Limited Run Blade Runner Whiskey Glasses by Magnoli Props

[sstnickg]

My Interest is in for the four pack Indy!

 

[EmmaInCandyland]

I'm checking with the factory, but I believe these will be lead-free crystal. We've never shipped anything quite so fragile, so fingers will be tightly crossed!

As for measurements, if there is an overwhelming preference for a slightly taller glass, let us know. I'm not sure what kind of tolerance there is in measurements... this is all a bit of a learning curve for us too.

I have an original 80s glass, if you need any more reference pictures and sizing, let me know

 

[drusselmeyer]

Real glass would be nice. The originals are lead crystal and you don't really want to be drinking out of them.

 

[HeliosActual]

Yeah, I'm probably in for 4 here as well

Yep! Same!

 

[drusselmeyer]

That said, for ease of manufacturing and price, I wouldn't oppose having PETE tumblers. There are plastics manufacturers that could do it. They would be durable and useable for drinking.

The same is true of the JW bottle.

 

[Indy Magnoli]

First physical sample:

The volume came up a bit smaller than the modern ones, even though we went taller, so we're going to reduce the wall thickness (which will actually increase accuracy, I believe) and get us closer to the 12.5oz of the originals.

 

[LZeitgeist]

Real glass would be nice. The originals are lead crystal and you don't really want to be drinking out of them.

Excellent point. I had to Google that because I thought it was an old wives' tale but you are 100% correct - lead crystal glassware is unsafe to drink from.

 

[userd1402]

-.-

 

[LZeitgeist]

(deleted sidetrack convo)

 

[Indy Magnoli]

It's a moot point here as we're using a lead-free crystal.

 

[LZeitgeist]

It's a moot point here as we're using a lead-free crystal.

Perfect! Thank you.

 

[userd1402]

-.-

 

[HeliosActual]

They should be thin enough that if confronted by a replicant and squeezed, they should shatter in your hand immediately. Consult Madam on this please. =)

 

[drusselmeyer]

I think the corners need to be a bit crisper and the bottom flare needs to be a tiny bit wider. Other that that, it looks good.

 

[kurtyboy]

I'll take a set.

 

[Indy Magnoli]

Thinner walls, so it's now up to about 11.5oz (340ml) which is still a bit less than the modern versions. Maybe our thicker bottom (to make it more like the 70s/80s version) is the cause of the lower capacity.

 

[Panaflex]

Thinner walls, so it's now up to about 11.5oz (340ml) which is still a bit less than the modern versions. Maybe our thicker bottom (to make it more like the 70s/80s version) is the cause of the lower capacity.

View attachment 1636448

Looks stellar. Has the base been widened on these? It looks slightly thinner in the base than the original. Overall great work.

 

[TheSweatshop]

Thinner walls, so it's now up to about 11.5oz (340ml) which is still a bit less than the modern versions. Maybe our thicker bottom (to make it more like the 70s/80s version) is the cause of the lower capacity.

View attachment 1636448

If someone has the 70/80’s version to double check volume. If the older ones are more like 340ml then in my opinion the volume discrepancy isn’t a problem needed to be solved.

 

[Prush242]

I think most people would prefer an exact match to the original glasses and don't really care about the actual volume.

An exact match to the originals will still hold ~plenty~ of JWB—if you happen to finish your glass, just refill it.

 

[Indy Magnoli]

Just double checked with someone who has a vintage one and the 37cl capacity actually measured out to only 330ml. So, I guess we're pretty much on the mark. So the question is now... do we advertise it as a 340ml glass (which is actually is) or "round it up" to match the original specs. Maybe I'll just call these 12oz glasses. That sounds good.