Please refrain from posting animated GIFs, memes, joke videos and so on in discussions other than those in the off topic area.

Dismiss this message to confirm your acceptance of this additional forum term of use.

Why are tan 60478s this price?

Just saw the price of these, and while it's not as high as some bricks out there, it's more than I'd expect for something like this! Are they all getting bought up for a popular MOC perhaps?

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=60478&idColor=2&name=Tan Plate, Modified 1 x 2 with Handle on End - Closed Ends&category=[Plate, Modified]#T=S&C=2&O={"color":2,"ss":"UK"}

Comments

  • BobflipBobflip Member Posts: 458
    Ahhh, wait, is it because of the Winter Village Post Office?
  • samiam391samiam391 A Log Cabin in KY, United StatesMember Posts: 4,239
    It was only available in 6 sets, the most recent being 2011.

    Low supply and (judging by the price guide), relatively high demand = expensive!
    Bobfliprd1899prevere
  • rd1899rd1899 U.S.A.Member Posts: 141

    Bobflip said:

    Are they all getting bought up for a popular MOC perhaps?

    That could be one part of the demand and dwindling supply.

    On Rebrickable (MOCs with 60478 in Tan), there's a couple modulars that might be the culprit(s): A Covent Garden Apple Store MOC requires 12 of this part, and an apartment row modular ("Brickstreet") requires 2 of this part.
  • ecmo47ecmo47 North CarolinaMember Posts: 2,084
    You think that's bad, try this tan window found only in 10198, Emerald Night.

    https://www.bricklink.com/catalogPG.asp?P=6556&ColorID=2

    At about $10.00 each, the 10 windows costs the same as the original set!
    MattDawsonSprinkleOtter
  • BobflipBobflip Member Posts: 458
    Ah well, just makes finishing off a #7682 I got in a job lot that bit more expensive! Lucky I only needed one...


    This one expensive piece that always gets me.

    https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=3063&idColor=48&name=Sand Green Brick, Round Corner 2 x 2 Macaroni with Stud Notch&category=[Brick, Round]#T=S&C=48&O={"color":48,"ss":"UK"}




    MAGNINOMINISUMBRAAllBrick
  • oldtodd33oldtodd33 Denver 4800 miles to BillundMember Posts: 2,370
    ^ There's a bit of irony in the first sellers store name, Brickr4kids. How many kids can afford a $75 macaroni brick?
    Bobflipprevere
  • MAGNINOMINISUMBRAMAGNINOMINISUMBRA Member Posts: 975
    ^^ The main reason why I'd be extremely wary of buying a bricklinked, near complete or sight unseen #3450!  I thought I read somewhere (probably here) that the part is going to appear again in one of this years elves sets?
  • BumblepantsBumblepants Sofia BG/Dallas TXMember Posts: 5,549
    ^Yeah the Goblin King Fortress set has a few in the​ foundation.
    MAGNINOMINISUMBRA
  • darkstonegreydarkstonegrey USAMember Posts: 15
    edited April 2017
    ^ Those will most likely be the more recent version part id 85080 (reinforced underside) instead of 3063.

    Wow, I'm glad now I got 20 of those tan windows for the Emerald Night @ $6 each - that was 2 years ago thru eBay, and they included the transparent window piece too.
  • MAGNINOMINISUMBRAMAGNINOMINISUMBRA Member Posts: 975


    ^ Those will most likely be the more recent version part id 85080 (reinforced underside) instead of 3063.
    SNIP


    Agreed, I think we'll still see the current prices for this version PLUMMET - not to mention a shipload of incorrectly ID'ed new ones sold as the old. 
  • MaffyDMaffyD West YorkshireMember Posts: 2,428
    ^ Is the new part significantly different to the old? Is the reinforced underside preventing some connections?
  • MAGNINOMINISUMBRAMAGNINOMINISUMBRA Member Posts: 975
    ^Considerably different. I cant recall any connections in known sets it prevents (though take that with a grain of salt).  Though it certainly limits what you CAN do with it (offsets for example), I don't think it would affect any connection that would be considered a legal connection.

    MaffyD
  • zmarkellazmarkella UKMember Posts: 48

    MaffyD said:

    ^ Is the new part significantly different to the old? Is the reinforced underside preventing some connections?


    No difference from the outside.

    Here's an image showing the detail:
    https://img.bricklink.com/ItemImage/PL/85080.png

    I can't think of any 'legal' connection that would be prevented by the reinforced underside.
    MAGNINOMINISUMBRAMaffyD
  • MAGNINOMINISUMBRAMAGNINOMINISUMBRA Member Posts: 975
    Great minds...
  • zmarkellazmarkella UKMember Posts: 48


    Great minds...


    ...build alike :)

    (should've refreshed the page before posting)
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,749

    zmarkella said:



    MaffyD said:


    ^ Is the new part significantly different to the old? Is the reinforced underside preventing some connections?




    No difference from the outside.

    Here's an image showing the detail:
    https://img.bricklink.com/ItemImage/PL/85080.png

    I can't think of any 'legal' connection that would be prevented by the reinforced underside.


    The old version could be layered at a 45 degree angle offset, a technique that was used in some sets such as #6414 Dolphin Point. However, this technique was rarely used and the lack of a reinforced underside reduced the part's clutch power. After pieces like 4x4 round bricks and plates were introduced that technique became even less essential, so the part was redesigned. I can understand some MOCists preferring the old version if, say, they want to create towers with a spiral color pattern, but for other uses the new one should suffice.
    BumblepantsMAGNINOMINISUMBRAMaffyDLyichir
  • RecceRecce Tiny Little Red DotMember Posts: 879
    I think the trigger is less of "we want to design a new version of the same part" than "old mold has to be retired so when we redo a new one we would like to improve on it".

    MaffyDgmonkey76AanchirLyichir
  • MaffyDMaffyD West YorkshireMember Posts: 2,428
    Thanks all for that lesson in brick history. I loved reading all those opinions!
  • IstokgIstokg MichiganMember Posts: 2,082
    So much for this type of build.... :-(


    The 1964 set #801...
    sid3windrcatwrangler
  • FauchFauch FranceMember Posts: 2,232
    well the new rocket set isn't too bad
  • LyichirLyichir United StatesMember Posts: 659

    Istokg said:

    So much for this type of build.... :-(


    The 1964 set #801...


    True, but as my brother was pointing out, the basic form of models like this rocket could be achieved just as easily (and more sturdily) with the newer 4x4 round bricks. The only difference would be the texture (losing the offset between the stud gaps in the sides) and in some cases other than this one, the color (for models using a spiraling effect). And presumably, the added stability in more common "grid-based" building (making models more secure and allowing for the part to be attached to a single stud without shifting) was decided to be more important than this offset technique.

    Those sorts of trade-offs are common in redesigns. Another great example is the 2x2 round plate, which used to be able to be centered on two studs thanks to the "X" instead of a traditional tube on the underside. But eventually designers compared the number of uses they had found in sets for that technique and the number of potential uses that would come from redesigning it with a more traditional centered tube, and decided that despite the loss of that older technique the change was worth making.
    catwrangler
  • SprinkleOtterSprinkleOtter Member Posts: 2,708

    Lyichir said:



    Istokg said:


    So much for this type of build.... :-(


    The 1964 set #801...




    The only difference would be the texture (losing the offset between the stud gaps in the sides)


    You mean the only thing holding the rocket together?
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,749




    Lyichir said:





    Istokg said:



    So much for this type of build.... :-(


    The 1964 set #801...






    The only difference would be the texture (losing the offset between the stud gaps in the sides)




    You mean the only thing holding the rocket together?

    No, because if you used 4x4 round bricks like Lyi suggests then it would be held together by normal stud–antistud connections. And more securely than doing it "the old way", to boot!
    Lyichir
  • SprinkleOtterSprinkleOtter Member Posts: 2,708

    Aanchir said:








    Lyichir said:







    Istokg said:




    So much for this type of build.... :-(


    The 1964 set #801...








    The only difference would be the texture (losing the offset between the stud gaps in the sides)






    You mean the only thing holding the rocket together?


    No, because if you used 4x4 round bricks like Lyi suggests then it would be held together by normal stud–antistud connections. And more securely than doing it "the old way", to boot!


    Ah, I thought he was advocating the newer macaroni piece stacked in columns.
Sign In or Register to comment.
Recent discussions Categories Privacy Policy