Yes, definitely dropping pin holes primitives would be a very bad idea, as they also provide automatic connectivity for editors that support it (SR3D builder).
An overlap is really annoying only in two cases: if part is transparent (overlapping surfaces create locally less transparent areas) and, to a lesser extend, on curved surface (visual artifacts caused by smooth shading behaving differently on the overlaping areas).
If you really want to remove overlap there, I would use method 2 of Ronald: leave connhole primitive, and build quads around outer ring of primitive. I'd use Coverer for that...
A final note: when possible, T-junctions (there are a lot in your part) should be avoided (at least when it's easy - sometimes removing them leads to an unwanted increase of triangles in part). For more information about T-junctions and why they should be avoided, see http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dat/parts/?n=6086
Quote:the visual loss of polygonized corners and cylinders is so highI kind of agree with that - note that in my review I mentionned top surface (where overlap elimination was rather easy) and not front/back
in my eyes that is is not worth the gain of getting rid of overlaps.
An overlap is really annoying only in two cases: if part is transparent (overlapping surfaces create locally less transparent areas) and, to a lesser extend, on curved surface (visual artifacts caused by smooth shading behaving differently on the overlaping areas).
If you really want to remove overlap there, I would use method 2 of Ronald: leave connhole primitive, and build quads around outer ring of primitive. I'd use Coverer for that...
A final note: when possible, T-junctions (there are a lot in your part) should be avoided (at least when it's easy - sometimes removing them leads to an unwanted increase of triangles in part). For more information about T-junctions and why they should be avoided, see http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dat/parts/?n=6086