Would you give a three year old LEGO? I'm sure they know by that point not to put things in their mouth, but kids will be kids and find a way to get something stuck in their throat, like those tires.

My brother and I each got a copy of 114 as our first LEGO sets. The primary difference being that Grandmother hadn't kicked the bucket yet.

I was given another of these Universal Building sets, number 30, as a 2 y.o. That was parenting in the ‘70s.

@MCLegoboy said:
"Would you give a three year old LEGO? I'm sure they know by that point not to put things in their mouth, but kids will be kids and find a way to get something stuck in their throat, like those tires."

And that TV antenna. But I have had my youngest 3 kids start with regular-sized LEGO already at the age of 2. Under supervision of course.

This was my first ever Lego set, the Christmas before I went into first grade. Still have a lot of the pieces in a shoebox. Coincidentally, I was digging through that box this evening.

I don't remember exactly when my parents 'graduated' me from Duplo to Lego, but I don't think I was much older than four or five. I think I would have had some trouble with this set though, especially since the instructions back in those days were a good deal shorter and generally less helpful.

Most of all, I am certain that my three-year-old self would have destroyed that beautiful antenna. It was a wonderful piece, but it did tend to crumble if you stared at it for too long.

Don't underestimate kids back in the 70s (and also 80s)!

Sure, some of these builds would be a bit ambitious, but hey, it's 3+, so kids who turn 4 still need some challenges. I might just be old, but I much prefer this over nowadays 4+ sets that are so dumbed down with highly specialized pieces it would be very hard to build such a variety of stuff from a single set.

@SimonSpace70s said:
"I was given another of these Universal Building sets, number 30, as a 2 y.o. That was parenting in the ‘70s."

Yep. If it don't kill 'em, it'll make 'em a master builder.

I'll say this for the box art: this set looked a lot more complex at a glance than when you zoom in on it. Though that house center-bottom looks pretty nice, even in 2023.

I found a 40 in a charity shop not so long ago - I just a had to have it for the box and although not complete the original parts inside were in incredible condition. It had a few extras like a few 'peg people' proto-minifigures in too and it's nice to have a few maxi-figures in good shape.

Just today, I built a rainbow artwork out of just 2x2, and later a Pirate ship from just 2x4 and 2x2 using 2x 11027 : Creative Neon Fun .

The classic fun with simple bricks can still be had in 2023.

@MCLegoboy said:
"Would you give a three year old LEGO? I'm sure they know by that point not to put things in their mouth, but kids will be kids and find a way to get something stuck in their throat, like those tires."

Back in those days, even small kids already were motivated to develop some common sense. Nowadays, the idea is that everyone is self-destructive and should be prevented from acting upon that.

@TeriXeri:
I think I'd rather have more-interesting fun. Yup, definitely that.

My second-ever set. I combined my copy with my brother's for endless fun back in the day. Big and small wheels, maxi-figs, large green baseplate bricks, antenna, hinges, windows, doors...great stuff. I have 3 copies now.

This was also my second universal LEGO set as a kid. A gift from my aunt and uncle. It was also the first set I had that included the maxi-figures and a small green baseplate. I liked the fact that at the time the set contained a lot of blue roof slope pieces. Lots of memories.