Subject:
|
Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Fri, 26 Feb 1999 08:33:42 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1812 times
|
| |
|
|
I recall hearing once that the chrome parts had to be made from a different
mold than non-chrome parts because the coating added some thickness.
So on the chrome version, e.g. the plastic studs would be a little smaller.
Also, I'd expect molds for transparent pieces to be slightly different due to
the different type of plastic, which might require a different part/tracking
number.
-gyug
KJMRR wrote:
>
> This topic seems to be comming up with every parts vote now. Wasn't it the
> chrome antenna last time? I though we solved that by not using the specific
> chrome part number...
>
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
| Paul Gyugyi wrote in message <36D65C66.E5F7A69@gy...yi.com>... (...) to (...) part/tracking (...) This is certainly true with metallic elements, but with clear I don't think so since ABS resin or any plastic resin I've seen is basic clear amber (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
| At the risk of being flamed into lurk mode, I'm going to ask the following: Why do we need the official TLG part numbers? Why not just use a numbering system that makes sense? (26 years ago, 27-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
| Sproaticus wrote in message ... (...) My vote would be to use the part number that people can see with out takeing apart the boat, i.e. the 30086 number. The 30087 number is only of value if you take the boat apart. Somthing I feel very few people (...) (26 years ago, 26-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
66 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
