Sets 600 - 610

[Michael Heidemann]

The old / vintage sets should go here.

[Michael Heidemann]

I could not find any building instruction.

So this is somewhat a guess, based on the pictures found.

The special Brick 2 x 4 with pattern is missing.

   

Edit: The rotor is now set 8 ldu in y direction.

[Magnus Forsberg]

According to Brickset there are two sets with the same number. There's also a 610-1 Vintage Car. The helicopter is called 610-2.
How should they be numbered to be OMR compliant?

[Merlijn Wissink]

The OMR specification calls that '<optional qualifier>'. So, in this case it should be 610-2.

[Stephen]

Well, I was going to post and say: wouldn't it be embarrassing if you made a mistake on such a simple model ;-)

Then I noticed that your main rotor is 8 ldu too low and clashing with the red studs...



Edit: if this link is anything to go by, the red plating probably isn't quite correct:

https://www.toysperiod.com/lego-set-refe...elicopter/

http://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/biYAAOSw6E...-l1600.jpg

[Michael Heidemann]

Thank for pointing to these both pages.

But they did not help. The picture (http://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/biYAAOSw6E...-l1600.jpg) shows a model that is not the same than on the official Lego picture. Please count the studs of the tail.

So I think that my approach is still valid. The rotor will be corrected of course.

[Stephen]

Interesting, and well spotted with the image. But the parts list on toysperiod doesn't match your build either. I wonder if they just guessed their parts list or got their info from somewhere else...

[Stephen]

Actually, looking at it again, I'm not entirely convinced

It looks to me from the box photo there are 5 studs between the body and the tail. You (and my ebay link image) have 6.

The parts list at rebrickable seems to match that of toysperiod, which doesn't match your build or the ebay build.

http://rebrickable.com/sets/610-2
https://www.toysperiod.com/lego-set-refe...elicopter/

What do you think?

Edit: posted wrong link to brickset.

[Michael Heidemann]

The attached file should now be correct from OMR file naming scheme.

Additionally I have changed the distance to 5 studs like you said. This looks good to me. I had also taken some inventory, but I think they are wrong (or contain more parts that we need to build the model).

   

Edit: Shifted the main rotor
Edit: Shifted the main rotor again by 0.5 LDU
Edit: Now with patterned part.

[Stephen]

Mmm. What's interesting is that I've now found the same parts list on 3 sites, where the tail plates are 2x2, 2x3, 2x4, 2x4, 2x6 and matching the box-advertised 35 parts, but the only way I can see to build it that way is with the 6 studs to the tail. Either the box image is misleading, or these sites have all wrongly copied each other.

[Michael Heidemann]

  610 - 1 - Vintage car.png (Size: 70.29 KB / Downloads: 26)

[Michael Heidemann]

I like your summarize. We know that TLC sometime make wrong pictures on the boxes. But we do not know that in this case.
So far I am going with the picture and not with the inventory.
The inventory can still be correct!

[Stephen]

Not sure we'll ever find out if its 5 or 6 unless someone owns one of these.

But, you're probably going to hate me for this, but the "repaired" mpd still has the main rotors at the wrong height. I said it was 8 ldu out, but in fact it is 4 ldu out. The square at the bottom of the propblade should be riding above the 2 red studs.

[Michael Heidemann]

Maybe someone can make the patterned Brick 2 x 4. The picture should be good enough.

[Michael Heidemann]

If I make errors I dont like me, but thats another story

I hope the "second" build is now ok with the rotor.

[Stephen]

Looks correct rotor position to me now.

I note the extra 0.5 you added to ensure it clears the lego logo on the stud
(I seriously doubt anyone would ever have quibbled on that score)

[Michael Heidemann]

Also this error is now (hopefully) fixed.
Thank you for your reviews.

[Stephen]

Yes, I'm happier without the 0.5, because with it then technically the top of the pin is left under compression from the propblade, and you can clearly see that from a seamless ldview cutaway.

[Philippe Hurbain]

More than good enough indeed!
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg...001p12.dat

[Michael Heidemann]

Thanks you very much for your quick shot