Even though they are similar, or have similar purpose, the shape is different
enough that they cannot always be interchanged. Why are they considered mold
variants? This seems to me like a mistake, unless the definition of mold variant
is different than what I originally assumed.
Even though they are similar, or have similar purpose, the shape is different
enough that they cannot always be interchanged. Why are they considered mold
variants? This seems to me like a mistake, unless the definition of mold variant
is different than what I originally assumed.
They have different entries in the catalogue, therefore they are considered functionnaly
differect and different parts.
The relation “mold variant” doesn’t mean that you can use on instead of the other
but that the parts look very much alike with small (functional) differences and
that you may be interested in looking at them.
If the parts were considered the samee / totally interchangeable, then there
would be only one entry and one ID would the main ID and the other would be an
Alternate ID.
Even though they are similar, or have similar purpose, the shape is different
enough that they cannot always be interchanged. Why are they considered mold
variants? This seems to me like a mistake, unless the definition of mold variant
is different than what I originally assumed.
They have different entries in the catalogue, therefore they are considered functionnaly
differect and different parts.
The relation “mold variant” doesn’t mean that you can use on instead of the other
but that the parts look very much alike with small (functional) differences and
that you may be interested in looking at them.
If the parts were considered the samee / totally interchangeable, then there
would be only one entry and one ID would the main ID and the other would be an
Alternate ID.
I just checked and it looks like these two parts are labeled as "similar"
but not "mold variants". So I guess that makes sense.
USA, California
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
