91 people own this set. What is the least owned Random Set of the Day?

@PJMcC said:
"91 people own this set. What is the least owned Random Set of the Day?"

An existentially gripping concept. I suggest finding a tag that is in as many sets as possible, and then sorting by Number Who Own. The first few results will be close to an accurate result. If you sort by year, and find the lowest number who own in every year, you could find the least owned LEGO set ever. I am assuming it is in the Gear category, but I do not know if those sets are used as Random Sets.

That steering wheel is pretty far away on the extended chassis.

ALT Build: L__________ O___________ N____________ G _____________C______________A________________ R

@MCLegoboy said:
" @PurpleDave said:
"Ah, purple. It boggles my mind why they retired one of the six basic colors of the rainbow."
Not to nitpick, although I do love doing it, but there's seven colors of the rainbow...
It ain't Roy G Biv for nothing!
In fact, technically, purple's not even a color on the rainbow, even though it is more commonly used and interchanged with violet."

I don't believe in indigo.

Looks like a pretty decent parts pack to me...

@PurpleDave said:
"Ah, purple. It boggles my mind why they retired one of the six basic colors of the rainbow."

You just after royalties or were you their chief supplier of the colour? XD

@phi13 said:
" @MCLegoboy said:
" @PurpleDave said:
"Ah, purple. It boggles my mind why they retired one of the six basic colors of the rainbow."
Not to nitpick, although I do love doing it, but there's seven colors of the rainbow...
It ain't Roy G Biv for nothing!
In fact, technically, purple's not even a color on the rainbow, even though it is more commonly used and interchanged with violet."

I don't believe in indigo."

Agreed. Indigo is the Pluto of colours.

The steering part works fine, but the gearing at the back of the car does nothing as if they forgot to add the usual 2 or 4 stroke piston engine but have left purple plates for it to sit on? Sorry, my mistake is a prequel to the hidden side where you need an app on your tablet to see the engine?

It was cool that they made these parts packs. Most of all, 5218 from that series was awesome. Best way to get some air tanks.

@LegoDavid said:
"Looks like a pretty decent parts pack to me..."

That's exactly what it is!

To me, Pluto will always be
a) Mickey's dog
b) a planet

It's only a matter of definition anyway.

@LegoDavid said:
"Looks like a pretty decent parts pack to me..."

Adjusted to inflation this set would cost around 25 dollars today. For 137 pieces thats not a great value. I dare to say that if this set was released today it would be met with high criticism and negative comments...

Compared to the old Car Chassis, this is nothing. However, it's a decent chassis for a truck/SUV. There is no floor--but then again, this IS Technic! The long chassis is a good starting point for larger vehicles. Bonus points in that it can seat a Technic fig. A used one on Bricklink right now is less than $20, and this is really tempting me.

And, I think the engine is sorely lacking in this set. However, I'm wondering--did they leave it out for a 9V motor to be added on later?

@MCLegoboy:
So, which "indigo" would that be? The modern usage that puts it between primary blue and violet, the classical usage that's based on the color produced by indigo dye, or Isaac Newton's usage which based the colors of the rainbow on the European musical scale and resulted in indigo replacing primary blue and blue landing more where cyan would be located?

Newton decided on the list of color names _before_ doing the prism trick, and had someone else mark the colors on a piece of paper because he wasn't very good at distinguishing colors. Indigo doesn't really fit into any form of color theory that I'm familiar with, outside of discussion of rainbows. And you can exclude rainbows if you ignore Newton's attempt to turn the rainbow into a musical scale, and plug any other form of color theory into the pattern of a rainbow.

Besides, if you were going to properly nitpick, you should have pointed out that purple isn't even a real color. It's just a figment of your imagination, created by your mind making something awesome out of the mundane.

@HandPositions:
That would be a lot easier if being picked for RSotD automatically applied a RSotD tag to each set that appears, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

@Bhahouighf:
They retired Purple shortly after Harry Potter debuted (the Richard Harris Dumbledore has a Purple outfit, but it appears that 2004 is the first year Dark-Purple appeared, and 2005 is the last year Purple was used). The choice Stafford had to make was between Teal and Dark Purple. If he'd chosen wrong on that count, the entire purple spectrum would have been pretty much wiped out, barring trans-purple.

@CarolinaOnMyMind:
Indiana Jones set 7195, Ambush in Cairo, had a Dark-Purple 4x6 car hood, which is proof that Purple had been retired from the color palette by 2009.

@MCLegoboy:
Yeah, that one really bugs me because the people behind that decision were clearly trying to find a way to define Pluto out of planethood...and the didn't even get that right. If you look at our solar system from the edge, 99.999999999999999% (approximately) of Pluto's orbit lies outside of the solar plane...and is pretty much completely empty of everything except Pluto and Charon. Eventually, they're going to find a celestial body that's bigger than Earth and fails to meet their revised definition of a planet, and then they're going to end up with a real pickle on their hands.

@AustinPowers:
You got it backwards, and missed a step. The planet was named after the Roman god (equivalent to Hades from the Greek pantheon). Mickey's dog was named after the planet.

I miss this old shade of purple. Most of my examples of it came from early Bionicle sets (Onepu and the Nui Jaga) and the shade has a vibrancy to it that other purples lack. It would be a great color for a MOC of stuff like Covenant vehicles from the Halo series, or just anything sci-fi that needs such a bright purple.

Although either this set I do have to say that black yellow and purple feels very late 90's for a color scheme.

@thor96:
Adjusted for inflation, today this set would be...still $17. Maybe less. They seem to favor nice $5 increments for anything above $15, so it's debatable whether they would reduce or raise the price to get it out of the gap.

Can't turn my nose up at a parts pack

@PurpleDave said:
" @MCLegoboy :
So, which "indigo" would that be? The modern usage that puts it between primary blue and violet, the classical usage that's based on the color produced by indigo dye, or Isaac Newton's usage which based the colors of the rainbow on the European musical scale and resulted in indigo replacing primary blue and blue landing more where cyan would be located?

Newton decided on the list of color names _before_ doing the prism trick, and had someone else mark the colors on a piece of paper because he wasn't very good at distinguishing colors. Indigo doesn't really fit into any form of color theory that I'm familiar with, outside of discussion of rainbows. And you can exclude rainbows if you ignore Newton's attempt to turn the rainbow into a musical scale, and plug any other form of color theory into the pattern of a rainbow.

Besides, if you were going to properly nitpick, you should have pointed out that purple isn't even a real color. It's just a figment of your imagination, created by your mind making something awesome out of the mundane."
Oh man, you out Technically Corrected me, and since being Technically Correct is the best kind of correct, you are the best. :)

But yeah, it's a silly debate. For me, Indigo lays between Blue and Violet, I mean, that's why Biv is what it is in Roy G Biv, but then when you deal with color theory and specifically color wheels, primary, secondary, and tertiary colors, complimentary, contrasting, and analogous colors, Indigo really doesn't fit. (Well maybe in analogous, but it's really a tertiary color because blue and violet mix to make it and doesn't really denote it's own category because 7 divides horribly due to being prime.)

@MCLegoboy:
Yeah, well, I'm not about to challenge anybody to limbo. You got unlucky on that one, because sometime I think in the past year I stumbled on an article explaining that what we think of as "indigo" is completely different from the historical definition of the color. I studied theatrical lighting design in college, and focused a lot more on use of colors than they were apparently used to, so if I run across an article that gets into something weird thing about colors, I have to read it.

The purple thing is true, too. Violet is visible in a rainbow, but purple isn't. You can't produce purple light by aiming white light through a prism, because the only way we can perceive purple is to combine red and blue light. That one I've known long enough that I can't remember exactly when I learned it.

@PurpleDave
@MCLegoboy
Is this a good time to bring up the Inverted Spectrum theory or no?
Are we even looking at the same color?

@CarolinaOnMyMind:
It's not a great time, since this comment board expires in 20 minutes. If you're talking about John Locke's qualia theory, wasn't that more of a philosophical thing? I don't think his theory, as stated, has much merit, but it does touch on some interesting oddities. In my college theatre days, I was able to sort color gels by just holding them up to the light and comparing the colors. Very few of the other people who worked on the light crew could do that, so even ruling out colorblindness, there's clearly a difference in the way any two people perceive color (just as there are people who have perfect pitch, and others who are tone deaf).

The other thing is that your eyes are constantly white-balancing themselves, so the colors you perceive are constantly being tainted by the colors you have recently perceived. One of the most common examples of this is a trick many people have experienced as kids, where you look at an image that's presented in really odd colors for about a minute, and then look at a white surface where you'll see the same image in the correct colors. For me, that example was a US flag where the field in the upper left was yellow, seven stripes were green, and the stars and the other six stripes were black. Switch to a white background, and the yellow turns blue, the green turns red, and the black turns white. My lighting designer professor did this trick with us where he aimed two small theatrical lights at a white panel and turned off the rest of the lights in the room. He turned them off, and back on, before asking which one was blue. Then he turned them off and on again, and asked the same question, and repeated this several times. Each time he turned the lights back on, the blue light would switch sides with the white light, until he got to the end and pulled the blue gel out and revealed that rather than swapping the blue gel back and forth, he'd been adding progressively more saturated blue gels to each side, while our eyes kept compensating by interpreting the less saturated color as "white". Partly this is the result of overworking the specific cones that perceive the color in question, and partly this is your brain trying to impose some degree of sense on the signals it's receiving.

@CarolinaOnMyMind:
Another theory I've run across that fits that description is that everything you see is actually the opposite color of what you perceive, since you're seeing the light it reflects, while the object is supposedly the color it absorbs. That theory has its own problems, because it doesn't account for any form of light outside of what we term the "visible" spectrum, for one. We know of several creatures that are capable of seeing UV or IR wavelengths, which drastically affects what they see, and we only labeled that one section as "visible light" because it's the portion we're capable of seeing. That theory is restricted to the visible light spectrum, so it falls apart once you expand it to include UV and/or IR. And we have no idea what things look like when you start including X-Rays, Gamma Rays, Radio Waves, Microwaves, and the rest of the complete EM spectrum.