ANH Hero DL-44 Discussion - Three ANH Greeblies Found

Wow...this is a tough call. On one hand I do see what you mean about a flat spot but, on the other hand I see only a shine from the obvious light source...probably a flash.

If I had to pick I'd say no, there is no milled flat surface and it is round all the way around.

Have any clearer pics of the Naked Runner gun surfaced that might help?

Anyone ever study the pics below? I know some have posted #1, the side view with Sinatra but never saw the others on the RPF.

Seems the barrel may be the same barrel from ANH.
About the right length.
Has the bevel/chamfers

Also note the position of the scope mount. Possible Mystery Disk answer?

Don't think it's the same receiver due to the Safety. Has a hole in the knurled area. ANH does not.

Gonna try to get film on Netflix to see better. The last shot laying in the grass seems to be our best bet.

The little nitch at the end of the barrel to lock the other segments would be great to look for on the Solo blaster.

look at this and tell me what you think.

Note the shadow line below the red line. Seems to be round?

Very, very, interesting.

My thoughts would be round too , i think the offset of the flash hider is caused by the grub screw pulling it down when it was tightened up.

kpax said:

---

Anyone ever study the pics below? I know some have posted #1, the side view with Sinatra but never saw the others on the RPF.

Seems the barrel may be the same barrel from ANH.
About the right length.
Has the bevel/chamfers

Also note the position of the scope mount. Possible Mystery Disk answer?

Don't think it's the same receiver due to the Safety. Has a hole in the knurled area. ANH does not.

Only the upper is from The Naked Runner. The lower body of the gun is a different Mauser.
Chris Reiff and I figured there was a flat bottom to the barrel when we blueprinted the gun for SW Blueprints: The Ultimate Collection a few years ago. It makes sense and it does make it easier to break down (and we know they switched the upper onto another body for ANH).

The Merr Sonn blasters are cast from the full Naked Runner gun (upper and lower). The lower was replaced later when Han's Hero blaster was finished.

All those Naked Runner pics are from my site The Parts of Star Wars:
The Naked Runner thumbnails

The info about the lower Mauser being replaced is on there too:
BlasTech DL-44

Just when "everything" was thought to have been discussed about this prop, something new arises and a day's lesson is learned

In the one Naked Runner pic with the extreme close-up it looks to be milled on all sides....possibly octagonal.

Why didn't the MR Han "EE" incorporate this into its design? Is this discovery that new?

Just the thing I was curious about too

DL 44 Blaster said:

---

Why didn't the MR Han "EE" incorporate this into its design? Is this discovery that new?

After years of seeing numerous DL-44 discussions and replicas, I've never really seen this one detail discussed or incorporated into many replicas.

It just seems too Perfect of an explanation to NOT be there. If only we had better references to work with..

-Carson

here are some more images and drawings to ponder.

The barrel in my opinion not octagonal as seen in the HERO pics below. I think it looked that way in the extreme CU due to the poor quality screen capture of the image and by blowing it up so big- it simply got distorted.

kpax said:

---

Hi Chris,

I tried to email you from your Parts of Star Wars site but the mail couldn't be delivered. I was asking if you had any HD versions of the images from Naked Runner to review. I hope you don't mind me posting the pics. I'm new here, not sure if I'm supposed to post your link or not.

Not sure why your email didn't come through. The email link should be correct on the site. Naked Runner isn't available in HD or even DVD last I checked. Those screencaps are from the VHS.

How did you find out about the switching of the lower receiver if you don't mind me asking? Did you ( do you still) have contact with the production people?

No, I haven't talked to the production people. All my research has been done from hi res photos. Early preproduction photos of Han's blaster clearly show it was built from a clean lower (no holes). The "mystery disc" only shows up in later pics. It seems to be a mark from a piece removed. The circle is slightly recessed (might just be paint thickness).
The Merr Sonn blasters have discs from where the Naked Runner mount was cut off (probably cut from the resin copies not the actual gun). They also have the same hammer as the Naked Runner gun, not the final Han blaster.

Although the FLAT bottom idea seems reasonable I don't think it is accurate. The idea that it would make it easier to "break down " is only applicable if the bull barrel actually came off. I have not seen the film. Did it come off in the film?

I think by break down people mean easier to slide the upper off.
No, the barrel did not come off in Naked Runner.
The flat also just looks better since it matches up with the gun body.

Also a quick Q about the Flash hider. I saw that on The Parts of Star Wars site a 1972 Fire Extinguisher Dispersion Nozzle as the flash hider. That fire extinguisher nozzle looks very much like the MG81 part. Do you have any more info on the nozzle? Anybody?

The Parts of Star Wars needs to be updated (I know, I know - it's been MANY years). I work nearly full-time on official Star Wars work and just don't have the time to work on the site.

That "fire extinguisher nozzle" pic came from an old member of the RPF who swore he found the correct prop part. It wasn't until years later that the MG81 hider was found and we knew he was lying. I have no idea of the actual origins of that pic. It could be a war relic found on a battlefield, but he swore it came from a pile of old extinguisher parts from a fire house.

I agree with everything kpax has said.

I don't quite understand what you mean by having the flat in the barrel that the upper would slide off easier. Doesn't the upper slide forward (toward the muzzle) when you take the gun down? What would be the reason to have the flat at the "bottom of the barrel"?

Anyway, I dunno, I'm not convinced either way 100% about the flat, but it looks round to me at the moment, always has.

Pretty sure they slide back. The MGC does anyway. Pretty much like most hand guns.

Dann said:

---

I agree with everything kpax has said.

I don't quite understand what you mean by having the flat in the barrel that the upper would slide off easier. Doesn't the upper slide forward (toward the muzzle) when you take the gun down? What would be the reason to have the flat at the "bottom of the barrel"?

Anyway, I dunno, I'm not convinced either way 100% about the flat, but it looks round to me at the moment, always has.

If the upper receiver slid off to the rear it would be important the barrel did'nt stick below the frame.

See below and link for break down info.

The Mauser model 1896 Broomhandle Pistol

quote:
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]Cock the hammer and lift the lock frame stop lever (take down latch) upwards. Slide the receiver foreward, it should be toward the barrel, slowly, as the lock frame may pop loose from the bolt locking block. If the locking frame does not pop loose then firmly pull the lock frame downward and away from the the barrel.
[/FONT]

Unless it's a different model this seems correct. The upper slides Forward so no "need" for the flat.

BUT... you never know.

Great info from Chris. Thanks for the explanations!

I think we have now proven that there could be a flat... but my depiction of the cross section of the barrel and receiver/bore lay out shows it could be done without a flat.

Glad that's settled.
One more thing to consider:


All depends on the actual position of the bore.
The search goes on.

Just for reference.

A lot of variation in Mausers from what I have seen.

kurtyboy said:

---

Pretty sure they slide back. The MGC does anyway. Pretty much like most hand guns.

Hi Kurtyboy,

Most autoloaders like the 1911 and Glock disassemble with the slides moving to the front after removing or unlocking the slide pin.

1911
YouTube - ‪1911 Takedown Video 1‬‏

Glock:
YouTube - ‪Glock Disassembly / Field Strip‬‏


The Mauser does not use a slide per se, it uses an internal bolt assembly similar to a Ruger Mark 2.

Ruger:
YouTube - ‪Ruger MK II & III Disassembly/Reassembly EASY (part 1 of 2)‬‏

BUT as Kurtyboy said, the c96 upper receiver does indeed disassemble to the rear!

I found this:
Mauser:
YouTube - ‪C96 disassembly and reassembly‬‏


So the first link I posted with disassembly instructions is incorrect information or just written poorly.

Seeing is believing.. .except in still shots and bad angles, or over exposures or anything to do with props and movies.

Still doesn't help answer the flat barrel question, can still work either way.

Is this question analogous to the Flat Earth vs round Earth question?

Maybe we should try to answer that one, ...Easier I think.

Sorry for my ignorance with guns but we just don't have 'em here!

I just know that you can slide the upper receiver back on the Mauser which cocks the hammer back, and I can do the same on a replica 1911 I have.

kpax said:

---

Hi Kurtyboy,

Most autoloaders like the 1911 and Glock disassemble with the slides moving to the front after removing or unlocking the slide pin.

1911
YouTube - ‪1911 Takedown Video 1‬‏

Glock:
YouTube - ‪Glock Disassembly / Field Strip‬‏


The Mauser does not use a slide per se, it uses an internal bolt assembly similar to a Ruger Mark 2.

Ruger:
YouTube - ‪Ruger MK II & III Disassembly/Reassembly EASY (part 1 of 2)‬‏

BUT as Kurtyboy said, the c96 upper receiver does indeed disassemble to the rear!

I found this:
Mauser:
YouTube - ‪C96 disassembly and reassembly‬‏


So the first link I posted with disassembly instructions is incorrect information or just written poorly.

Seeing is believing.. .except in still shots and bad angles, or over exposures or anything to do with props and movies.

Still doesn't help answer the flat barrel question, can still work either way.

Is this question analogous to the Flat Earth vs round Earth question?

Maybe we should try to answer that one, ...Easier I think.

Hi Kurtyboy,

Sorry if my reply sounded offensive, wasn't trying to jab at you at all. Just answering.

The Slides and or bolts do pull back to "rack" the hammer.

And you were correct about the Mauser receiver being disassembled to the rear. Have a look at the videos. Pretty cool.

I've disassembled the MGC a dozen times in the last week or so, it's very cool it breaks down in the exact same manner as the real Mauser broomhandle. I even built my GK MGC disassembled so I knew I could get it to reassemble and disassemble any time I want.

I'm leaning towards flat milled based on the reasoning behind disassembly/reassembly and the pictorial evidence.

Are we here to discuss any other aspects of the blaster like the barrel greeblies in evidence in the second and fifth pictures in post 1? Or has that all been well sorted? Maybe a refresher for those of us who enjoy talking blasters.

No offence taken, honestly!

kpax said:

---

Hi Kurtyboy,

Sorry if my reply sounded offensive, wasn't trying to jab at you at all. Just answering.

The Slides and or bolts do pull back to "rack" the hammer.

And you were correct about the Mauser receiver being disassembled to the rear. Have a look at the videos. Pretty cool.

For anyone that doesn't already know, the barrel greeblies were nailed by Lonepigeon years ago. A piece of t-track and two of those 'antenna' toggle switches.

The exact same details are on the Merr Sonns but in resin obviously.

wuher da brewer said:

---

I've disassembled the MGC a dozen times in the last week or so, it's very cool it breaks down in the exact same manner as the real Mauser broomhandle. I even built my GK MGC disassembled so I knew I could get it to reassemble and disassemble any time I want.

I'm leaning towards flat milled based on the reasoning behind disassembly/reassembly and the pictorial evidence.

Are we here to discuss any other aspects of the blaster like the barrel greeblies in evidence in the second and fifth pictures in post 1? Or has that all been well sorted? Maybe a refresher for those of us who enjoy talking blasters.

I'd love to see another run of those antenna toggle switches. I'd like 6 or 8 of them.

wuher da brewer said:

---

I'd love to see another run of those antenna toggle switches. I'd like 6 or 8 of them.

Me too.

kurtyboy said:

---

Sorry for my ignorance with guns but we just don't have 'em here!

I just know that you can slide the upper receiver back on the Mauser which cocks the hammer back, and I can do the same on a replica 1911 I have.

Kurt, does the replicas upper receiver draw back, or do you mean the little T lever (like in a M4 rifle) pulls back? Some replicas don't have the same feature as the original guns.

In a real Mauser C96 you flip the safety to Fire and draw back the internal slide, but the upper receiver stays stationary (and will lock open if unloaded, otherwise it feeds a round). The hammer is now cocked and the safety may be put to safe now.

It will slide back slightly (under a quarter inch) and will do so when fired but remains for the most part stationary with the inner slide shooting back and over the hammer. The hammer does not self cock mechanically but gets slapped back from the slide ramming back cocking it.

The C96 is very odd, and it's to expensive to shoot ($2+ a bullet) but it looks so cool. My C96