There's a note at the bottom of this set inventory that says:
"Minifigure, Weapon Sword, Greatsword Angular #48495, most likely doesn't
exist in Metallic Gold. Unfortunately there's no evidence so far in which
color this second sword actually came in this set."
I think the sword does exist because I found it with this set nearly/fully built.
I got this set as a kid and built it. When I moved, I put the set in a box as
it was. Today, I opened the box and began examining the set to make sure I had
all the parts. The leader minifigure was there and he was holding this gold sword.
I'll attach some pictures in the replies.
Can someone who knows more about colors and inventories confirm or deny what
I have here?
Here's some images of the set, the guy, and the sword.
Looks like either Reddish Gold or a shade of Pearl Gold to me, especially from
the last image.
Metallic Gold is a lacquered coating over another color of plastic like the Viking
guy's helmet. It can usually be felt quite easily as it has a slightly rougher
and grainier texture than just plastic alone. It is used on pieces that would
not bend normally, so it is typically used on ABS parts. Since this sword is
flexible and not ABS, having a lacquered coating on the sword would most likely
flake off during play.
So should we update the inventory to say Reddish Gold instead of Metallic Gold?
Why did the inventory say Metallic Gold in the first place if there's no
evidence that the set came with it?
So should we update the inventory to say Reddish Gold instead of Metallic Gold?
Why did the inventory say Metallic Gold in the first place if there's no
evidence that the set came with it?
I agree the inventory is really confusing here. It's ridiculous to list a
part in the regular section that might not even exist. Better to change it,
as you say, to a known colour like Reddish Gold
So should we update the inventory to say Reddish Gold instead of Metallic Gold?
Why did the inventory say Metallic Gold in the first place if there's no
evidence that the set came with it?
I agree the inventory is really confusing here. It's ridiculous to list a
part in the regular section that might not even exist. Better to change it,
as you say, to a known colour like Reddish Gold
No use changing it if we can't actually confirm what color was used with
a sealed set. FWIW, ICT data lists Warm Gold (Pearl Gold), but it would probably
do that even if the set actually came with Reddish Gold due to the gold color
change in 2006. It could also well be the case that earlier copies used one color,
and later copies another.
So should we update the inventory to say Reddish Gold instead of Metallic Gold?
Why did the inventory say Metallic Gold in the first place if there's no
evidence that the set came with it?
I agree the inventory is really confusing here. It's ridiculous to list a
part in the regular section that might not even exist. Better to change it,
as you say, to a known colour like Reddish Gold
No use changing it if we can't actually confirm what color was used with
a sealed set. FWIW, ICT data lists Warm Gold (Pearl Gold), but it would probably
do that even if the set actually came with Reddish Gold due to the gold color
change in 2006. It could also well be the case that earlier copies used one color,
and later copies another.
Well imo both Perl Gold and Reddish Gold is better than a non existing colour.
There is a set for sale at a popular auction site atm, open box with sealed bags.
Can't tell the colour of the sword from the pictures tho, bad angle.
So should we update the inventory to say Reddish Gold instead of Metallic Gold?
Why did the inventory say Metallic Gold in the first place if there's no
evidence that the set came with it?
I agree the inventory is really confusing here. It's ridiculous to list a
part in the regular section that might not even exist. Better to change it,
as you say, to a known colour like Reddish Gold
No use changing it if we can't actually confirm what color was used with
a sealed set. FWIW, ICT data lists Warm Gold (Pearl Gold), but it would probably
do that even if the set actually came with Reddish Gold due to the gold color
change in 2006. It could also well be the case that earlier copies used one color,
and later copies another.
Well imo both Perl Gold and Reddish Gold is better than a non existing colour.
There is a set for sale at a popular auction site atm, open box with sealed bags.
Can't tell the colour of the sword from the pictures tho, bad angle.
Another sealed bag from the a sold item on the same site.
In this picture I would say the swords is Pearl Gold
So should we update the inventory to say Reddish Gold instead of Metallic Gold?
Why did the inventory say Metallic Gold in the first place if there's no
evidence that the set came with it?
I agree the inventory is really confusing here. It's ridiculous to list a
part in the regular section that might not even exist. Better to change it,
as you say, to a known colour like Reddish Gold
No use changing it if we can't actually confirm what color was used with
a sealed set. FWIW, ICT data lists Warm Gold (Pearl Gold), but it would probably
do that even if the set actually came with Reddish Gold due to the gold color
change in 2006. It could also well be the case that earlier copies used one color,
and later copies another.
Well imo both Perl Gold and Reddish Gold is better than a non existing colour.
There is a set for sale at a popular auction site atm, open box with sealed bags.
Can't tell the colour of the sword from the pictures tho, bad angle.
Another sealed bag from the a sold item on the same site.
In this picture I would say the swords is Pearl Gold
Agreed, looks like Pearl Gold. That would be the most era-appropriate too.
USA, Wisconsin
)
)
)
Finland, Ahvenanmaa
Sweden, Örebro
