Worst instructions

[Runamuck]

While most instructions for LEGO sets are pretty good, especially these days, there have been some not so great instructions throughout the years.

So, what are the worst instructions that you have encountered for a LEGO set?

 

The strange thing about this is that there are several ways in which instructions can be bad. I’ll try to avoid problems that are caused as side-effects of being scans, although those can too have problems like colour distortion, graininess or splitting pictures up into two.

Some plans can be a bit annoying because the do too much in a single step, so you might overlook things being added, or have a cut-out for building some specific section, but then also add other pieces outside of that cut-out which you might overlook (6286 Skull’s Eye Schooner). Admittedly too little happening in each step can also be slightly annoying, as it can be trying for your patience.

One problem that a lot of people have complained about is when the colours are unclear. The most common problem is telling black and dark grey apart. This especially was a problem in the early- to mid-2000’s where plans got a more CGI looking. One set I remember having this problem is 7103 Jedi Duel.

In general the art in various problems can have some odd quirks. The aforementioned CGI plans, seen in themes like Star Wars and Island Xtreme Stunts, were pretty ugly in general. Earlier Pirates sets had an odd quirk in that the tricorn hat often looked much larger in the plans than it actually was on the figure.

But on the actual bad end of the scale we have other problems. When parts and plans don’t match it’s a problem. I have seen plans with colouring errors in them such as some early City sets having the wrong colour of hands (7236 Police Car) or 2009 Pirates sets having the wrong colour of arms (6239 cannon Battle). We also had sets with actual errata sheets (7019 Viking Fortress against the Fafnir Dragon). These kinds of errors sure are confusing.

There are also the occasional mismatches of pictures within the plans themselves like the box photo having things like plants in different places that the instructions show them (6266 Cannon Cove) or even outright colour errors in the box photo (6296 Shipwreck Island).

There are also the occasional art screw ups. It sure felt like the instructions for 6390 Main Street has more studs in the drawings than the actual base plates have. There can also be errors where things changes places.

Then there are plans that are just outright terrible. Technic plans from the 70’s have a lot of problems for me. They don’t always show very well what you are supposed to do. And at times it’s like you have to take a few pieces off to actually do what they want you to do. It can even be a bit hard to make out what pieces is actually being used.

[Digger of Bricks]

For some, those "well versed" in Lego bricks can find it both annoying and meticulous to follow instructions that place only one brick per step, since at some points, several bricks at one step is pretty easy to do.

It does sometimes just unnecessarily stretch out the process for some.

[ColletArrow]

10 hours ago, Runamuck said:

Then there are plans that are just outright terrible. Technic plans from the 70’s have a lot of problems for me. They don’t always show very well what you are supposed to do. And at times it’s like you have to take a few pieces off to actually do what they want you to do. It can even be a bit hard to make out what pieces is actually being used.

Reading this is interesting because, like @Digger of Bricks said, many of the people over in Technic lament the passing of these types of instructions; I believe the general feeling is that the more complicated instructions are half the fun of the build, and that modern instructions that show one or two parts added at a time are tedious. The opinions are (I believe) that spaced-out instructions are perfectly fine for many LEGO sub-themes, especially those aimed at younger builders such as City, but the higher suggested age-ratings of Technic should come with a higher level of instruction complexity. I agree with this to an extent, as the part call-out boxes help with finding what goes where, and some sets are simply a bore to build with steps being used just to rotate the model view. 

[Carrera124]

Never had problems with older instructions that add many parts in one step. If I missed one part, I got back and added it.

But I am annoyed by modern instructions - colors are sometimes hard to identify, and adding 1-2 pieces for each step is just a joke.

[LAKAbricks]

It also bothers me when each step adds too few bricks. It also has the side effect that the instruction booklets get bigger and thicker. Growing up in the 80s, I have seen relatively big models being built with rather few steps. - Of course we have to take into consideration that models have become more complex since then. But still.

Furthermore it annoys me that the booklets come in so many different sizes. It even happens within the same set. It makes it more difficult to store the booklets together in the same folder.

[Runamuck]

My problem with the old technic plans is often a really simple problem of accessibility. Technic plans from the 70’s and occasionally early 80’s have the idea to add axels with all kinds of things on them in the middle of the model where I have a hard time to get my fingers on it in any sort of sensible way. The plans that actually inspired me to this thread were the ones for 852, specifically the axel in step 7 on this page: http://peeron.com/scans/852-1/13.

You have to add an axel, gears and bushes in the middle of this where my fat old fingers have a hard time getting to it. Also it’s really hard to see what pieces are being added and there is no cutout showing the number of parts. This is not a challenge, to me this just comes off as a poor time to do that part of the build.

 

Oh, and there was a set I forgot to mention earlier, 6392 Airport doesn’t bother to show you how to build the runway in the plans at all so good luck placing those landing lights.

 

The drawn out instructions can be a bit tiresome and feel like they’re trying to hold your hand, but they at least don’t make you wonder what the hell you are actually supposed to do and you can easily just jump ahead a little bit if you get impatient.

[Commander Turtle]

Any set with both types of greys can be a pain, as you're left comparing colours to work out which one is right. That's not too bad, though.

If you really want to see bad instructions, try generating some from Lego Digital Designer! It's an absolute joke. You'd think they'd start roughly at the bottom and work up, maybe have some algorithm to do symmetrical things at the same time... Well, you'd be wrong! Any brick, anywhere, in an order that's almost impossible to put together.

[rodiziorobs]

On 5/28/2017 at 4:03 AM, laka said:

it annoys me that the booklets come in so many different sizes

Exactly this. I tend to only really use instructions once unless I want to refer to a specific building technique in a given set, which means mine spend most of their time in storage, which I feel like I have to keep redoing when I get a new book in yet another size.

As for actually using them, I don't have any complaints. I usually skip ahead a few steps and invariably find later that I have missed a piece somewhere, so it's all part of the fun.