Thanks for adding the links and discoveries at the beginning carson!, should make it easier to follow and join in.
Thanks for adding the links and discoveries at the beginning carson!, should make it easier to follow and join in.
What where the original Scope mounts that where used?
I have plastic ones but are there any metal versions out there?
I don't have access to any Mausers right now. My MGC upper receiver is in Germany and the rest of my DL44s are in storage. I do hope to buy a real C96 for coversion eventually though.
My flash hider was from the run of steel MG81 flash hider replicas done 3 or 4 years ago. I think it's the same as yours. There were quite a few made and they were sold both here and on ebay.
Last edited by kpax; Jun 29, 2011 at 3:09 PM.
But unless you have a original (proof) to take your own measurements, or go with other/old/wrong measurement, you can´t use the measurements given by me. They were taken from a made mount that was given to me, not a found one - so it could be considered as something like "recasting". The measurements were given to you for private use only, not to make numbers and sell them.
Sorry, i assumed that was already clear from my messages when we had our mail-conversation, long before it was said in this thread that you´ll try to offer parts for sale.
Any measurements I've incorporated into the Model were measurements determined from reference photos over the years. It has allot of updating to do to accommodate the new reference pictures available, and nothing has been changed and probably won't be until we find some real Mauser measurements to base the mount on. Pat (kpax) hasn't sent me any measurements concerning the Scope Mount, just references and ideas concerning the layout and look of the Mount.
So there isn't any issue of recasting involved with any Models we have or will be working on. It's strictly reference and ideas going into these pieces.
Also I, and I 'm pretty sure Pat too, are doing this completely non-profit. Only the Machinist and Finish people will profit from this Project. This Project is to make accurate parts available for everybody who wants them, at the cheapest price possible. I plan on money coming OUT of my pocket for this if anything.
Here's a thread I started a while ago of my old Mount Model:
Last edited by deadbolt; Jun 29, 2011 at 11:00 PM.
We have not posted any information on the scope mount so you may be jumping the gun (pardon the pun) so to speak. As with the barrel and sight, we intended to have full participation of RPF members to chime in to help get parts that everyone AGREED with.
I was under the impression that this was a GROUP effort and project and that everyone here, including you would like to have a full metal set of parts that are as screen accurate as possible.
Please keep in mind that my version was created from pics and guesstimates before we ever knew each other and I only checked my version against your casting which is not correct as now proven by the new Sitting Target stills I posted so you need not worry, none of your information will be used without your permission.
OUR new version, as Carson said is based on work he started last year, long before you and I ever corresponded. I had contacted him back then to see if he had gotten anyone to make the mounts from his 3d models because I did not want to have to machine my own! He didn't, so I did have to make my own.
I have spoken with Carson about the need to make this new version adjusted to AVAILABLE hardware, like the knurled screw I used from JW Winco. It is a 17.mm OD 1/4-20 knurled screw, which I used to size the rest of my scope mount based on the HERO pics by overlaying etc.
As you know I started my project as a gift for my nephew. I only need one, which I now have. (I'd love to replace the parts I have already made with these new PERFECTED parts but don't really need to) I am only interested in the FUN of discovering new things and was happy to be of some help with the Bull Barrel revelation.
Any NEW parts we make will need to be "sized" to fit all the models available, REAL, MGC and Denix which I am sure your particular sample does not do. Even the barrels can not be "cast" from an original Mauser as the part would not "fit" a Denix or MGC.
My machined parts are not the same as yours and are in fact substantially different as I needed to adjust the dimensions to fit my altered Denix and now adjusted again based on the new photos we got from ST and NR.
I checked again your email and dimensions and can assure you, my dimensions are different as you will see if we continue this development.
My mount is in fact based on and adjusted for a 22mm tube which I am using for the scope which as you know is bigger than the original so EVERYTHING needed to be scaled accordingly.
According to your email which I reread, your concern was that no one should "make a profit...without doing his homework" etc.
As Carson said, I do not intend on profiting at all on these parts and will gladly let someone else get them made or let each individual interested party have them made from the work Carson and I are putting in.
As I told Carson in an email, I intended to have everyone interested deal with the machinist directly if that is practical. I have no interest or need to make a few dollars from these parts. I, just like Carson and most people here only want the BEST parts we can get and I thought that working together we could all have the best replica possible.
To date I have put a lot of time into trying to HELP the RPF members have access to these new parts and have spoken to several CNC guys and metal casters to try to get some ball park pricing.
Frankly I think it may be too expensive to make these parts in the numbers estimated so the entire subject may me moot.
Carson is doing a great deal of 3d work solely to get the most screen accurate versions of these parts for all to use freely. Maybe we should have made that clear as well. Maybe we should thank him and encourage him as well!
As for your concern about re-casting: I would think that it could be considered "recasting" IF we were to use the model you had and made a mold and actually recast parts for sale and profit. We are not doing that of course and would not want to since your sample is not correct and not made of metal as these hopefully will be.
I hope you do not feel that I took advantage of your information. Your information was merely used as a check against mine. To reiterate, My hand/machine made pieces are not the same sizes as yours and did not want them to be exactly the same since your version, as well as all the other currently available parts are not correct including BT, MR and others.
Even the FHs are not really "good enough" which is why Carson is redoing the entire piece rather than merely "copying" it.
I am hoping we, together, can hash out the details to perfect all the parts we all need as we did with the barrel.
I am certain that the final pieces will be nothing like any part anyone here has to date. They should be as close to original as possible without the original to measure against.
I think I have been very forthright and open about any information I have had and shared freely to all interested RPF members all materials I have researched and created.
I welcome anyone with machinist friends like Lichtbrings, that may be able to make these parts for us to price them out when we get them perfected.
It has been my pleasure to offer what little help and observations I can to these efforts.
Here are some pics of mine. I am sure you can compare and see clearly it is not a "recast" of yours.
If anyone thinks I have been unethical or wrong in my dealings I will gladly bow out.
To be very very clear. Any parts we define and perfect here together are not for sale by either me or Carson or anyone else contributing to this discussion.
The purpose of this thread is to perfect and define the parts of the DL-44 as best we can and offer the opportunity for anyone wanting to "make their own" parts from the detailed models and files that may be generated from our joint team effort.
IF we all find that we would like to make a NON PROFIT run of these items we may choose to do so. For now, we are simply discussing and investigating details, with some success I might add.
I hope this addresses your concerns.
Last edited by kpax; Jun 30, 2011 at 1:42 AM.
At least we know now that these scopemounts were available and it´s no custom made part. Or ist it, maybe like the bullbarrel?
IIRC BobaDept has measurements of an original MG81 flashhider...worth shooting him a PM and ask.
Kpax, how accurate do you make the MR Elite scope bracket to be?
Also considering the measurements were derived from an original and made out to be when they were sold, using real measurements isn't really recasting, their supposed to be original measurements.
Either way, I would prefer using Original measurements for anything Identified over any measurements at all.
Recasting measurements? Oy-vey!
I don't have an MR scope mount to compare but from the images I have seen it looks pretty good, but lacks the new details Carson and I have seen in the ST stills. It may be close to the original but we will never know. I am sure MR had to guesstimate the sizes as well which is why using theirs as a model would only mean copying a mistake in my opinion.
I estimated the size of mine based on the amount of frame recess (above the trigger guard) area on either side of the mount and first penciled it in place on the frame and then sized it according to the knurled screw I was able to get. I think it is close, and since we don't have and prob. never will have an original mount it will be the best we can do.
After taking some pics I noticed it looked too big when overlayed with the hero so I cut it down and soldiered it. (Yes you can soldier aluminum but I don't recommend it!)
The rings I took from real ring sizes and shapes from similar period German and Russian rings of the same dia. and details etc. This also brings together the entire design since it has to "look right". If the rings are x size you can extrapolate the rest of the sizes by simply dividing the section by the known size.
Now that I have this model I can refine the size and round off the numbers to make sense. Ie: instead of 20.011mm you make it 20mm. I am sure, like most things industrial, the item was more or less even, and logical in the layout.
Thanks for the reply Michael.
I agree with your concerns. I am an artist and would not like my work copied without permission. We all need to be sensitive to this issue.
This thread was started to PERFECT the parts of the DL-44 which in part assumes that the existing available parts have varying degrees of inaccuracies which we are all trying to address and revise because we find them lacking. The vary act of doing this is creating NEW material and parts.
I hope we can continue to develop these parts together as a group. More eyes, more observations equal better details.
As I said before, we will never know the actual dimensions of the HERO parts unless someone someday finds it. The HERO is not available for study and even that may have even used several different /similar parts if any were damaged during production etc. (ie: Greedo) so the best we can do is choose a "time frame" for the prop to replicate as has been said before. In addition the parts from the original HERO would probably look wrong if put on a Denix or MGC without modification even tough they were the REAL parts.
It seems that most here prefer the HERO as known in the promos and stills available with or without a sight and or antenna etc.
I may be different than some here in that I don't put that much stock in the REAL dimensions, since every Mauser (Denix, MGC or REAL) is different and that parts that look good on the hero REAL version may be out of place on another.
As I said, I needed to adjust the parts based on comparing the Hero photos to photos of my model and just like the FH, the ones we have, while pretty close and good are not "screen accurate" in appearance which is why I am remaking mine to match the photos, not particularly a REAL MG81 which as Lichtbringer said were made in many factories and all were slightly different but the one that is shown on the HERO.
In my view, once this is done, any dimensions from the original reproduction (a contradiction in terms?) will be changed and therefor NEW information.
Is this a fair assessment?
I believe my FH to be a reproduction of a REAL vintage MG81 and was not made by anyone in the RPF and not made as a prop and was indeed made for a REAL, firing MG81 which is why I am comfortable sharing the measurements.
I believe all the working dimensions should be as
close as we can get to the HERO if that was a real MG81 and we have no reason to doubt it at this point, remembering the fact that many factories were used so there were differences etc. even a vintage MG81 would not LOOK like the SW HERO.
The cosmetic dimensions and details are another story. As stated before, as it is now I noted several areas of modification we need to make as did Carson.
The Straight knurling, bullet knurling, recess between, and I believe the holes on the HERO are slightly smaller than mine.
Again, the ones I bought as REAL FHs, are great for shooting but not for cosmetically replicating the SW prop.
I think all the parts will be treated this way to get the "look" and feel first and then measure up that "look" to replicate.
Real is great, but we also need to be practical if we want the best we can get.
Sure, every scratch can be replicated, I have done this in my profession, but we need to draw the line somewhere so we can practically get it done without costing thousands of dollars per part.
I will post some pics of my development of parts and proofs for everyone to study and assess.
Please feel free to comment.
Lets say person one has bought a real flashhider for some hundred Dollars (or knows someone who has), to take the measurements for making a replica.
Now someone buys one of his flashhiders/finds one/know someone who has a replica, uses it´s measurement to make copies to sell them in high numbers. What would you call that?
Here are some proofs I found tying the ST scope and mount to the SW HERO.
Let me know what you think.
How likely for Two Different scopes to have the lens retaining ring notches line up exactly at the same angle. Hard to do it on purpose with the fine threads on a scope?
Michael, you have an Original scope, do your notches angle the same way, lets say 11:25 GMT?
Note the worn, rubbed and rusted area on the HERO scope in front of the adjustment knob where a RING used to be?
Note the FLAT areas on the inside (toward gun) rings on both the HERO and ST mount...coincidence?
KEEP IN MIND THE SCOPE IS REVERSED ON THE HERO AND THINK INNER AND OUTER SCOPE MOUNT.
Last edited by kpax; Jun 30, 2011 at 7:38 PM.
Nice observations Pat, It seems likely now that could very well be the same Scope and Mount used! Maybe the Sitting Target Mauser was an Elstree Prop?
Now we know, and knowing is half the battle.
A FEW MORE OBSERVATIONS
PS: SHOULD SAY "KNOB" NOT KNOW BUT TOO LAZY TO CHANGE
KNURLED SCREW DETAIL
ONE MORE FOR THE ST AND SW SCOPE AND MOUNT MATCH
Sorry about the cap lock
What are the chances of the rear AND front fine thread lens rings lining up exactly the same?
Here is some prelim details to show the NEW found details of thickness and inner REAR surface detail.
square hole thru and rear top dovetail detail
here is my thought.
Note the damaged areas on the upper receiver rail as circled.
not there on the pre- production HERO without disk.
There on the post production with the disk.
That spot is suspiciously in the same location as the rings on the ST AND DISK area.
Could it be that the prop guys tried to put the scope on the SW Bull Barrel NR hero on the left somehow and the rings either impacted the frame leaving a dent, possibly by dropping it?
Again, maybe it wouldn't holster properly so they switched it to the right?
Why the disk ???
Last edited by kpax; Jul 1, 2011 at 9:57 AM.
here is a comparison between the SW left HERO with disk and the ST Mauser with dovetail.
Note where the center screw hole in the dovetail lines up.