Folding Short Legs

[Teh Stud]

Has anyone heard a good reason why Lego hasn't made short legs that fold? The short Duplo figures can sit, so why not Lego?

[JopieK]

Well, there are certain people that have successfully modded the long legs:

With LEGO you never know...

[davee123]

Well, for starters, they'd be more expensive. With the current stubby legs, there's only 1 required mold. With 'folding' legs, you'd need at least 2 molds-- preferably 3 (one for the waist, one for the left and right legs). And then you need them to be assembled.

They might also be a little too small for tiny hands to manipulate. Hence, they might only be able to be included for sets in ranges for older kids, which may limit the use of the elements. That's just wild speculation, though.

Finally, I'm not sure it would do very much. The height of the figure wouldn't change noticeably from sitting to standing-- and since the legs wouldn't be long enough to stick out very far in front of the figure, it wouldn't really resemble someone sitting as well as the normal legs (which are already too short to be in proportion for human legs).

So, my guess is that it's not sufficient gain for the price involved. Easily double the cost of the element (if not 3x, 4x, 5x or more), for what amounts to very little difference, and a possibly more limited-use element.

Not to say that I don't WANT a pair-- they'd certainly be cool. But I would guess that if you asked LEGO this question, that's the answer you'd probably get.

DaveE

[Teh Stud]

Please don't take offense, but I was hoping someone has asked Lego and received an official response. I can speculate too...

Regarding three molds, they already have the hip mold, so they would only mood two molds.

Regarding making a difference, it would make a huge difference! You could pose children, hobbits, dwarves, etc. it isn't as fun having them all stand at attention.

[Hey Joe]

It's possible that they've never really thought that it was necessary? If enough people request it I'm sure they'd do it, wouldn't they? There's a 'wish-list' floating around the site somewhere, perhaps add it?

[Bilbo Baggins]

I think that foldable short legs are a real need, specially for the hobbits that are such important characters.

[Zachattacx]

I think that foldable short legs are a real need, specially for the hobbits that are such important characters.

And younger Lloyd from Ninjago, but yeah as much as I would want it I don't think it would happen.

[JackJonespaw]

Well, for starters, they'd be more expensive. With the current stubby legs, there's only 1 required mold. With 'folding' legs, you'd need at least 2 molds-- preferably 3 (one for the waist, one for the left and right legs). And then you need them to be assembled.

Some good points. However, Lego would only need 2 molds, as they could just reuse the regular waist.

[davee123]

Please don't take offense, but I was hoping someone has asked Lego and received an official response. I can speculate too...

That's fine-- just trying to prepare you for what the answer would probably be. Most of the time with this sort of thing, it comes down to cost: "The small benefit wasn't worth the cost". I haven't heard an answer to this particular question from LEGO (maybe someone out there has), but based on what we've heard before, it seems a likely reply.

Regarding three molds, they already have the hip mold, so they would only mood two molds.

However, Lego would only need 2 molds, as they could just reuse the regular waist.

Yes. That's why I explicitly said "you'd need at least 2 molds-- preferably 3". Why not re-use the waist mold? Well, because then you don't get a lot of separation between the legs. Notice that normal minifig legs have about 8mm height-wise of separation between the legs, and the waist actually fills in the top 8mm where the rounded joint is. That means, if you re-used the waist, and kept the "short" (aka "stubby") legs at 9.6mm, you'd only have 1.6mm of height for the separation between the legs-- half a plate worth!

Hence, if you were going to be making short legs that articulated, I'd recommend making that separation as large as possible, to still try and resemble "legs". If you cut off the bottom part of the disc on the existing waist, you could get about 4.3mm of separation, which is probably pretty reasonable.

That could also be another reason for the prevention of the articulated short legs, too-- that any design they came up with prevented sufficient separation for kids to appreciate the fact that they were, in fact, "legs". That seems less likely to me, but possible.

Anyway, like I said, it would take at least 2 new molded elements, preferably 3. And, I should clarify that's not to say that it requires 2-3 distinct *MOLDS* per se. They COULD do all 3 in a single mold. It just makes things more difficult (and therefore more expensive) when you want to separate out the distinct parts after they're ejected from the mold cavity.

In the end, it just strikes me as a pretty expensive part to make, when compared to the 'standard' short legs. I would guess that LEGO probably play-tested several options, and found that kids were fine with non-articulate legs. If they weren't, you'd probably see stubby legs with similar connections to the standard minifigs.

DaveE

[natelite]

you'd probably need new torsos too to overcome the perception of stubby legs.

[deskp]

duplo is much larger....

Also lego small bendable legs would looks too round and odd.

[Vindice]

I don't think this is an idea that's been explored to any great length by LEGO. As has previously been mentioned, if there is enough call for it then i can see them doing it.

We seem to be using a greater deal of mini-minifigures than ever before now and the LOTR range will perpetuate this.

The main thing that holds me and my brother back from animating LOTR is the lack of poseable legs for the characters. I think the mod is really clever but I would prefer the finish of an actual mold.

[davee123]

I don't think this is an idea that's been explored to any great length by LEGO.

I don't know if I'd say that-- I expect they did market research on it back in the late 1990's or early 2000's, and made a decision to go with the single-piece stubby legs. LEGO is pretty good about exploring a lot of options-- they just don't discuss all of them with the hobby community.

I believe the issue got pushed with licensed figures. How were they going to do certain characters without some sort of variant on the minifigure? Prior to 1999, the only "child" minifig (in a non-Maxifig set) that I'm aware of is Timmy from Time Cruisers in 1996? I can't think of any others offhand.

Anyway, some characters, like young Anakin were probably "acceptable" to kids, despite their full 'adult' height. And others (jawas, Harry Potter goblins, etc) are lesser characters that MIGHT be able to be avoided, or might be unfamiliar enough to kids to again be acceptable. But other characters (particularly, I'm thinking Yoda and the ewoks) are less fitting, and are pretty prominent. Who's going to accept a Yoda that's as tall as Darth Vader?

I would guess that there were a lot of ideas on the table, like individually poseable legs, connected poseable legs, fixed legs, smaller torsos, smaller arms-- maybe even smaller heads. They likely tested these, did their evaluations, and decided that the best bang-for-the-buck was the "short" legs that we have today.

I'm not sure if they would have re-evaluated since then-- my guess would be probably not with any seriousness. But admittedly, the decision was more than 10 years ago now. At the time, LEGO was struggling, and didn't have cheap production as we see in China today. Would they make the same choice today? No idea.

DaveE

[BrickG]

I've come to hate the short legs due to their inability to move.

Minifigures should be as articulated as possible while still having that Lego feel. If there was some magic way to make the current minifigures poseable like in the CGI I'd freakin' love it ;P.

I used to like my Dwarves but their inability to pose their legs just became too much. Their poses were therefore almost always boring. I hate the hobbits from LotRs too for the same reason.

But making them smaller has it's problems. Simply cutting out the middle part so the circular top part meets the feet is kind of ugly. Makes them look like they have circular ugly legs.

[Faefrost]

I think we overlook one of the major technical hurdles that at least in the past have discouraged Lego from making jointed child legs. In the adult minifigs part of the purpose for the position able legs ( in fact the only real "play" purpose originally envisioned) was to be able to sit hem on something and have them lock in by clutching the studs. The problem with the short legs is there isn't enough space to allow for the connection points if you hinge them. It's a one or the other scenario.

And before anyone says it, yes I realize that the Newer Friends mini dolls also lack this connection point. So it is possible that we will see something new in this area. But I am just not sure if or why they would put that much effort and resources into it? About the only thing that might precipitate Lego re-engineering the short legs would be the Hobbit movies, with their over abundance of very short main characters.

[fred67]

I think we overlook one of the major technical hurdles that at least in the past have discouraged Lego from making jointed child legs. In the adult minifigs part of the purpose for the position able legs ( in fact the only real "play" purpose originally envisioned) was to be able to sit hem on something and have them lock in by clutching the studs. The problem with the short legs is there isn't enough space to allow for the connection points if you hinge them. It's a one or the other scenario.

I disagree... there's room enough for at least one set of holes (one on each leg) in the back. They may have to make a different mechanism than they do for the "adult" legs (smaller "axles"), so they wouldn't be interchangeable (although, if they redesigned it so that it would work for smaller legs, they might just use that design for new adult legs - that'd have people screaming, I guess).

It may mean that taking them apart to arrange them as you see fit wouldn't work (perhaps too easily broken), but since you can't do that with current short legs, I don't see what people would be able to complain about.

[AmperZand]

I'm resurrecting this thread because I too was searching for articulated short legs and have recently made a discovery: there's a company called BrickFortress ( http://www.brickfortress.com ) that makes them. I bought some of their legs in each of the available colours and here's my review broken down into nine criteria.

1. Functionality 9/10

The BrickFortress legs are as articulated as standard LEGO minifig legs. You can seat the minifigs on studs as each leg has a hole in the back. When standing, the minifigs with the articulated short legs are fractionally taller than minifigs with LEGO's short legs, but the additional height is less than adding a backpack (such as http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemPic.asp?P=92590 ) or similar neck part. The joints of the BrickFortress legs are a tiny bit stiffer than those of standard LEGO legs.

2. Compatibility 8/10

The BrickFortress legs slot into LEGO torsos perfectly. They come in five colours: black, dark blue, light grey, reddish brown and tan. The shininess of the ABS used matches LEGO's exactly. And the colours are identical to LEGO's legs except for the dark blue. The shade of blue of the articulated legs is ever so slightly lighter than the official dark blue. But I could only see the difference in strong light and I have exceptional colour acuity. You wouldn't notice the difference unless you were looking for it.

3. Material 9/10

The articulated short legs seem to be made of the same ABS that LEGO uses for its non-Chinese elements. There is no problem with translucency; the BrickFortress legs are completely opaque.

4. Manufacture 9/10

The BrickFortress legs are made to the same high standard as official legs. The marks where the legs are separated from the sprue are slightly more pronounced than on official parts, but nothing that can't easily be tidied up with an X-acto knife or scalpel. The BrickFortress legs are all identical to each other in their manufacture, i.e. they are consistently high quality.

5. Variety 6/10

The BrickFortress legs are currently only available in five colours and no printing. It would be great if they came in dark brown and in green at least. If they were printed with pockets and others with armour (in addition to coming unprinted), that would be even better.

6. Usefulness 10/10

If you use short legs for jawas, hobbits, dwarves or kids, I can't imagine why you wouldn't want articulated legs rather than static ones. I don't easily give a perfect score, but BrickFortress deserves top marks for usefulness.

7. Originality 10/10

Although AFOLs have been modding articulated short legs from standard LEGO legs for a while, I'm not aware that anyone has actually moulded short, folding legs before. Another perfect score for BrickFortress.

8. Service 8/10

The BrickFortress site is clear and easy to navigate. Buying is straightforward. Although a volume discount is available, you only get it if all the legs are the same colour, which was a bit frustrating. The parts were protected in padded envelopes and delivered quickly internationally. I found the company friendly and communicative.

9. Value 9/10

Considering the time and effort that must have gone into designing and perfecting these legs, the $1.15 price is reasonable. They used to be more, but I think $1 to $1.15 is about right. International shipping, though fast, was a bit expensive.

Overall, I was very impressed with these legs. I would have preferred if they came in more colours. Still, BrickFortress has made a great start with the current range. Unless you're a purest or on an extremely tight budget, do yourself a favour and get some of these legs. You'll wonder why we ever settled for static short legs.

Edited February 24, 2013 by AmperZand

[BlueberryWaffles]

AmperZand, is the reddish brown legs actually dark brown? They look like it in the picture. (if so, I will order one for every single hobbit I have)

[Aanchir]

I'm resurrecting this thread because I too was searching for articulated short and have recently made a discovery: there's a company called BrickFortress ( http://www.brickfortress.com ) that makes them. I bought some of their legs in each of the available colours and here's my review broken down into nine criteria.

*snip*

Overall, I was very impressed with these legs. I would have preferred if they came in more colours. Still, BrickFortress has made a great start with the current range. Unless you're a purest or on an extremely tight budget, do yourself a favour and get some of these legs. You'll wonder why we ever settled for static short legs.

I think these short legs do a good job demonstrating exactly why official short legs don't exist. Take a look at this pic. Neither the standing nor the sitting legs even look very much like legs-- they look like a pair of feet fused with the figure's hips. They're close to the same height whether sitting or standing, It's a lot less natural-looking than the official short minifig legs, which have the hips somewhat recessed into the torso to lend more realistic childlike/dwarflike proportions. Don't get me wrong, they're well-designed with a lot of attention to matching official LEGO part design quality, but they seem ineffective when it comes to actually looking like articulated legs. You'd be about as well-off just using a pair of headlight bricks or 3937+3938-- both solutions would seem about as leg-like as these.

The real question regarding this issue is if you're in the business of customizing, why not make your "short legs" one plate taller and the torso one plate shorter? That would raise the hips of the figure and lend it an overall more realistic appearance. The obvious answer, though, is that while "official" short minifig legs can be replaced with a custom solution with almost no real loss, the same is not true for torsos, which often have specialized prints that would be difficult and time-consuming to replicate. Since licensed themes tend to use short legs quite plentifully, for characters whose designs are too distinctive to be acceptable without detailed torso patterns, it doesn't seem anyone's attempted this ideal solution.

Edited February 24, 2013 by Aanchir

[Omicron]

The real question regarding this issue is if you're in the business of customizing, why not make your "short legs" one plate taller and the torso one plate shorter?

Well I think the real question regarding this issue is if you're in the business of toymaking, why not make your "short legs" moving?

Gotta give more credit to the custom world for accomplishing yet another feat that Lego apparently says they can't do.

-Omi

[tedbeard]

I bought some a while ago and I think they are great. Well made and reasonably priced, they are a good complement to the existing solid legs.

[AmperZand]

AmperZand, is the reddish brown legs actually dark brown? They look like it in the picture. (if so, I will order one for every single hobbit I have)

Unfortunately not. BrickFortress's reddish brown is a perfect match with LEGO's reddish brown despite how it appears in the picture. I would love if they did them in dark brown for the same reason as you. I also use short dark brown legs for my goblins/Moria orcs. I understand that BrickFortress are aware of the demand for other colours and are planning on expanding the range. I'll be keeping an eye on their site and will post in this thread if/when there is any news.

[Aanchir]

Well I think the real question regarding this issue is if you're in the business of toymaking, why not make your "short legs" moving?

Gotta give more credit to the custom world for accomplishing yet another feat that Lego apparently says they can't do.

-Omi

I give plenty of credit to the customizers for their ingenuity. But frankly, in this case, I don't think it's something TLG can't do, I think it's something they know better than to do since it would lend a figure a far less natural appearance, as demonstrated here. One of the wonderful things about customizers is that they often can create parts that look like something TLG could make but which they (for whatever reason) won't. Brickarms, with its high-detail minifigure weapons, is one example. TLG goes out of their way to avoid realistic detail in their minifigure firearms, leaving a niche for Brickforge to cater to builders who desire them. TLG's reasons for avoiding doing this themselves are not invalid, but likewise Brickarms isn't in the wrong for catering to that audience, because they run two very different operations.

TLG could probably introduce a short (1 x 2 x 1) torso and medium-sized (1 x 2 x 1 1/3) legs, but they'd face the same roadblock as customizers: such a design would not be especially backwards-compatible with previously released dwarf/child minifigures. And since posable short legs would be a pre-assembled part rather than just a simple new part, it would probably not be a worthwhile investment to introduce posable legs that have next to no impact on a figure's height, and which hardly look like legs in most positions.

[AndyC]

Well I think the real question regarding this issue is if you're in the business of toymaking, why not make your "short legs" moving?

Gotta give more credit to the custom world for accomplishing yet another feat that Lego apparently says they can't do.

Not really. I'm sure TLG could make legs like that, but as Aanchir points out, they just don't look very much like legs. It's not hard to believe that TLG looked at this and rejected the idea for precisely that reason. Just because they don't make the part doesn't mean they couldn't.

Edited February 24, 2013 by AndyC

[SheepEater]

I agree with Aanchir and AndyC. Those look like crap. I thought for years that the only way for Lego to do it is to redesign the torso, and as pointed out, it would make them incompatible with the othe regular figs, and older short figs.