Part 47458 has zero clutch power

[MelonHeadSeb]

Hi, I am trying to attach the middle inner tube of part 47458 (Slope, Curved 1 x 2 x 2/3 Wing End) to the side of a SNOT brick, but it has 0 clutch power whatsoever. It attaches fine in other configurations where the middle isn't being attached to a hollow stud. I have tried a couple different ones and each has the same problem. Have I just been unlucky or do they all do this?

Edited October 5, 2021 by MelonHeadSeb

[Brickbuilder0937]

I just tested it on some of my parts and had the same results. It's because the wall of the piece is a little thinner than regular pieces, and has small bumps where it touches the side of the stud for friction. It was probably designed this way to save 0.01 grams of plastic per part.

Edited October 6, 2021 by Brickbuilder0937
Add photo

[MAB]

5 hours ago, Brickbuilder0937 said:

It was probably designed this way to save 0.01 grams of plastic per part.

 

I doubt it. If they wanted to do that, they'd have the same thickness for 1x2 plates that are much more common.

[Lyichir]

8 hours ago, MAB said:

I doubt it. If they wanted to do that, they'd have the same thickness for 1x2 plates that are much more common.

Yeah, plus this particular part is not necessarily a common enough part that those material cost savings would add up that substantially.

Giving a part thinner, reinforced walls like that isn't uncommon—many revisions of the classic 2x4 brick have featured similar changes. I think more likely reasons for it than a marginal cost savings on material is that thinner walls allow the part to cool more consistently (preventing unwanted warping), while the ridges where studs attach allow for consistent clutch power in those positions while also preventing the thinner walls from compromising the part's structural integrity.

If I had to guess, I would think this part got a similar treatment to those larger bricks because of its complex angles (creating areas where heat might disperse from a freshly molded part less evenly). A potential improvement, if the part ever gets redesigned, would be to replace the center tube with internal ridges like those on the newer 1x2 and 1x3 jumpers, or 1x2x2 and 1x2x3 slope bricks, which would not only provide clutch power for a central anti-stud but would also allow parts with solid studs (not just hollow ones) to connect to that central point.

[AmperZand]

@MelonHeadSeb, You may not like this solution, but it works: Give the area a thin coating of Humbrol Satin Cote and allow it to dry thoroughly (24 hours). If the clutch is still loose, add another thin layer and allow that to dry thoroughly. Repeat the process as necessary. You’ll probably find that one or two layers will do the trick.
 

Satin Cote is transparent and matches the lustre of LEGO making it tricky to apply (you can’t see what you’re doing) but also results in an invisible correction.

[MAB]

28 minutes ago, AmperZand said:

@MelonHeadSeb, You may not like this solution, but it works: Give the area a thin coating of Humbrol Satin Cote and allow it to dry thoroughly (24 hours). If the clutch is still loose, add another thin layer and allow that to dry thoroughly. Repeat the process as necessary. You’ll probably find that one or two layers will do the trick.
 

Satin Cote is transparent and matches the lustre of LEGO making it tricky to apply (you can’t see what you’re doing) but also results in an invisible correction.

Or just glue them. At least that way it is easy to later identify which parts are modified to change their clutch properties.

[AmperZand]

1 hour ago, MAB said:

Or just glue them. At least that way it is easy to later identify which parts are modified to change their clutch properties.

Or use a small bead of Blu Tack. 

[MelonHeadSeb]

57 minutes ago, AmperZand said:

Or use a small bead of Blu Tack. 

Yeah, thats actually what I ended up doing after posting this. I generally don't like to, but in this case I feel like it really should be able to stay there on its own anyway.

 

22 hours ago, Lyichir said:

Yeah, plus this particular part is not necessarily a common enough part that those material cost savings would add up that substantially.

Giving a part thinner, reinforced walls like that isn't uncommon—many revisions of the classic 2x4 brick have featured similar changes. I think more likely reasons for it than a marginal cost savings on material is that thinner walls allow the part to cool more consistently (preventing unwanted warping), while the ridges where studs attach allow for consistent clutch power in those positions while also preventing the thinner walls from compromising the part's structural integrity.

If I had to guess, I would think this part got a similar treatment to those larger bricks because of its complex angles (creating areas where heat might disperse from a freshly molded part less evenly). A potential improvement, if the part ever gets redesigned, would be to replace the center tube with internal ridges like those on the newer 1x2 and 1x3 jumpers, or 1x2x2 and 1x2x3 slope bricks, which would not only provide clutch power for a central anti-stud but would also allow parts with solid studs (not just hollow ones) to connect to that central point.

That would be a perfect solution, I hope they do end up doing that eventually.

[koalayummies]

On 10/5/2021 at 5:04 PM, Brickbuilder0937 said:

It was probably designed this way to save 0.01 grams of plastic per part.

Well conspiracy theories aside it could just be the way that this part is specifically designed to interact with another corresponding part; in certain situations would make it unnecessarily difficult to remove if it had more clutch.

[Brickbuilder0937]

So apparently there is a different version of this piece. Today I was building the flower bouquet set and noticed that this part in this set has a different underside and does have clutch power in the center, and also a different part number (81300).

[MelonHeadSeb]

On 10/9/2021 at 4:48 PM, Brickbuilder0937 said:

So apparently there is a different version of this piece. Today I was building the flower bouquet set and noticed that this part in this set has a different underside and does have clutch power in the center, and also a different part number (81300).

Wow interesting, Bricklink and Brickowl seem to have them listed as the same piece... What does the bottom look like? The one I have has the same sort of appearance as a 1x2 plate on the underside. (except with thinner walls and the small bumps)

 

Edited October 10, 2021 by MelonHeadSeb

[Brickbuilder0937]

The bottom looks like a standard 1x2 plate.

[MelonHeadSeb]

Ooohh, instead it has a thick wall instead of the thin one you mentioned originally. What a strange coincidence that you build that set very shortly after posting on this thread about this exact part :)

Edited October 10, 2021 by MelonHeadSeb