More details on the Vader ROTJ saber - Please archive

</SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
fried mon calamari wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
Also, looking at the orientation of the D-ring and grips, this pic shows the dring pointing to the 7:30 position and you ocan see thin layer of tube above the grip that is contacting the holes

[PIC SNIPPED]

and then here the d-ring is almost horizontal (8-8:30ish) and you can barely see any tube over above the same grip.

[PIC SNIPPED]

Or to highlight it a different way, the front grip hole in the lower pic is pretty much along the centerline of the tube ( looking directly across it ) and in the top shop the front hole is lower down the side.

</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

I dunno, I don't see it - I see both pics to be identical in the D-ring orientation, and that whatever seeming difference is caused by viewing it "from a different point of view"...

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
obi1kenny wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
You want an extra hole, well here you go:


</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

Gosh, looks like there IS an extra hole there. You can see it here too:



Hey Kenny, could you drill that hole on my Graflex for me as well? Thanks!!!

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
obi1kenny wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
Now for the good stuff, here you go:



</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>



WTF is going on there??!

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
obi1kenny wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
KL:

That hole is visible in this pic you posted..[SNIP]

It is just filled with the same white crap that the charging port is filled with.
Here is another pic, check out the red arrows:



</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

Thanks for the pic! Wow, looks like they filled up both the TOP AND THE BOTTOM holes!
They must have thought the holes made it look ugly or "wrong", so they filled it up.

And I do agree it's very possible that they used the same "crap" to fill in the recharge ports too.

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
lonepigeon wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
OK- first like I said earlier I only found ONE top "grip" screw hole. Can anyone show another???
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

But Chris, that's what I was saying - I don't believe there HAS to be another screw hole showing. See the diagram I drew again:



I believe that on the Luke ESB grip that would have showed the holes in a Vader 7-grip placement (ie., the 3rd grip from teh left in my lower diagram (of Luke's ESB saber)), they might simply have put the rivet on the RIGHT side of the grip hump.

OR - they could have puttied the hole up so that it doesn't show anymore.

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
lonepigeon wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
I'm beginning to believe it's NOT a grip screw hole (too big, too low, and only one).
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>

I still believe they were the top grip holes.

"Too big" - I believe that we have not seen the ACTUAL Luke ESB saber that was used. We are assuming that it should be a small hole based on the rivets that were used on the RANCH saber.

"Too low" - Again, the ACTUAL luke ESB saber used (which we have probably never seen) could have had the rivets lower.
ALSO, as I pointed out earlier, I believe the grip lengths are probably different between the VAder ROTJ and Luke ESB (as suggested by the difference in distance to the L notch), which would make the Vader ROTJ holes appear lower than it actually is.

KL, thanks again, my friend.


Yes, that pic alone made me think the entire thing over.

I think it's some kind of metal endcap. NOT authentic Graflex, and still unsure if it's a washer...my guess is that it's cut sheet metal.

Check out the end of the Linhof D-ring assembly without rivets.
Looks like hot glue to me!!!

CRPROPS, thanks again for your very kind donation to this thread.



To those of you who have been working with me on this, a note: I won't be around much for the next few days. Please keep it straightforward, address the issues (and don't overlook any!), so together we can have something to be proud of archiving.

</SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
DARTH SABER wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
This looks like an older photo...The control box seems to be aligned straight....</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>

What do you mean? The box alignment looks perfectly consistent with the diagram I drew, which was based on all the other photos.

Yeah KL, does look like an endcap, but man, you gotta admit theres some white powdery gunk on all of the other photos which dampen the matallic reflection and the seems aouind most of the edges..

So far this is the first photo Ive seen that convinces me..

</SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
Oohyeah KL wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
DARTH SABER wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
This looks like an older photo...The control box seems to be aligned straight....</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

What do you mean? The box alignment looks perfectly consistent with the diagram I drew, which was based on all the other photos.
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>

No, I was referring to the new photos, it seems the box doesnt look like its been knocked off its alignment exposing those holes underneath...But its hard to tell from this angle.

</SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
DARTH SABER wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
Yeah KL, does look like an endcap, but man, you gotta admit theres some white powdery gunk on all of the other photos which dampen the matallic reflection and the seems aouind most of the edges..

So far this is the first photo Ive seen that convinces me..
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>

Absolutely agree.
I think they used some metal disc and puttied it all up to smoothen out the edges so it would look more AS ONE with the rest of the saber.

ie., we're all correct - both a disc and putty!!

</SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
Oohyeah KL wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
Absolutely agree.
I think they used some metal disc and puttied it all up to smoothen out the edges so it would look more AS ONE with the rest of the saber.

ie., we're all correct - both a disc and putty!!
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>

Wow, did we actually come to a consensus on this part?
( As I'm grabbing up my sheetmetal and making some discs)

Thank goodness for that new bottom pic!
I still disagree with any putty on top of it. There could be glue under, but not on top. That white powdery gunk is dirt from 20 years of not being cleaned. Look at all the ROTJ props, they are all like that. It's very easy to see on the E-11's.

The D-ring assembly is aligned exactly how I had it figured from all the photos.
When I redid my hole evaluation I marked reference points like thet box, catch, D-ring etc.. (Much like KL did).
You now what I discovered?
When I positioned it all to match the rivet holes for the D-ring perfectly matched the predrilled holes on the HK bottom. Meaning that the ESB saber this was made from was aligned like the Hero that Larry based his holes on.
I think it's too convenient that the one of the top grip screw holes that should show just happened to be on the opposite side of the grip ridge. Besides that I figured that 3 should show.
KL - The first top "X" on the left in your template posted is the third one I figured should be partly visible (but a slightly crooked grip could cover it).

KL- the pic you posted that appears to have the two holes filled is only because of the point of view. We are seeing the side of the holes (thickness of the metal). Check the alignment - those two holes are the ones we most clearly see in all the other pics including the Archives book pic.
(second holes from the left in the template posted).

I know the differences in position and size of that single visible top hole aren't proof for it not not being a grip hole, but they don't help. If we could find just some proof that it IS a grip hole screw I'd feel better.

I don't know what that groove above the grips is, but it has been mentioned in this thread before. Maybe they cut the black band while it was on the saber already? Could be a groove made by pipe cutters. I don't see a material change just a groove/cut.

That hole just below the catch could be the first bottom hole drilled for the catch. If you moved the catch to the point where that hole lines up with the bottom hole of the catch wouldn't the top of the catch then be just under the cowl? (Did you follow that?) It probably looked dumb that way and someone said "move that piece up". So they have to cut the top of the catch off and move it up.
Now, all that said what's holding the top of the catch on?
Why doesn't it pivot from that bottom screw? Was there a screw in that middle hole? If so what's holding it now?

DS, I definitely see the ridge/groove at the front of the grips. I've wondered about this shot-

The area at the front of the grips shows a black band all the way around the back of the clamp. Could the line you pointed out be a residual from that? ( if the base of this saber was used)

Just a thought, nothing definite

</SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
lonepigeon wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
I think it's too convenient that the one of the top grip screw holes that should show just happened to be on the opposite side of the grip ridge. Besides that I figured that 3 should show.
KL - The first top "X" on the left in your template posted is the third one I figured should be partly visible (but a slightly crooked grip could cover it).
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

Well, I figured 3 should show too, but not from that first 'x' you were thinking of, but from the third grip (from left) of Luke's ESB saber. To me, the first 'x' sits comfortably under the grips to be covered.
Yes, it IS "convenient" that our explanation is that the rivet was put on the right side for that particular grip where it should have shown, but how else would you explain the top holes?? Unless another plausible explanation is made, I see no other logical explanation.

Speaking of which, can I ask you what you know about the Ranch Luke saber in terms of rivet placement? Were the top rivets/screws put on the right or left side of the grip hump? Or were they inconsistent? Do you remember? Any pics to show? What I have right now don't show much.

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
lonepigeon wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
KL- the pic you posted that appears to have the two holes filled is only because of the point of view. We are seeing the side of the holes (thickness of the metal). Check the alignment - those two holes are the ones we most clearly see in all the other pics including the Archives book pic.
(second holes from the left in the template posted).
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

I dunno... the shot looks pretty dead on to me, just as dead on (or off) as the Archives pic or the other pic where the holes were clearly visible. I still stick with Kenny's opinion that they filled it with gunk, just like they seem to have filled up the recharge port with gunk which was not seen in the other (earlier) pics.
If those are indeed still holes as you say, then that's one heck of an optical illusion!

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>Quote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>

That hole just below the catch could be the first bottom hole drilled for the catch. If you moved the catch to the point where that hole lines up with the bottom hole of the catch wouldn't the top of the catch then be just under the cowl? (Did you follow that?) It probably looked dumb that way and someone said "move that piece up". So they have to cut the top of the catch off and move it up.

</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

That's a very logical explanation! I believe tha'ts probably the case too. They drilled the hole, then decided to move the door latch further up, and chopped off the top end of the latch.

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>Quote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>

Now, all that said what's holding the top of the catch on?
Why doesn't it pivot from that bottom screw? Was there a screw in that middle hole? If so what's holding it now?

</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>

Could it be that the flat top end of the latch pushing up against the shroud would be sufficient to prevent it from moving side to side?

FINALLY.....a kick-ass thread.......

My god, this saber is going to be a pain in the ass for me to make...Alot of small detailes to keep in mind.

Im still debating on whether to go with the gunky bottom or the cleaner bottom with the metal showing...



OK, so what have we found out so far on this thread???


.

</SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
DARTH SABER wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
My god, this saber is going to be a pain in the ass for me to make...Alot of small detailes to keep in mind.

Im still debating on whether to go with the gunky bottom or the cleaner bottom with the metal showing...
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>

C'mon, if you're going to go that far (eg., making your bottom half gooey and gunky (and looking like... wood ), you might as well go all the way and replicate the thing as precisely as you can!!!

For me, I'm going for an idealized half-way version:

- pristine Graflex finish
- all holes drilled (well, 3 for the bottom half, and 1 under the door latch)
- Assymetrical bolt placement
- control box ALIGNED, not slanted to show the insides
- MAYBE a clean metal disc at the bottom (but problem is I wouldn't know how to make one... )

</SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
DARTH SABER wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
Im still debating on whether to go with the gunky bottom or the cleaner bottom with the metal showing...

</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>

I can't believe it! I figured for sure if anyone was going to make this baby as photo-ugly as this bad boy is becoming, it would be you!

I going to try the wierd-shaped disc idea and try epoxying it to the base and see what happens. I've already started banging the rolled lip against my vise and scratched the hell out of the front tube.

On the door latch piece, I was figuring on a drop of epoxy under the front square since it looks loke it sets back a couple MM from the shroud ( unless that's another optical illusion )

well, I figure I already have my hardware version which is pretty clean, so I might as well do a wethered version ..

I'm just wondering why the white part (the dirt) looks so much like it's a part of the glue or whatever it is. To me, it doesn't look like it's on top or below the glue. Looks mixed in. Heck, I don't know what kind of dirt is floating through the air at the exhibit though.

might be anthrax...

Do any of you own the T-track that Laszlo made a find on a few months back?

If so, and if you're willing (for the sake of this thread!), would you send me a piece?

I'll dip it in black Plasti-Dip so we can see some actual results.


That's all for now...seriously, gotta get a few hours of shut-eye!

Got the update on the circuit breaker

------------------------------------------------------

Subj: Re: YJ-9304L Terminal Type Circuit Breaker
Date: 5/6/2003 1:06:09 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: amy@yuehjyh.com




Dear Sir,

We usually sell them in large quantity. We can sell in small quantity, while, for smaller quantity, the unit price will be very high because of the shipping cost. Although we sell most of our circuit breakers to America by importer, while, I am sorry that I do not know which company have distribut store. Sorry.

I have received the pictures you send in 3 e-mails. It looks LIKE YJ-9304L. While, I am not very sure, because it is not complete.

If there further problems you have, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Regards,

Amy Lin
Yueh Jyh Metal Industrial Co., Ltd.

</SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
Oohyeah KL wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>

</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>

I must say, the grip in this shot that's bent sure looks like a rubber grip that wasn't put on properly or that was pushed around a little after it was afixed to the tube. Judging by this picture, I really doubt the grips being metal.