Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies| Author: | BRICKcycling  | | Posted: | Jul 9, 2019 09:02 | | Subject: | What sets could I build from my inventory | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Inventories | | Status: | Open | |
| Hey guys,
Is there a listing option here to check which complete sets could I be able to
build using the parts in my inventory? If the answer is yes, can I exclude the
parts from my inventory that belong to a complete set I wouldn't want to
take apart for the purpose? I have a crazy amount of spare parts, I'd like
to check wether they could add up to some nice, complete sets 
|
 |
| Author: | bb598 | | Posted: | Jul 7, 2019 23:45 | | Subject: | Re: 10205 : Parts to be removed from Inventory | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
| In Inventories, Sango85 writes:
| | In Inventories, FreeStorm writes:
| | In Inventories, Sango85 writes:
| | Hello,
I check my locomotive 10205 with Bricklink Inventory and I found differences...
I bought a new loco, and found the same differences...
I think there are errors into the Bricklink Inventory.
Please find the list of the issues.
Best regards,
Julien
|
To confirm the inventory, you can find an unboxing there:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=168313
If I remember correctly, the reason for "extra" parts is because the set
is the same as which is composed of
Some black parts are sort of 'extra' (from 3745-1) because this set is
used to build other locomotives
For example:
-Fred
|
OK, thanks for the explanation, and sorry for the "troubles"... I just wanted
to notice a possible issue, which is not an issue anyway.
Julien
|
The My Own Train locomotive sets 3740 and 3741 were designed to build TWO different
models with full instructions to do so. When building one or the other, there
will be pieces left over.
Here is the page from the instructions showing the alternate build that does
use each of the pieces you show in your original post.
http://lego.brickinstructions.com/03000/3741/013.jpg
These set inventories have stood unchanged for many years because they are accurate
and correct. They were produced and sold by LEGO back before there used to be
intentional Extra Pieces, so every piece in the inventory is needed to build
either the primary or the secondary model.
Also, the packs of colored bricks for these sets --
contain the correct parts to build either the
short locomotive or the long locomotive. When done building one or the other,
there will be different pieces left over, but all of the pieces are needed for
one or the other with no extra pieces at all.
____
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jul 4, 2019 19:14 | | Subject: | Re: inventory question | | Viewed: | 22 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
| In General, mattallica writes:
| | recently i have been buying some Duplo figures for my son and have noted that
figures like Batman that have a cape are inventoried without them meaning to
get a complete figure you must buy the cape separately.
why is this? minifigs come with their capes?
|
Duplo figures have historically not been inventoried with their capes, and I
honestly don't know why. It is something that should probably be added to
the Catalog Roadmap for consideration of being changed.
Cheers,
Randy
|
|
| Author: | mattallica | | Posted: | Jul 4, 2019 18:22 | | Subject: | inventory question | | Viewed: | 72 times | | Topic: | Inventories | | Status: | Open | |
| recently i have been buying some Duplo figures for my son and have noted that
figures like Batman that have a cape are inventoried without them meaning to
get a complete figure you must buy the cape separately.
why is this? minifigs come with their capes?
|
|
| Author: | 62Bricks | | Posted: | Jul 4, 2019 13:28 | | Subject: | Re: 10205 : Parts to be removed from Inventory | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
| In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories, 62Bricks writes:
| | In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories, 62Bricks writes:
| | If you want to base the inventories on the consistent contents of the box, that
makes sense from a part-out viewpoint. But this policy does not guarantee that
will happen. It is determining what goes "inside" the box based on what's
printed on the outside of the box, and not what is actually included.
|
This set consistently had 234 parts that were included inside the box regardless
of where the set was produced and what was printed on the outside of the box
since it was just an amalgam of three other sets that had been repackaged. Therefore,
your argument is moot, and the inventory will stand as is.
|
No, this example does not invalidate what I am saying. It demonstrates how the
rule applied here, if applied consistently, could lead to inconsistencies in
the inventories. It gives you "accurate" results in this case, but this is only
one case. Had this set only been produced in Europe and had no part count on
the box, it would lead to a different inventory - IF the rule was consistently
applied.
On the other hand, if the extra part designation were eliminated completely,
and the foolish reliance on the imaginary "official" part count was also eliminated,
then it would have the same inventory whether or not there was a part count printed
on the box.
I'm just extending what we are being told is the sole intent of the inventories
on Bricklink - to document the contents of the box so that sellers can more efficiently
part them out. I don't agree this should be the sole intent, but it is what
it is. That being the case, why is there a need to build up ever-more complicated
policies which introduce apparent inconsistencies and rely on the whim of Lego
continuing a practice it has already shown it is willing to change?
|
You sure do like to flog a life-challenged equine. The set inventory will stand
as is. That is the final decision of the entire admin team.
|
It is telling that you think I'm calling for the inventory to be changed.
I'm not. The only change I've called for is the elimination of the extra
parts designation, since the admins have to dance around with sets like this
to explain why it is an apparent exception.
If that change were made, this set would stand exactly as it is. So really, I'm
calling for all other set inventories to follow what this one does - put everything
known to be in the box in the regular section.
|
|
| Author: | 62Bricks | | Posted: | Jul 4, 2019 13:10 | | Subject: | Re: 10205 : Parts to be removed from Inventory | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
| In Inventories, Admin_Russell writes:
| | In Inventories, 62Bricks writes:
| | The foolish policy to which I refer is the one that uses the "official parts
count" as the primary guide for what goes in the regular section when there is
no part list.
|
Regular Items - Parts required to build the main model and any secondary models
plus any other parts on the official parts list. In the absence of an official
parts list, the official parts count, the instructions, and/or images on the
packaging are used to determine as closely as possible the contents of this section.
Where does it say anything about the official parts count being the primary guide?
It is listed first because it is the easiest and most useful thing to check.
There are cases where the instructions have the final say, e.g. in a situation
where the instructions call for a greater number of parts than the official parts
count.
|
It doesn't say it. This is my point. In this set, since there is no part
list, we are told that the regular items may be determined by the part count,
the instructions, etc.
In this set, using the instructions would give you one set of results that includes
extra parts, but using the part count gives you a different set of results that
does not include extra parts. There is a conflict. A choice has to be made on
which method to use. According to Randy, the part count trumps the instructions,
so that is the method that was used: https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1147636
| |
| | That policy does not serve sellers who want to part out sets, because
there is no consistent way Lego has counted parts in the past, and part counts
are not included on all sets now.
|
LEGO part counts are exceptionally reliable. There are a few cases where things
don't line up, but for 99.9% of the cases they are spot on. We know that
some sets don't have them, but that is nothing new. Sets produced for the
European market in the 1970's never had them.
|
You are not accounting for the fact that Lego has changed what it calls a "part."
When trying to reconcile the "official" count with the number of individual items
in the box, you sometimes have to consider a minifig torso and head as one piece,
as Lego sometimes did. Or you have to leave out the flowers, because they are
not "interlocking" pieces and therefore not included in the total. Or you may
have to count individual stickers (which is the only way I can even get close
to 779 parts in the Yellow Castle).
So we ignore the part count in some instances, but use it to define the complete
set in others. Any rule that relies on exceptions for it to work is not a good
rule. It would be simpler to get rid of the extra parts section and obviate the
need for any such rule at all.
| |
| | That policy is not spelled out anywhere in the help pages. It is listed among
the possible sources in the absence of a part list, but it is not explained that
it is considered more important than the instructions.
|
It is spelled out as much as it needs to be. Any further details about how part
lists were counted slightly differently over the years or limitations of their
usefulness are matters of discussion among collectors. Please read these as examples:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1027168
https://www.bricklink.com/aboutMe.asp?u=viejos&pageID=16500
We're not going to put that level of detail in the Help Pages. Our Inv Admins
have access to this kind of information to help them make informed decisions,
but it's too much for the general BrickLink public.
|
It is noted that the official stance is that we just don't need to know how
these decisions are made.
| |
| | This case illustrates the foolishness of this policy. The criterion for including
these leftover parts in the regular section - and thereby including them in any
part-out and in requiring them to be present to sell the set as "complete" -
is a number printed on the package. If this set had been released just in Europe
with no part count on the box, those parts would be extras, could be excluded
from a part-out, and would not be required in a "complete" set.
|
Maybe, but probably not. We have other ways to determine what parts should be
considered regular, and one of them is related sets.
| | If you want to base the inventories on the consistent contents of the box, that
makes sense from a part-out viewpoint. But this policy does not guarantee that
will happen. It is determining what goes "inside" the box based on what's
printed on the outside of the box, and not what is actually included.
|
The parts count is just one tool out of many that we use. It is not used to remove
actual contents from a set, or to add things that were never there. BrickLink's
standard is a sealed set, and that's where we start from when building an
inventory.
|
I put "inside" in quotes, because I mean the theoretical set made up of regular
parts. This is what a "complete" used set is made up of. Parts are indeed moved
in and out of this "complete" set based on the arcane rules we are not to be
made aware of.
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jul 4, 2019 12:53 | | Subject: | Re: 10205 : Parts to be removed from Inventory | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
| In Inventories, 62Bricks writes:
| | In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories, 62Bricks writes:
| | If you want to base the inventories on the consistent contents of the box, that
makes sense from a part-out viewpoint. But this policy does not guarantee that
will happen. It is determining what goes "inside" the box based on what's
printed on the outside of the box, and not what is actually included.
|
This set consistently had 234 parts that were included inside the box regardless
of where the set was produced and what was printed on the outside of the box
since it was just an amalgam of three other sets that had been repackaged. Therefore,
your argument is moot, and the inventory will stand as is.
|
No, this example does not invalidate what I am saying. It demonstrates how the
rule applied here, if applied consistently, could lead to inconsistencies in
the inventories. It gives you "accurate" results in this case, but this is only
one case. Had this set only been produced in Europe and had no part count on
the box, it would lead to a different inventory - IF the rule was consistently
applied.
On the other hand, if the extra part designation were eliminated completely,
and the foolish reliance on the imaginary "official" part count was also eliminated,
then it would have the same inventory whether or not there was a part count printed
on the box.
I'm just extending what we are being told is the sole intent of the inventories
on Bricklink - to document the contents of the box so that sellers can more efficiently
part them out. I don't agree this should be the sole intent, but it is what
it is. That being the case, why is there a need to build up ever-more complicated
policies which introduce apparent inconsistencies and rely on the whim of Lego
continuing a practice it has already shown it is willing to change?
|
You sure do like to flog a life-challenged equine. The set inventory will stand
as is. That is the final decision of the entire admin team.
|
|
| Author: | 62Bricks | | Posted: | Jul 4, 2019 12:33 | | Subject: | Re: 10205 : Parts to be removed from Inventory | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
| In Inventories, randyf writes:
| | In Inventories, 62Bricks writes:
| | If you want to base the inventories on the consistent contents of the box, that
makes sense from a part-out viewpoint. But this policy does not guarantee that
will happen. It is determining what goes "inside" the box based on what's
printed on the outside of the box, and not what is actually included.
|
This set consistently had 234 parts that were included inside the box regardless
of where the set was produced and what was printed on the outside of the box
since it was just an amalgam of three other sets that had been repackaged. Therefore,
your argument is moot, and the inventory will stand as is.
|
No, this example does not invalidate what I am saying. It demonstrates how the
rule applied here, if applied consistently, could lead to inconsistencies in
the inventories. It gives you "accurate" results in this case, but this is only
one case. Had this set only been produced in Europe and had no part count on
the box, it would lead to a different inventory - IF the rule was consistently
applied.
On the other hand, if the extra part designation were eliminated completely,
and the foolish reliance on the imaginary "official" part count was also eliminated,
then it would have the same inventory whether or not there was a part count printed
on the box.
I'm just extending what we are being told is the sole intent of the inventories
on Bricklink - to document the contents of the box so that sellers can more efficiently
part them out. I don't agree this should be the sole intent, but it is what
it is. That being the case, why is there a need to build up ever-more complicated
policies which introduce apparent inconsistencies and rely on the whim of Lego
continuing a practice it has already shown it is willing to change?
|
|
| Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | Jul 4, 2019 12:25 | | Subject: | Re: 10205 : Parts to be removed from Inventory | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
| In Inventories, 62Bricks writes:
| | The foolish policy to which I refer is the one that uses the "official parts
count" as the primary guide for what goes in the regular section when there is
no part list.
|
Regular Items - Parts required to build the main model and any secondary models
plus any other parts on the official parts list. In the absence of an official
parts list, the official parts count, the instructions, and/or images on the
packaging are used to determine as closely as possible the contents of this section.
Where does it say anything about the official parts count being the primary guide?
It is listed first because it is the easiest and most useful thing to check.
There are cases where the instructions have the final say, e.g. in a situation
where the instructions call for a greater number of parts than the official parts
count.
| | That policy does not serve sellers who want to part out sets, because
there is no consistent way Lego has counted parts in the past, and part counts
are not included on all sets now.
|
LEGO part counts are exceptionally reliable. There are a few cases where things
don't line up, but for 99.9% of the cases they are spot on. We know that
some sets don't have them, but that is nothing new. Sets produced for the
European market in the 1970's never had them.
| | That policy is not spelled out anywhere in the help pages. It is listed among
the possible sources in the absence of a part list, but it is not explained that
it is considered more important than the instructions.
|
It is spelled out as much as it needs to be. Any further details about how part
lists were counted slightly differently over the years or limitations of their
usefulness are matters of discussion among collectors. Please read these as examples:
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1027168
https://www.bricklink.com/aboutMe.asp?u=viejos&pageID=16500
We're not going to put that level of detail in the Help Pages. Our Inv Admins
have access to this kind of information to help them make informed decisions,
but it's too much for the general BrickLink public.
| | This case illustrates the foolishness of this policy. The criterion for including
these leftover parts in the regular section - and thereby including them in any
part-out and in requiring them to be present to sell the set as "complete" -
is a number printed on the package. If this set had been released just in Europe
with no part count on the box, those parts would be extras, could be excluded
from a part-out, and would not be required in a "complete" set.
|
Maybe, but probably not. We have other ways to determine what parts should be
considered regular, and one of them is related sets.
| | If you want to base the inventories on the consistent contents of the box, that
makes sense from a part-out viewpoint. But this policy does not guarantee that
will happen. It is determining what goes "inside" the box based on what's
printed on the outside of the box, and not what is actually included.
|
The parts count is just one tool out of many that we use. It is not used to remove
actual contents from a set, or to add things that were never there. BrickLink's
standard is a sealed set, and that's where we start from when building an
inventory.
|
|
| Author: | randyf | | Posted: | Jul 4, 2019 11:43 | | Subject: | Re: 10205 : Parts to be removed from Inventory | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Inventories | |
| In Inventories, 62Bricks writes:
| | If you want to base the inventories on the consistent contents of the box, that
makes sense from a part-out viewpoint. But this policy does not guarantee that
will happen. It is determining what goes "inside" the box based on what's
printed on the outside of the box, and not what is actually included.
|
This set consistently had 234 parts that were included inside the box regardless
of where the set was produced and what was printed on the outside of the box
since it was just an amalgam of three other sets that had been repackaged. Therefore,
your argument is moot, and the inventory will stand as is.
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
