I believe the handle was commented on... Here's the upgrade to that. (which I just purchased for my DS to HA Hero conversion.)
Attachments
Last edited:
Alleged Screen Used Hero TOS Phaser up for auction (now the aftermath)
- Thread starter Anakin Starkiller
- Start date
- Status
I believe the handle was commented on... Here's the upgrade to that. (which I just purchased for my DS to HA Hero conversion.)
WinstonWolf359
Master Member
Yeah, the bottom plate looks familiar too...
That's why the end of the handles would have an incorrect OVAL shape. A replica (including mine) would try and use this part....rather than doing it from scratch.
For someone to make a replica battery that weighs the same, and is interchangeable, they would have to know the weight and dimensions in detail of the Jein.
For someone to make a replica battery that weighs the same, and is interchangeable, they would have to know the weight and dimensions in detail of the Jein.
Last edited:
ghostryder
Legendary Member
Wow - fascinating.
Random question: Are the nozzles on the original screen-used heroes aluminum as well? Hand made?
Karstein
Active Member
What a fascinating thread. Thank you for this glimpse down the rabbit hole.
Interesting the auction doesn’t claim it to be screen used, just made for. I guess the market will decide what that makes it worth.
I think if I was buying something like that I’d want to know it’d been touched by the Shatner himself for that kind of money.
Interesting the auction doesn’t claim it to be screen used, just made for. I guess the market will decide what that makes it worth.
I think if I was buying something like that I’d want to know it’d been touched by the Shatner himself for that kind of money.
I believe it’s occasionally been speculated that this was a found part, but that doesn’t track with Jefferies’ sketches showing the rotating ring and the various bevels and whatnot (unless he’d already found a real part to serve as the range-adjustment collar on the phaser, which he then incorporated into his sketch). So, yeah, custom-made machined aluminum, I’d say.
WinstonWolf359
Master Member
I also think it was custom fabricated by the prop department.
All of the known phasers have nozzles that look remarkably similar...But the auction phaser's knurling just seems...off when compared to the rest.
I think it's also suspect that the auction phaser's nozzle seems to be cleaner and shinier in the first deep notch behind the front ring...normally gunk would collect in deep grooves (like what is seen on the GJ) but if you were applying dirt and/or weathering, it wouldn't get into those deeper grooves as easily, which is what I see on the auction phaser.
All of the known phasers have nozzles that look remarkably similar...But the auction phaser's knurling just seems...off when compared to the rest.
I think it's also suspect that the auction phaser's nozzle seems to be cleaner and shinier in the first deep notch behind the front ring...normally gunk would collect in deep grooves (like what is seen on the GJ) but if you were applying dirt and/or weathering, it wouldn't get into those deeper grooves as easily, which is what I see on the auction phaser.
ghostryder
Legendary Member
Not sure if this was discussed - in your bottom two pics, there's paint around the ring where it meets the phaser body - is that common? Does this mean it was painted while the nozzle was attached?
WinstonWolf359
Master Member
Yes. There's evidence that at least some of the phasers were repainted as the series went on. None of the other phasers seem nearly as sloppy or gloopy as the auction phaser though.
GrenadeKing
Sr Member
I think you nailed it. Those nozzles look exactly the same. 5 large, flat, even ridges as opposed to the 7 smaller ones on the GJ hero. A little carefully careless weathering with some Dykem, paint, and a dremel and off they went. Not even any built up gunk in all the recesses. Very unlikely that something seemingly handled so poorly and so dirty in other areas (even on the inside not exposed to the elements) would be so clean in that area.
Lightning
Master Member
the dirt and age on the inside of the P1 looks extremely authentic. Anyone there think they could duplicate that? What if we are dealing with a real P1 and a forged P2. Perhaps someone built a matching "ugly" P2 replica for their authentic P1 to sit in, and later they or someone else decided to claim the P2 was real as well.
That’s possible, although both the P1 and P2 show inconsistencies with the known originals.
genZOD
Sr Member
The look can be duplicated pretty accurately. I wouldn’t know how to do it in a way that would fool someone doing a forensic investigation—the materials I would use would be wrong.
Lightning
Master Member
I've seen the insides of lots of old machines, electric fans and the like, and it's dead on. But as you mention, you'd have to use actual oil, dirt and grease, and then make it look old and compacted. The P2 is much cleaner on the inside, matching the Jein, which has been cleaned.
QuasiOdo
Well-Known Member
Yeah, but the proportions of the AA/DST are waaay different than the Jein (or Wand.) If the auction phaser is a replica, they surely didn't base it off a DST.
Yep, I'm finding it a bit small.
USS Endeav
Sr Member
In auctions such as these, with an item of some historical significance, is it normal to see zero bidding with 2/3 of the auction passed? Is this usually something that sees last minute bidding frenzy? I've never watched or bid on something that was pretty much a one-off, unlikely to be seen again. I'm curious if this is expected by Heritage or is perhaps its causing some concern down the line.
Read up art forgeries. There are plenty of ways to age old paintings, sculptures and other objects to make them look dirty and worn with realistic weathering.
This also applies to old guns and even cars. All those things have been forged or altered to appear older than they really are. (Or to be associated with historic people or events that they have no connection too like a "7th Cav rifle" or "Hitler's PPK")
Seriously, like I said earlier, I'm looking at this from a different perspective. This has all the tell tales of a fairly well executed con with some effort made to create a convincing new "just found" prop and a seemingly plausible story that covers a multitude of sins. ("It's different because it was repaired")
The story itself, which really can't be checked as the main players are dead.
The fact that no documentation exists to match the story, like say a work order to Chang found in the memos that have been published for "phaser prop repairs" or even any work after his initial work was completed.
Or any references to him having this after the show ended, from anyone, at anytime. No one says, "He mentioned he had one still" or "He showed it to me when I interviewed him" or anything like that.
The fact that it can't be screen matched to any of the four known hero phasers.
That means there is a fifth, previously unknown hero, that was never captured on screen or referenced in any memos. And if the P1 and P2 are supposed to NOT originally be a matching pair, that means that there were TWO previously unknown heroes. (One that is now this P1, and a second that is now the P2 matched to the P1.)
Then look at the object itself. At first glance the construction techniques and wear, etc, look convincing. But then look closer:
The fiberglass on the P2 is thicker than the Jein.
The construction technique with the inlet side rail was not used on the original hero prop. This was something done by early replica prop makers and carried over by others later.
The Velcro is the modern type, not the correct vintage type.
The handle is noticeably different than the Jein handle in shape and size. The handle base plate seems to match a modern commercially available plate.
The nozzle is different from known screen caps AND matches a modern replica nozzle commercially available.
The location of the side knob.
The shape of the side rails that matches the Diamond Select shape.
All those things should be setting off warning bells and red flags. At this point, now that some current production replica parts have been found that appear to have been used (the nozzle, and handle baseplate), I can't imagine how anyone can really believe this is a 55 year old, previously uknown, prop and not a well done fake.
A real test would be buy one of those modern nozzles from eBay and compare it straight across with the auction piece in person. And then compare it to the Jein. I bet in person that modern nozzle will match the one in the auction piece exactly and have even more noticeable differences from the Jein.
Same for the handle baseplate.
EDIT: And I forgot about the nice, clear, non-yellowed Plexi. That's a tell, right there.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
