0

Many LEGO sets have minimum age ratings, such as 7-12, 9-14, and 16+. Why is this? Are the models really that different in terms of complexity? Also, why does LEGO often indicate that sets are not recommended for children under 3 separately?

  • 6
    Welcome to Stack Exchange! Looks like part of your question got cut off - can you edit and complete it? – Phil B. Oct 22 '15 at 0:53
  • Related: bricks.stackexchange.com/questions/682/… – Ambo100 Oct 22 '15 at 16:48
  • The "three and under" warning is related to laws regarding selling toys that contain choking hazards. There is (supposed to be) more strict laws regarding those toys sold for the three-and-under set, and LEGO is both indemnifying themselves if your toddler chokes on a brick for the "wrong age", and lowering the testing and certification costs associated with toys for younger children. Once your kid understands not to try and eat toys, regular LEGO bricks are perfectly safe. Though, if they accidentally take out their eye whilst playing, you will not be able to easily make a legal claim. – user3971 Oct 23 '15 at 13:16
5

With children 3 and under, small parts may be a choking hazard. The sets that Lego markets to the parents of small children contain larger pieces that are easier to handle and harder to swallow (i.e. Duplo).

When a Lego set recommends "ages 10 and up", it refers more to building ability and patience than safety. These sets are generally more complex and larger than, say, sets an average 8-year-old would be comfortable (or capable) of building. These are only recommendations of course, not rules!

0

Indeed.

My 8 year old sister is incapable of completing more difficult lego sets but when i was this age, I was already building (and making my own) difficult sets. I would say it depends on many factors.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.