratch! There is not a SINGLE part in this set that looks identically like a LEGO part! If the quality of the material would be better this sure could be a great source for additional parts TLC didn't make so far. Quote
Aredhel Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 That just looks interesting! (j/k) In my opinion the head looks really funny (at the moment I am just watching Sleepy Hollow, so this fits a bit- you know...rolling head and so on ;-)) This is just again a very good example for the greatness of TLC! Every other "bricks" (in my opinion you cannot call them bricks because bricks just belong to Lego X-D ) cannot be compared to Lego. Quote
ApophisV Posted March 28, 2006 Author Posted March 28, 2006 So...how much points out of 10? ;-) Since I just discovered that however the tools can be attached after some carefully trying to LEGO hands I would say 2 / 10 (LEGO scale) 3 / 10 (Construction Toy Brand scale) Quote
Governor Mister Phes Posted March 29, 2006 Governor Posted March 29, 2006 What's this about purists keeping away? I don't know what a purist is (or do I?) so I'll just go ahead and throw some comments in anyway... This set is like a 4+ Pirate set at mini-figure scale! Its definitely a blatant rip off of the red coated Imperial Guards from yesteryear but the quality is ridiculously inferior. The colours look drab, the design on the mini-figure looks dull, the quality of the plastic looks cheap. The chest looks like it could almost fit two figures in it so that seems rather poor in the scaling department. About the only positive thing I can mention is that it contains a goodly amount of accessories. What was the official year of this set's release and where did this particular one originate from? Quote
ApophisV Posted March 29, 2006 Author Posted March 29, 2006 First of all: I think I found the number of the set, atop the bar code is a 4 digit number, 3609, this would fit to the adverised sets' numbers (3610, 3611, 3612, 4219). What's this about purists keeping away? I don't know what a purist is (or do I?) so I'll just go ahead and throw some comments in anyway... It's just that some people wouldn't ever use anything than LEGO (aren't they called "LEGO purists"? At least at a German website they are) and I only wanted to avoid unthoughtful "That's blasphemy!"-posts! ;-) This set is like a 4+ Pirate set at mini-figure scale! I made a comparrison between a LEGO fig and the Best Lock one: The Best Lock figure is slightly taller than the LEGO fig, but thats just a subtle difference. Its definitely a blatant rip off of the red coated Imperial Guards from yesteryear but the quality is ridiculously inferior. The colours look drab, the design on the mini-figure looks dull, the quality of the plastic looks cheap. This summarized exactly this set's appearance! The chest looks like it could almost fit two figures in it so that seems rather poor in the scaling department. That made me starting an experiment and... you are right! About the only positive thing I can mention is that it contains a goodly amount of accessories. Yeah, and I also experimented with them, if you carefully attach them to LEGO minifig hands they can be locked in the right position. Actually those accessories are the one and only highlight of the set and I think after all they were worth the money. What was the official year of this set's release and where did this particular one originate from? I can't find any date on the package or instruction sheet with a date, so no idea about the production date. (maybe at www.best-lock.com) The set was produced in China, but there are three manifaturer and distribution adresses on it, one in China, another one in England and the third is in Florida. Hope that helps! ;-) Quote
Kikuichimonji Posted March 29, 2006 Posted March 29, 2006 Man...the legs on that Best Lock MF are seriously ugly... :-X Quote
Sir Dillon Posted March 29, 2006 Posted March 29, 2006 :-X Thanks for posting this; it reminds me why I pay more money for good quality LEGO. ;-) The chest might make a good coffin... Quote
ApophisV Posted March 29, 2006 Author Posted March 29, 2006 The chest might make a good coffin... Yeah, I also had a similar idea, though it looks more like a sarkophag than a coffin... It would be great ot have them in grey instead of brown, that would look even better as a sarcophag.... Quote
Governor Mister Phes Posted April 27, 2006 Governor Posted April 27, 2006 Despite all the negativity regarding the inferiority of Best Lock at least it has a Pirate theme... It seems all the cheap imitations of LEGO have a pirate theme... Does The LEGO Company not think they can compete with these imitation brands hence no SYSTEM Pirate theme since 1997? Quote
Sir Dillon Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 It seems kind of silly that TLC would be scared of these clone brand pirate themes, but they might be... As I admit that M******** Pyrate them does look kind of cool. :-$ Or, maybe the last system theme of pirates didn't sell well, so TLC dosn't want to make more? I would tend to doubt that, as I always thought pirates sold well, but it might be true. Quote
Deinonychus Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 :-D Best-Lock is everything people accuse Megabloks of being...but I commend you for at least giving it a try and making up your own mind... But now you know better Quote
Governor Mister Phes Posted April 28, 2006 Governor Posted April 28, 2006 It seems kind of silly that TLC would be scared of these clone brand pirate themes, but they might be... As I admit that M******** Pyrate them does look kind of cool. :-$ Or, maybe the last system theme of pirates didn't sell well, so TLC dosn't want to make more? I would tend to doubt that, as I always thought pirates sold well, but it might be true. The last SYSTEM Pirate LEGO theme was the only SYSTEM Pirate LEGO theme there ever was! Unless you're referring to the horrible 4+ Pirate theme which isn't really system. I'm not sure how well that sold but The LEGO Company didn't expand the theme in 2005 or 2006 so maybe that's an indication that it wasn't popular enough to consider continuing. If you're referring to the latter years of the original SYSTEM Pirate LEGO theme then perhaps you're correct. From what I've read (I wasn't actually paying attention at the time) the prices were ridiculously high. Perhaps this is true because I have a 1996 LEGO catalogue (which I procured from eBay) and its previous owner had written in the price of a couple of the sets. The Red Beard Runner was priced at A$220/US$164 and the Armada Flagship was priced at $144/$107.50 which seems to me unreasonable for what these sets offer. I suspect that The LEGO Company killed off the SYSTEM Pirate LEGO theme through greed by over charging for the Pirate sets. Maybe they thought they could get away with it due to the theme's popularity, but by this stage they were also "ecconomising" the designs by reducing the piece count which made the sets look less substantial. Also it would appear the Islanders sub-theme did some damage and weren't as popular so this was a completely illogical recovery move on The LEGO Company's behalf. Combining reduced piece count, insubstantial design, damage by the Islander sub-theme and excessive prices its no wonder sales declined. Quote
Sir Dillon Posted April 28, 2006 Posted April 28, 2006 If you're referring to the latter years of the original SYSTEM Pirate LEGO theme then perhaps you're correct. Oh, yeah. :-$ That's what I meant. Red Beard Runner was priced at A$220/US$164 and the Armada Flagship was priced at $144/$107.50 which seems to me unreasonable for what these sets offer. Those prices do seem very unreasonable, but I don't remember them quite that high. Were those prices printed in the catalogue, or did the seller write them? IIRC the Red Beard Runner was 99.99 USD and the Armada Flagship was 49.99 USD. I could be wrong though, I have them both, but one was a present and the other I bought off e-bay. Even if I am right, I think that's still overpriced. Also it would appear the Islanders sub-theme did some damage and weren't as popular so this was a completely illogical recovery move on The LEGO Company's behalf. That could very well be true. I never liked the islanders as much as pirates, and never bought any of the sets that had Islanders in them. Quote
Governor Mister Phes Posted April 28, 2006 Governor Posted April 28, 2006 IIRC the Red Beard Runner was 99.99 USD and the Armada Flagship was 49.99 USD. I could be wrong though, I have them both, but one was a present and the other I bought off e-bay. Even if I am right, I think that's still overpriced. Firstly are you referring to the 2001 re-released version of The Red Beard Runner and Armada Flagship? If so it appears their prices were much cheaper than the original. Being re-released in 2001 also means the re-released sets had nothing to do with the 1997 cancelling of the Pirate theme as they obviously didn't exist a the time. Even if you did buy original versions off eBay the price can't really be compared to the shelf prices of 1997 because the fact they're no longer in production and potentially used/damaged/pieces missed devalues them anyway. Those prices do seem very unreasonable, but I don't remember them quite that high. Were those prices printed in the catalogue, or did the seller write them? The prices were hand written by the previous owner who I assume was looking at buying these sets at the time. These prices are Australian however, and LEGO is ridicuously more expensive in Australia compared to the rest of the world. That could very well be true. I never liked the islanders as much as pirates, and never bought any of the sets that had Islanders in them. The Islander theme was never really that popular at the time and I haven't heard much praise about them recently. But thats fine, because I like them! Quote
Peoples_General Posted April 30, 2006 Posted April 30, 2006 DISGUSTING!!! Clone Bricks! I shall muster my Lego army to defend all Lego-dom from this invasion of the heathens!!! Quote
Governor Mister Phes Posted April 30, 2006 Governor Posted April 30, 2006 Peoples General it would be interesting to see your mini-figure collection (if that's really yours) in closer detail. Could you take some close up pictures and create a new thread for it so we can all have a decent chit chat? Quote
General Redwater Posted March 28, 2010 Posted March 28, 2010 What's this about purists keeping away? I don't know what a purist is (or do I?) so I'll just go ahead and throw some comments in anyway...This set is like a 4+ Pirate set at mini-figure scale! Its definitely a blatant rip off of the red coated Imperial Guards from yesteryear but the quality is ridiculously inferior. The colours look drab, the design on the mini-figure looks dull, the quality of the plastic looks cheap. The chest looks like it could almost fit two figures in it so that seems rather poor in the scaling department. About the only positive thing I can mention is that it contains a goodly amount of accessories. What was the official year of this set's release and where did this particular one originate from? I agree 100% It does have bad colors and the scaling is way off. Quote
Joey Lock Posted March 28, 2010 Posted March 28, 2010 I agree 100% It does have bad colors and the scaling is way off. Way to dig up a dead thread! Quote
MillerTime Posted March 28, 2010 Posted March 28, 2010 (edited) Way to dig up a dead thread! Hahaha I saw March 28th as the date (which is today) for the first post but didn't see it was from 2006! 4 years old....I was wondering why the pictures wouldn't show. Edited March 28, 2010 by MillerTime Quote
General Redwater Posted March 28, 2010 Posted March 28, 2010 (edited) Way to dig up a dead thread! Yea! Edited March 28, 2010 by General Redwater Quote
CMP Posted March 28, 2010 Posted March 28, 2010 Way to dig up a dead thread! I think you mean to say: "Where'd you dig up that old fossil?" Han Solo to Luke Skywalker on Obi-Wan Kenobi. Quote
Captain Zuloo Posted March 28, 2010 Posted March 28, 2010 Ok everyone, let's either add something worth while or leave this thread be. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.