Dave, et al.,

I believe I solved my problem! Your recital of your own experience with
what seems like the same problem was the key. You said you ran into this
with a sheet you recreated via a "mechanized routine." So I looked over my
sheet-merge macro and looked and looked.

I finally saw that I was turning on autofilter mode early in the macro,
before I merged the data from other sheets. It shouldn't make a difference,
but it does. I moved that step to near the end of the macro:

' Turn on auto-filter mode if off
With DestSh
If Not .AutoFilterMode Then .Range("a2").AutoFilter
End With

When that step was taken before the merge, Excel would update the active
range later but always had it one row short! The named range could not be
successfully adjusted manually (except by your trick of adding an extra cell
of dummy data).

Thanks to all! A very educational turn of events, even though frustrating
and time-consuming. You guys are great.

--
Sarah

"Dave Peterson" wrote in message
...

I had the problem with xl2k. I don't think it originated with xl2007.

I'm sure there's a link somewhere on the MS site that would allow you
to contact them. But I bet it's difficut to find <bg.

"Sarah H." wrote:

Thanks for the further elucidation. As a matter of fact, I also am
creating this sheet automatically from a macro that merges other
sheets together. I'm using a macro that started out from one of Ron
de Bruin's merge VBA examples - http://www.rondebruin.nl/tips.htm .
But I edited it extensively and have been using it for a couple of
years in its present form under Excel 2002. Just now I'm trying to
remake the entire thing for Excel 2007 because of various annoyances
and incompatibilities with my 2002 macros and ranges. The merge
macro works fine as it was, but this problem now arises with
autofilter.

I appreciate your workaround idea (and might have to do as you
suggest in the short run), but in all honesty I am too fastidious
to be satisfied with a kludge of that degree after having decided
to dive in and fully convert my sheets to optimize in native Excel
2007 form. I am still in jaw-drop mode that such a problem can be
happening. It's not as if Excel 2007 just came out last week! Do
you or does anyone have a suggestion for how I can get Microsoft
support in on this?

(Gee, maybe I should have spent my effort re-coding for Open Office
instead. Then at least I could also run under Linux.) :-) -- Sarah

"Dave Peterson" wrote in message
...

I was going to include this in my first response, but I didn't want
to add clutter if it wasn't necessary.

I had an xl2k workbook that I created from scratch each morning
from data from various sources (it was a mechanized routine).

I had that same exasperating problem. The last row of the data
just wouldn't be included--even if I did it manually.

This was the only time (over and over and over) I've seen this
problem.

My workaround (not quite a solution) was to add something to column
A of the row under the last row. Then filter the range through
this lastrow+1. After I applied the filter, I'd clear the cell
(just clearcontents).

The only problem that the stupid filter included this lastrow+1
in its range! So I'd see "blanks" as one of the options for the
filtering dropdowns.

But I decided that I could live with that irritation to get the
real last row included.

Maybe it'll work for you and you'll lower your standards to allow
this other irritation.

"Sarah H." wrote:

Dave,

Yes, the last row is not included in the filter range. But
nothing I can do will get it to be included! That is the
problem. If I turn off autofiltering and turn it back on with
the entire range selected manually, Excel still leaves the last
row unfiltered and creates a new sheetname!_FilterDatabase range
leaving out the last row.

Even if I manually select the blank row following the last row and
turn on autofilter with that selection active, the problem still
occurs.

This is the silliest thing! I mean, millions of people are using
Excel 2007 and autofilters. How can such a basic problem be
biting me like this? I don't get it. Nor am I a newbie. Oh,
well, what other ideas do you have?

Much obliged. S

"Dave Peterson" wrote in message
...

Next time you do this, look at that last row that should not be
visible.

Notice the color of the row number for that row compared to the
row numbers of the visible rows in the filtered range.

I bet it's not the same.

That means that this row wasn't included in the range to be
filtered.

I'd remove the filter, and then select the range to filter. (I
never let excel guess!)

Then test again.

Did it work?

"Sarah H." wrote:

Hi, all,

I recently started using Excel 2007 after having used older
versions for many years.

I am having a baffling issue with AutoFilters. I turn on
filters, select a criterion, and find that the lowest row in my
data table shows up regardless, even though it should have been
filtered out.

I also note that the automatically created _FilterDatabase
range on my sheet ends one row too soon. But if I edit or
delete that named range, the problem does not resolve. Nothing
different happens at all.

Help?

--

Dave Peterson

--

Dave Peterson

--

Dave Peterson