Discussion Forum: Thread 368647

 Author: TheBrickResort View Messages Posted By TheBrickResort
 Posted: Mar 31, 2025 22:10
 Subject: Packing Type 6415277 6415278 6414465 80112-1
 Viewed: 82 times
 Topic: Catalog Requests
 For:Catalog Associate
 Status:Completed
 Report:
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

TheBrickResort (4493)

Location:  USA, Wisconsin
Member Since Contact Type Status
Feb 19, 2019 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: The Brick Resort
Gear 6415277, 6415278, 6414465 and Instructions 80112-1 show Packing Type Weight
Bound.

I found Packing Type referenced in help twice, both on the Item Dimensions -
General Article page. https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2510

For the Parts Item Type, there is a Packing Type setting with two options - Weight
Bound and Volume Bound.

Under subheading Gear:
...the system will always treat Gear items as Volume Bound.

Does the system ignore the Packing Type on Item Types that are not Parts,
regardless of the option entered?

If that is the case, never mind and ignore the rest.


When Adding or Changing Catalog Items, Parts is the only Item Type that has the
Packing Type option. Minfigures have both Packing Types, and it seems intentional.

These are probably inconsequential/minor inconsistencies, but I came across them
trying to figure out if Packing Type flowed through from Inventory/what determines
Packing Type.

SW1086 is Weight Bound which seems right, but his Poncho 66846 is Volume Bound.

Vid034 and her wings 77192pb01 seem like they would both be Volume Bound, but
are not.

85863pb034 and the rest of the microfigures from the 3862-1 HP Hogwarts Game
are all Volume Bound. (Maybe based on Games are Gear, rather than size?)

Dm031 or Drm014 have nearly the dimensions, Drm014 is slightly larger but is
weight bound.

I do think Bricklink is awesome, and don't want this to come across as nit-picky.
Thanks
Jen
 Author: Nubs_Select View Messages Posted By Nubs_Select
 Posted: Mar 31, 2025 22:56
 Subject: Re: Packing Type 6415277 6415278 6414465 80112-1
 Viewed: 40 times
 Topic: Catalog Requests
 Report:
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

Nubs_Select (4742)

Location:  Canada, Ontario
Member Since Contact Type Status
Mar 15, 2016 Contact Member Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store: Nub's Select
  SW1086 is Weight Bound which seems right, but his Poncho 66846 is Volume Bound.


cloth parts are always set as volume, i cant link to a specific thing as on the
page it only specifies human clothing but its what the admins have said, things
like cloth, sticker sheets, etc are always V

  Vid034 and her wings 77192pb01 seem like they would both be Volume Bound, but
are not.

1 side is under 2 cm so its kinda on the edge but still is below the threshold
but admins would know better on this

  
 Author: randyf View Messages Posted By randyf
 Posted: Apr 1, 2025 14:15
 Subject: Re: Packing Type 6415277 6415278 6414465 80112-1
 Viewed: 48 times
 Topic: Catalog Requests
 Report:
Cancel Message
Cancel
Reply to Message
Reply
BrickLink
ID Card

randyf (447)

Location:  USA, Ohio
Member Since Contact Type Status
Sep 16, 2009 Member Does Not Allow Contact Seller
Buying Privileges - OKSelling Privileges - OK
Store Closed Store: The Bricking Spectre
In Catalog Requests, TheBrickResort writes:
  Gear 6415277, 6415278, 6414465 and Instructions 80112-1 show Packing Type Weight
Bound.

I found Packing Type referenced in help twice, both on the Item Dimensions -
General Article page. https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2510

For the Parts Item Type, there is a Packing Type setting with two options - Weight
Bound and Volume Bound.

Under subheading Gear:
...the system will always treat Gear items as Volume Bound.

Does the system ignore the Packing Type on Item Types that are not Parts,
regardless of the option entered?


Minifigures are also treated like parts (for now...), but all of the other item
types (sets, books, gear, catalogs, instructions and boxes) are always treated
as volume bound no matter what the item is set to. We try and make sure that
all items that are treated as volume bound are always set to volume bound anyways,
so I have changed the few that you listed above (6415277, 6415278, 6414465 and
80112-1 instructions).


  If that is the case, never mind and ignore the rest.


When Adding or Changing Catalog Items, Parts is the only Item Type that has the
Packing Type option. Minfigures have both Packing Types, and it seems intentional.

These are probably inconsequential/minor inconsistencies, but I came across them
trying to figure out if Packing Type flowed through from Inventory/what determines
Packing Type.

SW1086 is Weight Bound which seems right, but his Poncho 66846 is Volume Bound.


sw1086 is treated like a part and its packing dimensions are 2.6 x 4.27 x 1.3cm.
Since all dimensions do not go over 2cm and no single dimension goes over 8cm,
it is set to weight bound.

The poncho is set to volume bound because anything that is a cloth item has a
special exception due to its size to weight ratio (doesn't weigh much but
usually takes up all of the volume that it needs in a package).


  Vid034 and her wings 77192pb01 seem like they would both be Volume Bound, but
are not.


vid034 is treated like a part and its packing dimensions are 3.1 x 4.4 x 2.2cm.
Since all dimensions do exceed 2cm, it should have been set to volume bound.
I have updated it.

The wings are set to weight bound because they just make it under the 2cm-in-all-dimensions
guideline (3.1 x 1.9 x 3.4cm).


  85863pb034 and the rest of the microfigures from the 3862-1 HP Hogwarts Game
are all Volume Bound. (Maybe based on Games are Gear, rather than size?)


Those should all be set to weight bound. I will get them updated.


  Drm031 or Drm014 have nearly the dimensions, Drm014 is slightly larger but is
weight bound.


drm014 should have been set to volume bound. It has been updated.


  I do think Bricklink is awesome, and don't want this to come across as nit-picky.
Thanks
Jen


We like nit-picky catalog contributors! Keep them coming if you find any more
inconsistencies.

Cheers,
Randy