• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About toecutter3095

  • Rank
    Level 2 Stud

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Melbourne, Australia
  1. Ah, nice pick up. I never thought to try that. Using that option returns 12 parts instead of 7 and spot checking a couple of others like 53545 and 50659c01pb02 shows that they too are missing a monetary value. I guess we can disregard the picture having some weird bearing on the search as all but one of the new 'unused' parts have pictures in Dark Red.
  2. I was logging parts from a bulk lot of Bionicles and had a torso in Dark Red (50925) which would not return from a parts search. Filter options used: Part Category = Bionicles Color = Dark Red Appears in Year = 1950 - 2018 Average Cost = $0 - $20+ Sample search Tried different combos, removing Part Category which blew out the results to all Dark Red, then added "torso" to get the list back to a manageable number. No luck every time. Gave up and used the main search to look up the part number which found it in 8736-1. Looking at the parts page for this set, 2 things stand out. The picture for the part is in Dark Blue This part does not have a monetary value associated with it I'm guessing it is the latter which is causing it not to return from the search.
  3. Hello Back before Rebrickable v3.0 released, I had built a parts list for a bulk collection I'd bought and now I'm working through that list sorting it into other lists as required. Since compiling the parts list, this part 71610pb01 has been flagged in Rebrickable as "This part is disabled and cannot be used". Unfortunately this has also disabled all editing functions for the part, such that I cannot change the part id to match what Rebrickable includes in the set inventory now, nor can I just delete the part from the list so that I can add the correct one. In the past I've made the odd mistake with part variations but I've always been able to change the part id in the pop-up. Whilst that feature is still available in v3.0, this seems to be a new sort of "invalid part" for which that doesn't work. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks Greg
  4. Thanks for your help. I'd somehow never noticed that checkbox for show unused parts.
  5. Please add this part to the database: 3626bpx319 (Bricklink id). Here is a link for the Bricklink set relationships: It was in 6 sets from Dino 2010 and Dino Attack, none of which have any minifigs on this site. I'm just sifting a bulk lot of Lego though and found this part, so I can't verify any inventory except based on what Bricklink has. edit: Found another one missing from the same sets: 3626bpb0246
  6. Chrome works fine here too. I do see that sort of thing on some sites (not this one) when the intrusive proxy service we use in the office messes things up. The site will work fine elsewhere, or on my phone, just not when viewed from behind the corporate firewall. Might that be a similar problem for you?
  7. That's fantastic, thank you for the super quick turnaround. I couldn't understand what was happening with the files either, especially when the set-pieces had been updated to Dec 1st but the sets file was back at Nov 1st (so there were orphaned pieces without the parent "set" record). Weird, but happily fixed. The dates are appreciated and the new schedule is a nice bonus. Thanks for all your hard work on building such a wonderfully invaluable site.
  8. Hello Over the past 6 months or so I have been using the CSV files of sets and set-pieces that are available to download from the site. I'm better with VBA in Excel than I am with an API, so I've found it extremely useful that these files were available for me to tinker with. I have noticed that the files don't always seem to be automatically generated at the beginning of the month as is stated on the page. I don't mind some lag but it would be really helpful if the downloads page showed the date when the files were last generated. I keep having to download the files and open them to see if they've updated yet by checking the date of the zipped-up CSV file. I guess that's a suggestion but it leads to my next point (bug). I have been trying on and off all through December to get the updated files and whilst I've managed to get an updated set-pieces list, the sets list that I've downloaded still has a creation date of November 01. I've even tried clearing cached files etc. in my browser to rule that out as the culprit, but still the file has not been updated for this month. I'm sure you have more pressing issues/features to look at but I would appreciate it if you could find a little time to take a look at this. Thanks Greg
  9. I agree, I think it is a bug but it is also current behaviour (for better or worse).
  10. I think what you're after has been discussed here along with some gotchas to look out for: To summarise, if you have loaded up a spare parts list, you need to use the "What can I build?" function with all the advanced options set for exact matching of mold and color. Then (and only then) if you have a set at 100% complete, when you click that set to open up the set-specific page you will find a hyperlink near the top of the page to combine all parts into a set. Clicking this will give you a pop-up as to what set-list to add it to and after that all the relevant loose parts will be removed from your "My First Parts List". Parts are only ever removed from that first (default) list so if you're using a different parts list for the build search, be advised that the combine will not remove the parts from the alternate list, only the first list (this may or may not be a bug but it is certainly the way the function works, like it or not). Something else to be aware of is that the combine will also deduct the parts that are listed as "spare parts" for the set if it has any, even though these are not required for the build.
  11. I buy bulk collections of Lego, catalog the parts and sift through them to find the sets (or almost sets) and I've noted the same issue where spare parts are counted only when you do the combine parts to set. This causes me the most grief as it deducts the spare parts from the list of loose parts I'm sorting which can mean that the next set is not considered as complete as it should be because of the extra parts having been deducted. An option to control this would be greatly appreciated, or perhaps the default behavior should just be that the spare parts are not considered in the convert to set which would align with the way they are not considered necessary to complete a build.
  12. What I do works similar to what biodreamer describes and is not too time-consuming. Let's say I have a set at 80% in the build feature, clicking that will open a page showing the set and the missing parts. You can export that list of parts as a Rebrickable csv file. I then import that file into another "Temp" parts list and set this list to be used in builds as well. When you refresh the page for the 80% set, it will flip to 100% and allow you to combine parts into a set. When you do the combine into a set, only the actual parts you own will be deducted from your "My First Parts List". If you want you can take the list of missing parts loaded into your "Temp" list and created a wanted list on Bricklink or else just rinse-and-repeat with the next set. I buy lots of bulk Lego collections and use this method to sift through the parts to find the full sets (rarely) and the almost full sets (usually) that are hidden within.
  13. One thing you need to watch out for that I've been caught out with is that when you do the "combine parts to set", the system will also deduct the spare parts for the set from your loose parts list (if the set has any) even though the spare parts are not considered in the calculation for 100%. So if you haven't pulled the spare parts for the set from your box of parts, you'll find that the rebrickable list of parts will get out-of-sync with the physical parts which can lead to a set being reported as <100% when in fact you do have 100% of parts.
  14. Sorry, just realized I should have created to topics for my suggestions so I've split them now although I'm not sure how to change the subject line of my other post. To recap: I've been buying a lot of bulk Lego lots lately and using the site to catalog all the parts and find what sets are buried in there. Based on my experiences, I had a suggestion (or two ) My suggestion for the build scanner would be for an Ignore Themes page in the user-profile to enhance (or replace) the ignore sets functionality. This would be a page full of themes with check-boxes so that you can easily turn on and off themes as required for the build scanner, with an over-arching on/off switch so that you could choose to ignore or not with just one click rather than undoing all your selections. I do appreciate that this might create a heavy load on the scanner as it crunches the results but I'm not sure it would be any heavier than looking at the existing list of individual sets people choose to ignore (in fact it is probably less work on the database to ignore a whole theme than cherry-pick the sets to ignore). An alternative would be a filter over the result-set so that you can run it with all themes and then pick a single theme from a drop-down once you see the results. But then this is basically the same as running it filtered on theme x in the first place, so the ignore themes would be preferable. Thanks again for your wonderfully useful site.
  15. I've been buying a lot of bulk Lego lots lately and using the site to catalog all the parts and find what sets are buried in there. I have a couple of suggestions around the build scanner which would suit my style of using the site and hopefully others as well. The first suggestion would be for a summary by theme of the number of hits from the build scanner. Although you can apply a filter to tell it to find sets in x theme, I'd like to leave it open to look at all themes but get a summary of results instead so that I might further refine my searching based on what theme seems to be most represented. Since buying in bulk is a lot like opening a big mystery bag of Lego, I'd find this to be helpful in sorting through the parts to find the sets. An extra feature would be an adjustable threshold for what percentage of match you'd want to see reported so you can further filter some of the clutter so that the numbers are not skewed but just one red 2x4 that matches a heap of sets. This would probably need to be user-configurable as everyone's tastes differ, but I think the summary could still work well without this extra filter. Thanks for your time and all the effort you put in the site. Sorry, just realized I should have created to topics for my suggestions so I've split them now (the ignoring themes is in another topic).