Discussion Forum: Catalog: Message 1450576
 Previous Message   Next Message 
 Author: Nubs_Select View Messages Posted By Nubs_Select
 Posted: Jan 25, 2024 19:52
 Subject: Re: Important proposal regarding catalog variants
 Viewed: 28 times
 Topic: Catalog
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Nubs_Select (3524)

Location:  Canada, Ontario
Member Since Contact Type Status
Mar 15, 2016 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Seller Ships to My Country Store: Nub's Select
In Catalog, randyf writes:
  In Catalog, Nubs_Select writes:
  
  The difference is actually more significant than that.
 
Part No: 2444  Name: Plate, Modified 2 x 2 with Pin Hole
* 
2444 Plate, Modified 2 x 2 with Pin Hole
Parts: Plate, Modified
cannot clutch a 1x2 jumper plate or any other hollow stud for that matter attached
to the center tube underneath.
 
Part No: 10247  Name: Plate, Modified 2 x 2 with Pin Hole - Full Cross Support Underneath
* 
10247 Plate, Modified 2 x 2 with Pin Hole - Full Cross Support Underneath
Parts: Plate, Modified
clutches them with ease.

The only thing about this one is that I do not have the time to look through
all 555 sets that use 10247 to see if it ever "officially" mattered.
However, the question I keep coming back to is why redesign the part in the first
place if not to use that additional functionality? And I believe the answer is
somewhere in those 555 sets.

So in theory, if we can find 1 set that has a 1x2 jumper under the modern base
of 1 it should then mean it cant be merged if I'm understanding correctly?


Yes.


  but then even if we dont find it and then a year later lego does do that it would
be something that has to be split again if I understand correctly?


Yes, again. This is one of the main reasons losing information that is already
here is not a good plan.

mhm. a functional difference like this is not a good idea to merge. I just tested
it out, out of curiosity with the parts on hand and it truly has no grip. it
just falls off as there was no stud. Thankyou for clarifying

Message is in Reply To:

View Thread Re: Important proposal regarding catalog variants - randyf (442)
[...] Yes. [...] Yes, again. This is one of the main reasons losing information that is already here is not a good plan.
(4 hours ago, Jan 25, 2024, to Catalog)

655 Messages in this Thread.
(Message tree supressed because there are more than 50 messages in this thread)
show message tree

 Previous Message   Next Message 

Entire thread on one page
This message and all its replies on one page