Something is wrong with that life jacket. Tell me if you manage to find it.

@Zordboy said:
"I'm almost positive this picture is one of the alternate models, because that just doesn't look quite right, does it?"

The original one has a rear motor

@Be_hapi said:
"Something is wrong with that life jacket. Tell me if you manage to find it."

It doesn't help the wearer to float, for one thing.

Looks like it's not even built properly. Look at those gaps. That's a leaky boat.

@Be_hapi said:
"Something is wrong with that life jacket. Tell me if you manage to find it."

It appears not to be attached fully?

I see a Paradisa and a boat, but no speed. Is it just me.

Just hold out your hand in front of you for a moment.

Now imagine what that hand would feel if it were to push this boat across a carpet.

Have a nice day!

It's strange how the instructions describes an completely different boat (from the same parts) than the one from this photograph from the front of the leaflet.

@brickengineeringdude said:
" @Be_hapi said:
"Something is wrong with that life jacket. Tell me if you manage to find it."

It appears not to be attached fully?"

Same as that hull piece.

@MCLegoboy said:
" @Your_Future_President said:
"That 1x1 white plate is so random..."
No, that 1x2 plate is to imply motion. When you rev up the motor on a speedboat, you begin hydroplaning, which brings the bow up at an angle not too disimilar to what's being shown with the addition of that 1x2 plate. I find it to be quite inventive."

The same piece was used in 6508 Wave Racer, but all later boats we have that wanted to imply motion used a 2654 Plate Round 2 x 2 with Rounded Bottom [Boat Stud] for that effect which works so much better to actually slide the boat over a carpet, when I rebuilt that Wave Racer I swapped the 1 x 2 with this part for that reason. So why they took a step back with this boat is beyond me? (Incidentally, that boat stud would also help to tie the hull pieces together so double win... or in this case, double loss)

@T79 said:
" @MCLegoboy said:
" @Your_Future_President said:
"That 1x1 white plate is so random..."
No, that 1x2 plate is to imply motion. When you rev up the motor on a speedboat, you begin hydroplaning, which brings the bow up at an angle not too disimilar to what's being shown with the addition of that 1x2 plate. I find it to be quite inventive."
The same piece was used in 6508 Wave Racer, but all later boats we have that wanted to imply motion used a 2654 Plate Round 2 x 2 with Rounded Bottom [Boat Stud] for that effect which works so much better to actually slide the boat over a carpet, when I rebuilt that Wave Racer I swapped the 1 x 2 with this part for that reason. So why they took a step back with this boat is beyond me? (Incidentally, that boat stud would also help to tie the hull pieces together so double win... or in this case, double loss)"
Well turns out that this boat in the image is an alternate model. When you look at the instructions for it, it's totally different, so that would be why a 1x2 plate is being used.

@MCLegoboy said:
" @T79 said:
" @MCLegoboy said:
" @Your_Future_President said:
"That 1x1 white plate is so random..."
No, that 1x2 plate is to imply motion. When you rev up the motor on a speedboat, you begin hydroplaning, which brings the bow up at an angle not too disimilar to what's being shown with the addition of that 1x2 plate. I find it to be quite inventive."
The same piece was used in 6508 Wave Racer, but all later boats we have that wanted to imply motion used a 2654 Plate Round 2 x 2 with Rounded Bottom [Boat Stud] for that effect which works so much better to actually slide the boat over a carpet, when I rebuilt that Wave Racer I swapped the 1 x 2 with this part for that reason. So why they took a step back with this boat is beyond me? (Incidentally, that boat stud would also help to tie the hull pieces together so double win... or in this case, double loss)"
Well turns out that this boat in the image is an alternate model. When you look at the instructions for it, it's totally different, so that would be why a 1x2 plate is being used."

Heh, you're right! Still begs the question why they didn't include one of those boat studs in the first place though :-)

Friends avant la lettre.

@Be_hapi said:
"Something is wrong with that life jacket. Tell me if you manage to find it."

The arms and head are also yellow, blending it all in?

@CarolinaOnMyMind said:
"I was surprised to see that both Jang and just2good did video reviews for this set, about 20 years after its release.
I mean, I suppose they would’ve been pretty young at the actual time of its release, but I was just surprised to see it reviewed at all. "
At the time of its release in 1995, the internet was in its infancy. Mass video content creation and distribution had not occurred yet. Also, AFOLdom was largely unrecognised as a phenomenon. I was well into adulthood when I became an AFOL a couple of years before this set’s release. I was unaware at the time that there were other adults who were into LEGO. So it’s quite a tall order to expect anyone to have made an online video review of this set in 1995.

Could Jang or Just2Good have reviewed this set sooner than they did? Sure, but in fairness to them, there are lots of sets that were released before Jang and J2G started their review videos and we cannot expect them to review them all. (I know Jang has reviewed some Classic Space sets from the late ‘70s which I think was before he was born.) So Jang and J2G are doing pretty well with their older set reviews all things considered.

I was child in the 70's 80's. Now out of my dark ages at first I was in chok over those 90's faces. Especially that ladies face! I am slowly growing to like it.

@Zordboy said:
"I'm almost positive this picture is one of the alternate models, because that just doesn't look quite right, does it?"
Bricklink agrees with you: the model they show for the set is actually https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?S=1761-1 Though Brickset's image is the one from the front of the instructions, according to their pictures, which is probably how it ended up as the set image on here.

It's nice to see more small single-figure sets from the '90s that had lady minifigures in; I feel like those were quite few and far between back then. The late '90s got a bit better on that count with sets like 4910 and 5905, before the start of the 2000s lapsed back into barely any girl characters at all for a long while, and certainly none in such small sets as this.

I know I sound like a broken record on this point, but I miss these tiny impulse-buy sets. CMFs just aren't quite the same, and polybag sets barely exist in this part of the world... and, to me, don't have the charm of these little boxed sets from the 90s.

Bring back tiny cheap boxed sets, 2k21?

(Though, valid question: with inflation, how much would a set like this be nowadays? Probably more than just the £2 / £3 they were back in the day...)

@ThatBionicleGuy:
We're probably going to find out. With their move to eliminate plastic packaging, polybags are pretty much out. Paper bags might work for interior packaging, but will it be durable enough to take over for polybags? Vidiyo Bandmates are being boxed, not bagged, so I expect that's the future of polybags. More specifically, it'll probably be one of these new paper bags inside of a box, to keep small parts from slipping out through any gaps.

For price, they did release some tiny boxed sets about ten years ago, which I believe were priced at $2.49 USD. And at the time, people were complaining up a storm about how the price of LEGO sets keeps rising.