J.A.F. Team

Very interesting! But upon testing it myself, it seems like this connection probably stresses the part significantly more than other connection methods. I wouldn't want to leave a mask attached this way for any significant length of time.

 

Personally I still prefer using http://brickset.com/parts/4610371 this part, which provides plenty of friction without stressing the part, and is small and subtle to boot. Alternatively, if you want a System connection, you can really just use two of these attached with a friction pin—the flat edge holds the mask in one position pretty well.

Actually, having tested it myself, I noted it didn't bend it any differently than the element you suggested, and it does provide a better (snugger) fit. If anything, this is a much safer method of display of masks. Granted, is it possible it could bend the tabs back over an extended period of time? Sure, but the same could be said of any Lego element connected with something not intended for that connection (illegal connections). Eventually, it's possible you could wear out a clip if you clip a tile on it. Is it likely? Probably not, given the newer reinforced plastic connections these days.

I prefer mounting my masks on the "belts" of the characters they came with, since almost everything uses the CCBS high-friction ball cup on the hips, and it you slip a mask onto the holes in the sides of it, it stays in place exceptionally well.

Actually, having tested it myself, I noted it didn't bend it any differently than the element you suggested, and it does provide a better (snugger) fit. If anything, this is a much safer method of display of masks. Granted, is it possible it could bend the tabs back over an extended period of time? Sure, but the same could be said of any Lego element connected with something not intended for that connection (illegal connections). Eventually, it's possible you could wear out a clip if you clip a tile on it. Is it likely? Probably not, given the newer reinforced plastic connections these days.

Do you think I didn't test it myself? The reason I'd be worried is that with the connection I proposed (as with the connection to the heads themselves), the mask is only slightly stressed when attaching or detaching it—the stress is relieved once the part is firmly attached or removed and the "arms" (for lack of a better word) can return to their original position. The method shown here, on the other hand, forces the two "arms" of the mask apart and that stress is not relieved until the mask is removed once again. As such, I would be much more worried about long-term damage attaching masks with this method.

I get where you're coming from, and this method probably isn't officially approved and puts minor stress on the mask. But I think you might be overblowing it with the whole "significantly more" stressed. (Unless you're like "Anything above zero is significant" then I can exactly blame you mathmatically.) All the same, I can hardly detect it myself, and perhaps the ridged round brick would be even better, because the ridges would give some more space for the pins to sit in and be less stressed? (Besides, while your mentioned alternatives do work, I personally wouldn't describe that as "sturdy." I like my connections to not be fragile, and turns out you need some friction on the pieces to pull that off. Agree to disagree I guess.)

 

I get where you're coming from, and this method probably isn't officially approved and puts minor stress on the mask. But I think you might be overblowing it with the whole "significantly more" stressed. (Unless you're like "Anything above zero is significant" then I can exactly blame you mathmatically.) All the same, I can hardly detect it myself, and perhaps the ridged round brick would be even better, because the ridges would give some more space for the pins to sit in and be less stressed? (Besides, while your mentioned alternatives do work, I personally wouldn't describe that as "sturdy." I like my connections to not be fragile, and turns out you need some friction on the pieces to pull that off. Agree to disagree I guess.)

 

I don't see how the connections I shared are fragile at all—they do allow the masks to come off with less effort than your new technique, but they aren't going to fall off simply by being nudged or jostled, nor are they going to change position unless you deliberately adjust them (or shake them vigorously, but I can't see why you'd do that to masks on display). A sturdier connection doesn't strike me as necessary—especially considering it was not even possible to have a sturdier connection than this for the classic masks.

 

When I say "significantly more stressed" I'm talking cumulatively. Any connection that visibly stresses parts like these over a sustained period of time is not something I would favor on the best of days—and I'd hate to risk making the masks even looser considering that their intended connection to the heads is already looser than either display method.