UM8000369

Pocket Cube an original Meffert's puzzle

or make 4 interest-free payments of $8.75 NZD fortnightly with More info

  • At first glance, Meffert’s Pocket Cube looks like a simple 2×2 cube but don’t be fooled. What you see is not what you’re getting this time! With the axis off centre and two different size segments, when scrambled, the puzzle creates all kinds of strange shapes. Can you master the detail and return Meffert’s Pocket Cube into it’s original cube shape?

    With the never ending search for harder and harder twisty puzzles the cubes first got bigger and bigger but people soon wanted even more. The next move was to change the turning axis so the puzzler had the added challenge of shapeshifting to deal with. Unusual shapes like the 60 degree axis cube, the Windmill cube and lots and lots more appeared. So what was comes next? The bandaged cube. And the Pocket Cube is one of these.  They involve gluing some pairs of corner pieces together. In theory, it seems you now have less moveable parts and so the puzzle should be easier. Right? Wrong! Many moves you want to make are no longer possible and the regular algorithms of the 3×3 to not apply. So you’ll just have to learn how to solve this new type of cube all over again.

Size: 60mm x 60mm x 60mm

The puzzle was invented by Justin Eplett and developed with Uwe Meffert and has been manufactured for them by Recent Toys.

Martin Gardner wrote that Uwe Meffert puzzles help put the fun back into mathematics. A big statement from a man who devoted his life to mathematics and puzzles.

Rather than the only function of puzzles being to entertain, Uwe’s philosophy was that they were a way of teaching mathematics. In fact, he thought the function of the teacher should be to select puzzles that were well-suited to the students, to answer questions raised by the students and give inspiration, but that the students should learn how to solve themselves.

His most famous quote was that “If you hated math at school, it wasn’t because the subject is dreary but because you had dreary teachers who in turn also disliked mathematics.”

Subscribe