Random part of the day: Plate 6X6, W/4.85 Hole, No. 1
Posted by Huwbot,
Today's random part is 73110, 'Plate 6X6, W/4.85 Hole, No. 1', which is a System part, category Plates, Special.
Our members collectively own a total of 19,948 of them. If you'd like to buy some you should find them for sale at BrickLink.
60 likes
21 comments on this article
Random part of the day is back!
Yay! It’s back!
That seems to be a very niche piece though, I wonder what the pitch was?
The number of colors and occurrences in sets are not in the text, is there some bug or was the algorithm revised to include only the total number of parts owned?
I've never seen this before in my life.
@DFX said:
"The number of colors and occurrences in sets are not in the text, is there some bug or was the algorithm revised to include only the total number of parts owned?"
The piece was in only one color
Isn't this the 2021 TIE fighter piece?
@Lego_mini_fan said:
" @DFX said:
"The number of colors and occurrences in sets are not in the text, is there some bug or was the algorithm revised to include only the total number of parts owned?"
The piece was in only one color"
Correct, but if you see previous RPotD posts where the part was also made in one color, this information is in the text along with the number of sets that has the part, e.g.:
https://brickset.com/article/66328/random-part-of-the-day-helicopter-axle
I actually got one of the two sets with this part (namely 75300 ) for Christmas, but because of the angle on this image, I had to double-check that that's actually what this part was. It does seem like a part that will likely get some more uses again, and it's certainly a sleeker solution than the 6X6X2 slopes with cutouts piece that was used in the original TIEs.
@Lego_mini_fan said:
"Random part of the day is back! "
How geeky am I that I’m thrilled to see the return of RPotD? :~P
Got 2 of these from Bricks and Pieces. Wanted to build Hedwig, but had zero interest is the rest of 76391
@LegoSonicBoy said:
"Isn't this the 2021 TIE fighter piece?"
It is. I suppose in a certain way, it's the modern equivalent of part 30373.
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=30373
@Kynareth:
It has five full pin holes in the center, and it appears to have been developed to replace a much bulkier part. Both parts were first used to mount the solar panels on TIE Fighters, so pretty important to help round out the theme.
@Zander said:
" @Lego_mini_fan said:
"Random part of the day is back! "
How geeky am I that I’m thrilled to see the return of RPotD? :~P
"
You're not the only geek here! :)
I was at first going to make some kind of a joke about having both number 1 and a 4.85 hole in the part name, but my number 2 idea not to do it was stronger and flushed the joke down the drain.
@560heliport said:
" @Zander said:
" @Lego_mini_fan said:
"Random part of the day is back! "
How geeky am I that I’m thrilled to see the return of RPotD? :~P
"
You're not the only geek here! :)"
Yep. I was sad when it was gone, and thrilled now it's back. I love looking at what sets the "part of the day" is included in, and which I have. Keep 'em coming!
Welcome back Random Part of the Day!
The additional information has been removed because it was often considered to be inaccurate, usually due to misunderstandings about LEGO's part numbering and how elements are renumbered over time, or inaccuracies in LEGO's set inventories.
Aww. I kind of enjoyed seeing the exact same discussion every single day. "It says it was introduced in 2009 but it's existed since 1992! What gives?" *cue series of comments explaining about the plastic mold revisions and stuff that generate different part ID's*
I built the Tie Fighter that includes this part, but I thought I never saw this part before. Must be getting old...
@Norikins said:
"I've never seen this before in my life."
Me neither!! Apparently a very new piece I've yet to encounter.
There could be “part families” that account for different part numbers and pieces that have evolved slightly over time. Example “This part family is a part of X number of sets in gray and X number in red”.
Having said that, I’m sure Huw has already thought these ideas through and it would get pretty complicated. Especially if it relied on relationships that must be manually maintained.