New Star Trek TOS Phaser coming November 2014

Cue the spam...


Lovely spam, Wonderful spa-a-m,
Lovely spam, Wonderful s-spam,
Spa-a-a-a-a-a-a-am,
Spa-a-a-a-a-a-a-am,
SPA-A-A-A-A-A-A-AM,
SPA-A-A-A-A-A-A-AM,
LOVELY SPAM,
LOVELY SPAM,
LOVELY SPAM,
LOVELY SPAM,
LOVELY SPA-A-A-A-AM...
SPA-AM,
SPA-AM,
SPA-AM,
SPA-A-A-AM!​

Oh wait... You probably meant something else. :$
 
Yeah, StarTrek.com sends many emails after signing up. But they have plenty of 15% and 20% offers in them, so I don't mind it so much.
 
I'm all for coupons, but aside from the Wand Co. phaser, I'm hard-pressed to find any really interesting merchandise there.
 
The Wand Company image, shown below, is a recent photo of the actual product and not a 3D render. The Wand phaser is very similar to the initial accurate Master Replicas prototype (before the China manufacturer changed the P1 in the shipping item).

comparison_wand_master01_zps85331fc6.jpg
 
Last edited:
That MR P1 is completely wrong as well. I've built several John Long kits (and I helped him draft the instructions for the kit), and that phaser 1's entire geometry is badly off. It doesn't even compare well to the Wand model right next to it. Not to mention it was obscenely, highway-robberyingly priced. That, combined with SD's fingerprints and unique fragrance all over it, make me hold my nose whenever the subject of the MR phaser comes up.
 
No doubt that John Long's work is extraordinary. I have 3 of his P1 kits that were built for me. What a gift to the hardcore TOS phaser prop collector. I'm just sorry I missed out on the Masterpiece Models kit John did. His buildup of that kit featured on his website looks like a prop that walked off the set of the original series.

MMherobuild_compare_zps4da7eeac.jpg
 

Attachments

  • MMherobuild.jpg
    MMherobuild.jpg
    40.7 KB · Views: 152
Last edited:
Jlong's MM kit was reportedly based on an earlier version of one of his models. It has proportion issues- which will become more apparent when compared to the upcoming WP. MR got the pistol body pretty accurate. Of course the p1, well...
 
Jlong's MM kit was reportedly based on an earlier version of one of his models. It has proportion issues- which will become more apparent when compared to the upcoming WP. MR got the pistol body pretty accurate. Of course the p1, well...

Well, those reports are probably inaccurate. There's been a lot of misinformation out there about John's work.

What the MM kit had were production issues. John scratch-made superior masters, but MM did a horrible job casting them. Apart from distortion, the castings shrank even farther than John had accounted for in his masters (I've recently cut mine into four pieces on the bandsaw in order to restore it, make internals and a brass handle, and fit John's fiberglass P1 to it).

The MM affair was a major factor in John's decision to produce his licensed kit himself, with very tight control over those parts he had to sub out (turning and knurling 2,500 thumb wheels was not in the cards).

John also revisited his source material, including his extensive notes, drawings, measurements, and photos from his examination of GJ's phaser, before scratch-making his masters. The result was the famous P1 kit. Notwithstanding the beautiful but idealized Wand Company version (I've already ordered mine!), John's P1 remains the only accurate licensed reproduction of the screen-used props ever made.

Maskull: I remember your famous video of the GJ phaser. For many of us, that was our first look inside a glorious enigma. Kinda like finally seeing footage of Cthulhu. :p
 
I was lucky enough to get one of the better MM kits. Again, it will be interesting to compare to the WP and the JL P1. In the case of the latter, VERY interesting. (And I'll do my best to ignore that "huge" WP side dial. Sheesh...)
 
Yeah, me too. The only Wand shots showing the P1 contours are 3D renders, and those could be early attempts that don't accurately reflect the final production shape, so there's no point commenting yet. Though they must've done some modification to accommodate the electronics. We'll see.

Yeah, my MM kit was not the best. P1 and P2 were fine, but the resin handle was seriously bent. Took major sanding and clamping. Oy what a pain! :)
 
The general overall effect of the Wand phaser is quite good for the price as seen above.

I've got 2 of the Wand phasers on order, and when it gets released I might be getting 2 more. I'll take one and mod it with either magnets or Velcro to make it work with a phaser belt. Another will probably get the B&W phaser treatment.

The real plus for me (beyond the overall accuracy) on the Wand phaser is the side dial dilithium chamber, which delivers a new working feature that is based on the Matt Jefferies concept notes for what the side dial is. The metal parts are finished with a satin finish, as well as the body. Removeable handle, USB charging, magnetic display base and cool storage/travel case fills out the rest of the niceties.
 
Last edited:
I'm with you there, Tom. It's fantastically accurate even as it is in the renders, and when you consider the very small $150 price tag, how can you go wrong? It's got nearly all the hero functionality, plus electronics, plus a new feature, plus a case! For $150!! Are joo KEEEEEDING???????!!!!! The one I've got on order certainly won't be my last, but I don't know when I'll pick up any more. I'm gonna be quite busy for quite a while scratch-building my own prop collection, which is gonna be a pretty hefty BOM. In fact, I'll probably have a BM when I see the BOM. :p
 
The really cool thing is that in the original Matt Jefferies phaser concept sketches, the meter area is actually an illuminated push button part (the 2 buttons used in the B&W phasers are there but weren't illuminated). The Wand phaser meter now functions as a push button part that is true to the original feature idea and has the illuminated modes. I like that approach. This Wand phaser is an incredibly smart new phaser with a sensible updated idealization to it. Dilithium chamber and all.

illuminatedpushbuttons_zps82f615e4.jpg
 
This thread is more than 5 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top