I found this guy in an old bin, can you help?

Are you sure it's Lego? 

Face looks suspect.

Yes it is a Lego, and it was bought in the mid 90's in a thrift store while it was in a yellow duplo box, I know that much.

Edited October 19, 20178 yr by RetroLegoLover
To add information.

19 minutes ago, Rodeogeorge said:

Face looks suspect.

Some 90's minifigs had a similar face.

Remove the legs and look in between male plugs should be extruded LEGO logo. If it's not there it's not lego obviously. Legs are crooked as well.

On top of the neck post, it should say Lego

 

Guys, it's a Lego.

Actually, my old childhood Robin hood legos had that little sack on the waist. Although, those were usually green with a dark belt. Still, the figures printed shirt and bag on the waste are reminiscent of those figures.

I remember having some of those, but I cannot remember where they came from. Out was so long ago.

Yes this is the torso, but I'm not aware of it ever coming in yellow. https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=973p46&idColor=0#T=P&C=6

I wonder if it is some sort of test print.  It has the same design as the Forestmen, but different color scheme.  I don't believe this was something that was ever issued in a set.  

The face pattern is from 1994 but there is no record on BrickLink of that combination of parts... are you sure it's not a mix of other figures? The green hands are definitely odd for mid 90s.

 

https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemIn.asp?P=3626bp05&in=M

Yeah, when I say I remember having some of this, I'm referring to the torsos. I don't remember the green hands.

Its not Lego

Sent from my SM-G930V using Brickpicker Forum mobile app

The neck peg does not say Lego, nor do the leg parts, but the figure is obviously Lego, maybe even a prototype, because of the forestmen print on the torso. Something else I noticed was that the neck peg was shorter than current Legos, either proving that the Lego is a bootleg ripoff, or a prototype that was never meant to be released. The leg pegs are shorter than normal too, like normal Lego studs.

It's not lego

32 minutes ago, RetroLegoLover said:

The neck peg does not say Lego, nor do the leg parts, but the figure is obviously Lego, maybe even a prototype, because of the forestmen print on the torso. Something else I noticed was that the neck peg was shorter than current Legos, either proving that the Lego is a bootleg ripoff, or a prototype that was never meant to be released. The leg pegs are shorter than normal too, like normal Lego studs.

 

 

Looks like you are using "LEGO" as a generic name for construction bricks, and not just the brand LEGO. From the perspective of most of us here on the site, something cannot be called "LEGO" unless it has actually been made by LEGO. The legs SCREAM clone-brand - LEGO would never allow legs to sag like that. The fact that the studs on the leg parts are different is a dead-giveaway that the legs are from a clone-brand. That, plus the missing LEGO logo. Similar story for the torso - LEGO torsos would always have the LEGO logo on the top stud. Also, the inside of the torso is always the same for LEGO minifigs, perhaps if you can show us a picture of that compared to a regular minifig, it would help to further prove the point that this is a clone-brand minifig.

The fact that you picked this up in a thrift-store makes the chances of this being something randomly stuck together out of different parts, including clone-brands, all the greater.

Yup, I must be confused with something else from my childhood.

After seeing those pictures and you saying that they dimensions are off, it's definitely not Lego.  Bootleg using the Forestman's torso design.

Well, I give in, I guess it's not a Lego after all.

I'm so confused by the order of these posts. Is this from voting posts up/down? :|

23 minutes ago, lodibricks said:

I'm so confused by the order of these posts. Is this from voting posts up/down? :|

In the header above the first answer, select "Sort by Date". Problem solved.