Original ANH X-Wing going to auction

vectorzero

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Just noticed this line in Auction 83 at Profiles in History

"An X-Wing Fighter miniature from Star Wars – Episode IV: A New Hope."

I'm pulling down the pdf for a closer look.

 
Screen Shot 2016-05-21 at 12.39.36 PM.pngScreen Shot 2016-05-21 at 12.40.15 PM.png

It says rebuilt from exploded screen used models (looks like a little Red 2 and Red 1)
 
It goes from saying screen used in their heading to actually telling what it is in the description. Kind of deceptive there.
 
Pretty sure Pat McClung built or painted this for Grant in 1980 or so? If I am remembering the provenance correctly?
 
I heard that too Jason. Guess what I'm trying to figure out now is whether we are looking at one model or two.

I have pics of McCune's office model dressed as "Red 4" from prior to last year's SDCC, pics of either the same model, or one that came out of the same molds as the first one dressed as "Red 1" at SDCC last year, and then pics of McCune's "Red 4" office model in the Profiles catalog.

So IMO, we are either looking at one unique model made from "screen-used" parts that had been painted three times, which I kind of doubt, or we ar looking at two different models that came of a mold made around a pattern that was not the same as the original pyro pattern constructed for Star Wars, and unlikely, IMO to be either constructed from screen-used parts or even unique.
 
Yeah, tiny parts have been added in a number of places. And of course, the engine nozzles are from the Estes rocket kit and not the Revell Phantom.
 
I think this IS the one from the office. I seriously doubt there is any part of this ship that is screen used. The story I hear is that it was built out of the original molds, but that doesn't make it screen used. I've seen X-wings after they've been blown up. It would take a lot of work to make those parts whole again and I don't think it would look this clean.
 
In a nutshell, GMD had two Xwings. There was a single Xwing in a display case, and one that was part of a display they had at SDCC last year (it was in a long case, chasing a TIE against a fiber-optic star field).

i can't comment on the origins of the Xwing or the TIE that were part of the SDCC display. That is NOT the Xwing being auctioned.

The single Xwing in its case was on display in Apogee's lobby from around 1980 till they shut down in 1993. Grant had it in his office at GMD after that. THIS is the Xwing that is being auctioned. I've heard various tales as to the origins of the parts. There might be some pyro debris in there. Sometimes the charges were duds or they just did a test with one. Talking to Pat, the bulk of the parts were leftover 1976 castings that were in a box that Grant managed to squirrel away before ILM took everything up north. (In other words, the parts were cast up in 1976, and intended for use rather than being cast up 5 or 10 years later for 'fun'.). Some missing parts were replaced with the same kit parts (also left behind). The whole thing was repainted in 1980, hence it looking cleaner than a "Franken-wing" of pyro bits and new castings.

As as to the veracity of the claim that it was screen used, I have my doubts - as do many here. But I do remember seeing this Xwing in Apogee's lobby several times when I visited and interviewed there. (Also saw it at GMD over the years, including at Grant's memorial.). This certainly makes it a period piece with its own story. But then again, I'm not bidding. (It does make me want to get my Capt' Cardboard kit out of the cupboard and finally paint the damn thing.....)

Gene
 
I'm thoroughly confused after reading the listing and viewing the pictures. Not one of the movie stills is of the model being sold. I see a shot of Blue 1, Red 5 turned around and it looks to be Red Leader. Is it just a pile of leftovers put together?
 
Last edited:
What a bunch of B.S. I can't believe they charge an additional 25% on top of the purchase price as a "premium"
 
This thread is more than 7 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