Incidentally this was the debate. When the new sources came out and Bryan and I discussed the changes we discussed either to split and roll this into separate designs.
From a Resource management perspective it was determined the same exterior geometry would be better across offerings and as such we folded the geometries into the FX too, begetting the Gen2 even tho the main reason to open the design was for practical assembly and tolerance issues (threads).
It certainly is not meant to be a slight to anyone who purchased previous batches; but more an attempt to improve an already In our opinion fantastic product.
Would it have been better to ignore those things and produce a batch knowing it could be even more accurate so as not to disappoint previous customers? Definitely a dilemma we faced then and are seeing the consequence of now.
At the end of the day, this is a hobby with "buyer beware" stamped all over it, at least in regards to accuracy. With rare exceptions, there are ALWAYS new discoveries and tweaks to be made. And, even if a prop is found and examined in exhaustive detail, there are still things to pin down, like backdating it to its screenused appearance, modifications made during its lifespan, etc.
The goalpost is ALWAYS in motion. And it's something we should all be aware of. At some point, you just have to say "good enough". Always strive for better, but know when to reasonably take a step back and chill out.
I mean, Master Replicas' high-end props (six-grip ANH Vader, one-rivet d-ring ANH Luke, etc.) were generally considered about as accurate as possible, back in the day, but now seem almost archaic.
Last edited: