Energizer Vader lightsaber and original flashlight model

[Benjo]

Hi there,

I really love the energizer Vader’s Lightsaber prop. To me, it’s an interesting scratch made recreation of the Vader’s saber characteristics, as all of these background/stunt/touring versions.

Recently, I came across that thread: Energizer Lightsaber project - as originally made

I knew the Energizer Lightsaber was built around a Maglite and that thread gave me the desire to buy a regular 3d Maglite to build that prop too, wich I did.
I found another thread giving a few dimensions of an ILM resin cast of that prop, made a scale from a bunch of pictures found on internet and drew a plan of the lightsaber.

The thing is, I received the maglite and realized the barrel diameter was bigger than expected.
I had 35mm (approximately 1 3/8”) body diameter on my plans, the maglite barrel diameter is 39mm ( 1 9/16”).
I decided to ask thd9791 about that and he confirmed my observations: the ILM cast is smaller in diameter than the maglite, 1 7/16" (ILM cast) against 1 9/16”(Maglite).

We can assume many casts were done for the commercial, and casts are smaller than originals due to shrinkage but in that case the difference seems way too big.

the ILM cast measures around 272 mm as lenght (10,71 “). If I scale up my plan to fit the maglite diameter (and keep the right proportions), then the lightsaber measures approximately 301 mm as length. Again the difference seems too big for a simple shrinkage.

My point is, I’m not that sure the prop was made around a Maglite. Though the maglite cap is dead on to the lightsaber prop cap. After a few search, we can find the same cap on other 90s flashlights, like some of the Brinkmann models for example, as the lightsaber was surely built around a flashlight according to these pictures.

I wish I'm wrong, but it really seems the Maglite isn't the original part. Is there any flashlight models with the correct barrel diameter?

Please let me know what you think about this statement. I'd really like to know more that prop and its original parts

Cheers

 

[E Williams]

My point is, I’m not that sure the prop was made around a Maglite. Though the maglite cap is dead on to the lightsaber prop cap. After a few search, we can find the same cap on other 90s flashlights, like some of the Brinkmann models for example, as the lightsaber was surely built around a flashlight according to these pictures.

When getting parts together for mine I came to the same conclusion - it’s a Maglite endcap but not a Maglite tube. Even putting aside the diameter difference, If I recall correctly I couldn’t find any Maglite models that had enough knurl-free length to build the lightsaber. The knurling texture is recessed and so the whole Maglite would have needed to be turned down, and Maglite wall thickness seems awfully thin for this.

I think it could just be a simple aluminum tube for the body. So, no actual threading in the end.

Funny you mention the Brinkmann lights as that’s what I ended up picking as a compromise for my kit build - it has an endcap that is similar enough to a maglite along with a plain tube where only a little material needed to be turned down on a lathe (along with removal of the black anodization).

 

[d_jedi1]

I dunno, I cut down a maglite to make a starkiller saber last year (? or maybe the year before) and the walls are pretty thick.
Seems to me that if you sanded through the knurling, you'd be in the ballpark and still have PLENTY of meat left on the tube.
Of course, if you've got another way to go.. by all means.
Just remember that castings tend to be a little bit smaller than the originals.

 

[E Williams]

Good points, and I’d forgotten that thd9791 had successfully sanded down his maglite.

 

[Treadwell]

Don Bies made it, and is a member here....

 

[SethS]

I wrote what Bies recalls in the lightsaber guide. Pg 77

https://wannawanga.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/SWLB_May_2019.pdf

He said it was a Maglite body.

 

[kurtyboy]

I just put it down to shrinkage as the whole casting just seemed small to me and I scaled all the parts up. I especially scaled up the shroud to match the dimensions I got for the Barbie-Con version.

 

[Dann]

Yeah, pretty sure the shroud is the same part on the Energizer and the Barbican, so, I think the castings really are that shrunken.

 

[FolkyPatrol]

I just put it down to shrinkage as the whole casting just seemed small to me and I scaled all the parts up. I especially scaled up the shroud to match the dimensions I got for the Barbie-Con version.

I think the shrinkage is a bit too much for a prop with these dimensions ? Because 4mm on the diameter/width is a lot...
Can you imagine the shrinkage there may be in the length of the prop ?

 

[Benjo]

First, Thx to all of you for your answers

I dunno, I cut down a maglite to make a starkiller saber last year (? or maybe the year before) and the walls are pretty thick.
Seems to me that if you sanded through the knurling, you'd be in the ballpark and still have PLENTY of meat left on the tube.

Yes that's possible. THD9791 did and it seems to work fine. Walls are thick on a maglite, you can even remove a bit of thickness but you cannot reduce the cap diameter.

I wrote what Bies recalls in the lightsaber guide. Pg 77

https://wannawanga.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/SWLB_May_2019.pdf

He said it was a Maglite body.

I have just seen the latest updates on the guide ! (very interesting by the way).
Don Bies said so, and the endcap is identical to the maglite, so.....Dunno what to think.

I think the shrinkage is a bit too much for a prop with these dimensions ? Because 4mm on the diameter/width is a lot...
Can you imagine the shrinkage there may be in the length of the prop ?

according to what I have, the shrinkage in lenght would be approximately from 301mm to 272 mm.


The Barbican, the ILM cast and the energizer share the same part under the shroud (and on the activation box on the original energizer prop). I don't have the dimensions of the real part, this might be a clue to have an idea of the original energizer prop size (the Energizer shroud seems very close but a bit taller than the Barbican's)

 

[Benjo]

I just put it down to shrinkage as the whole casting just seemed small to me and I scaled all the parts up. I especially scaled up the shroud to match the dimensions I got for the Barbie-Con version.

That's an interesting point. I don't know what is this Barbie-Con version but, as I have seen a few pictures of your replica on THD9791 building thread, I was wondering how you made yours. As said before, shrinkage could be the explanation but it seems a lot. The ILM cast seems a bit twisted and mishapen though.

 

[thd9791]

The Barbican is the original ANH motorized stunt saber made for Vader. There is a large thread on it here in the star wars section

The shroud appears to be scratch made - I can see 2 seam lines or layers in the collar.

 

[SethS]

-- and everything Don Bies made (the Bunny saber and all the promo Vader sabers), were based, according to him, on the only Vader saber in the archives at the time. That narrows it to the MoM and the Barbican, which is the obvious pick of the two.

 

[thd9791]

When I say scratch made I literally mean professional model shop scratch-made. I see bubbles in the emitter, as well as saw marks. Literally was made fom something, cast and shaped to fit. Not sure but I think the collar and bevel were made as two parts, and I'm not sure how they made a different recess for the maglite tube. I have trouble picturing things like that.

 

[SethS]

He could have made molds off Barbie parts

 

[Benjo]

Not sure but I think the collar and bevel were made as two parts

Well, I rather think it's made as a one part piece , then cast in resin. I'm sure the rectangular piece above the bevel is part of that piece too, it looks like painted more than a silver/aluminium piece threaded to the bevel emitter.