Han Solo ANH Blaster From RIA, Prev on Pawn Stars
- Thread starter JoeG
- Start date
russellsch
Master Member
I never apologize. I'm sorry, that's just the way I am.
deadbolt
Sr Member
..Next thing you know, Disney's gonna have Russia hack the RPF 'again' just because of what's been said here in this thread..
-Carson
A simple guide to high-end auction authentication:
A. Based on all available evidence, is it at all possible the item could be authentic?
--> Yes --> Go to B.
--> No --> Sorry, not authentic.
B. Based on all available evidence, is it at all possible the item could be inauthentic? (barring an unreasonably extraordinary fake)
--> Yes --> Go to C.
--> No --> CONGRATULATIONS! It’s authentic. – Use language such as Undoubted; Definitive; Proven.
C. Weighing the evidence, and considering Occam’s razor, is the item more plausibly authentic than not?
--> Yes --> Go to D.
--> No --> Go to E.
D. Is the combination of evidence and logic pointing to authenticity overwhelming? (for instance, direct corroboration comes from multiple independent primary sources or qualified secondary sources without conflict of interest, -AND- very little, if any, evidence points to doubt)
--> Yes --> Use language such as Almost Certain; Nearly Positive. [But hey, you’re an auctioneer; call it authentic. Close enough.]
--> No --> Use language such as Likely; Probable; Presumable.
E. Is the combination of evidence and logic pointing to authenticity essentially a technicality? (for instance, the only direct corroboration is the word of a non-primary-source consignor who stands to profit, the claim contains significant inconsistencies, -AND/OR- substantial evidence points to doubt)
--> Yes --> Go to F.
--> No --> Use language such as Possible; Conceivable.
F. Do you have a full complement of scruples?
--> Yes --> Use language such as Technically Possible, -OR- turn down the consignment.
--> No --> CONGRATULATIONS! It’s authentic. – Use language such as Undoubted; Definitive; Proven.
A. Based on all available evidence, is it at all possible the item could be authentic?
--> Yes --> Go to B.
--> No --> Sorry, not authentic.
B. Based on all available evidence, is it at all possible the item could be inauthentic? (barring an unreasonably extraordinary fake)
--> Yes --> Go to C.
--> No --> CONGRATULATIONS! It’s authentic. – Use language such as Undoubted; Definitive; Proven.
C. Weighing the evidence, and considering Occam’s razor, is the item more plausibly authentic than not?
--> Yes --> Go to D.
--> No --> Go to E.
D. Is the combination of evidence and logic pointing to authenticity overwhelming? (for instance, direct corroboration comes from multiple independent primary sources or qualified secondary sources without conflict of interest, -AND- very little, if any, evidence points to doubt)
--> Yes --> Use language such as Almost Certain; Nearly Positive. [But hey, you’re an auctioneer; call it authentic. Close enough.]
--> No --> Use language such as Likely; Probable; Presumable.
E. Is the combination of evidence and logic pointing to authenticity essentially a technicality? (for instance, the only direct corroboration is the word of a non-primary-source consignor who stands to profit, the claim contains significant inconsistencies, -AND/OR- substantial evidence points to doubt)
--> Yes --> Go to F.
--> No --> Use language such as Possible; Conceivable.
F. Do you have a full complement of scruples?
--> Yes --> Use language such as Technically Possible, -OR- turn down the consignment.
--> No --> CONGRATULATIONS! It’s authentic. – Use language such as Undoubted; Definitive; Proven.
Last edited:
Here something that’s pretty interesting. Breaking down these parts one of the many things that comes to light and raises a red flag towards this props and it’s actual authenticity is the scope rail?
IF in fact this PS/RIA/imposter Mauser was actually on set as one of the possible (and highly questionable) 3 backups… why doesn’t the tap holes line up for the mount rail to be switched over?
Where they line up you can clearly see the holes overlaps the one and only hero so retapping wouldn’t really work either. Not sure why in the first place they would even retap it anyways to be honest. Wouldn’t you simply measure and cut the rail to size instead??
IF in fact this PS/RIA/imposter Mauser was actually on set as one of the possible (and highly questionable) 3 backups… why doesn’t the tap holes line up for the mount rail to be switched over?
Where they line up you can clearly see the holes overlaps the one and only hero so retapping wouldn’t really work either. Not sure why in the first place they would even retap it anyways to be honest. Wouldn’t you simply measure and cut the rail to size instead??
kpax
Sr Member
Well the simple fact is that Tony said there was only one scope and mount from ST.
He said they would swap it if snd when needed.
This would require as you say, an interchangeable crossbar or additional dovetail on the second gun.
Carl conceivably could have remade and replaced the “lugs” when he gun was found since they claimed the gun was taken down to it’s pretty SW configuration after production.
Just to be clear. The gun wouldn’t be tapped. Only the lugs. Or threaded rod welded on spacer lug. But the lugs are brazed on the flat gun surface. The frame is not drilled and tapped if that’s what you were describing.
We need an inspection of this prop!
He said they would swap it if snd when needed.
This would require as you say, an interchangeable crossbar or additional dovetail on the second gun.
Carl conceivably could have remade and replaced the “lugs” when he gun was found since they claimed the gun was taken down to it’s pretty SW configuration after production.
Just to be clear. The gun wouldn’t be tapped. Only the lugs. Or threaded rod welded on spacer lug. But the lugs are brazed on the flat gun surface. The frame is not drilled and tapped if that’s what you were describing.
We need an inspection of this prop!
Yes that’s exactly what I thought. Interesting. Learn something new every day. Didn’t realize they wouldn’t tap the gun. So firing blanks the mount/scope would still stay on the Mauser itself? It wouldn’t come lose and fall off??
kpax
Sr Member
Blanks won’t generate the kind of recoil a live fire would.
Brazing, especially 2 disks as big as the lug spacers are would be very strong. And removable. The mag well would likely bend before the braze broke free.
As many know even from MgCs and Denix copies, the wall thickness is very thin in the mag well and rear receiver. Maybe get 2-3 threads. BUT can mess up and block trigger group and mag spring for those with MGC and real Mausers. Must be careful. And most of us do this only because they can’t braze or weld the lugs on the MGCs or Denix or they will melt!
Drill tap and epoxy for our replicas is best and only option.
Brazing, especially 2 disks as big as the lug spacers are would be very strong. And removable. The mag well would likely bend before the braze broke free.
As many know even from MgCs and Denix copies, the wall thickness is very thin in the mag well and rear receiver. Maybe get 2-3 threads. BUT can mess up and block trigger group and mag spring for those with MGC and real Mausers. Must be careful. And most of us do this only because they can’t braze or weld the lugs on the MGCs or Denix or they will melt!
Drill tap and epoxy for our replicas is best and only option.
Thanks kpax ! I’ve worked with a few MGC’s and ya tapping the back with the limited spacing can be tricky but it works well enough. What will be really interesting is the print I’m getting soon of the c96. It has the Lockframe so the space is very limited as mentioned. I think redesigning it a bit with the rail spacer already on the Mauser might be a great option moving forward though to add more threading.
Just got the shipping notice today so it should arrive in a few days to find out
Thanks again for 411!!
Just got the shipping notice today so it should arrive in a few days to find out
Thanks again for 411!!
Very well done overlays.
I always got the impression that the story was suggesting the unique mount was swapped, not the whole flat bar. That's why the bar on the Hero was so scratched from removing the vertical portion over and over (swapping)
Funnily enough, they specifically made a rectangular channel instead of the dovetail to "not confuse the collecting community" as well as it being more complicated. This to me suggests an initial attempt at discerning the newly machined parts from the old ones. Again, I am always amazed they milled away all this material instead of making the bar/block out of two pieces of metal
Anyway, yes to the lugs/mounts. I learned this when I was making MGC replicas and someone.. I think scott helped me with tapping instructions. I have a feeling they just drilled right into the trigger group for the ROTJ MGC blasters. I did not, and was able to get my bolt to sit flush inside. Had to be supported by the spacer and stuff, and we talked about it after his live fire things I believe. Anyway, it was very late that I realized they did this for empire too, all of our replicas have a donut spacer, and that was just brazing one threaded mount on.
This is unrelated to the hero, but it seems for the Hoth gun they found a way to mount the scope without opening up the gun. the mount spacer is held on with screws and nuts from the outside, and the bracket is screwed to the spacer, also external. I'm wondering if anyone opened up the guns like we do.
I always got the impression that the story was suggesting the unique mount was swapped, not the whole flat bar. That's why the bar on the Hero was so scratched from removing the vertical portion over and over (swapping)
Funnily enough, they specifically made a rectangular channel instead of the dovetail to "not confuse the collecting community" as well as it being more complicated. This to me suggests an initial attempt at discerning the newly machined parts from the old ones. Again, I am always amazed they milled away all this material instead of making the bar/block out of two pieces of metal
Anyway, yes to the lugs/mounts. I learned this when I was making MGC replicas and someone.. I think scott helped me with tapping instructions. I have a feeling they just drilled right into the trigger group for the ROTJ MGC blasters. I did not, and was able to get my bolt to sit flush inside. Had to be supported by the spacer and stuff, and we talked about it after his live fire things I believe. Anyway, it was very late that I realized they did this for empire too, all of our replicas have a donut spacer, and that was just brazing one threaded mount on.
This is unrelated to the hero, but it seems for the Hoth gun they found a way to mount the scope without opening up the gun. the mount spacer is held on with screws and nuts from the outside, and the bracket is screwed to the spacer, also external. I'm wondering if anyone opened up the guns like we do.
I remember the idea of overlaying the screw points to confirm whether their positioning actually matched the known hero occurred to me at one point in the middle of this - and then somehow I completely forgot. Thanks!
Their claim was witness marks specifically from the placement of the mount, where the only points of contact are the lugs. So IF the positioning of former lugs was clearly defined, the new lugs should be directly over them. Notice that there's no visible sign of any marks beyond the lugs:
Unfortunately, I think this possible interpretation does leave Tony and RIA some wiggle room.
But, this revelation at least confirms that both the positioning of the forward lug and the distance between the lugs doesn't match the known hero. This means that even if the claimed witness marks existed, they could AT MOST indicate the former presence of a right-side mount - not necessarily the unique presence of an ANH mount.
So while not a slam-dunk, this definitely severely constricts the potential significance of the already-weak and unproven witness marks claim.
Thanks thd9791! Ya I think they didn’t do the dovetail simply because it’s easier and faster to do it the other way is all?
Here another detail that’s interesting. When reworking the flats on the back of the mount they shaved down the front one so much so that the bottom of the screw now shows..
Here another detail that’s interesting. When reworking the flats on the back of the mount they shaved down the front one so much so that the bottom of the screw now shows..
kpax
Sr Member
I don’t know what possible “witness marks” there could be.
The PS gun is NOT the HERO gun. There are NO witness marks on the PS that could possibly line up with the preproduction HERO photo Tony showed and claimed.
It is not the same upper or lower receiver. Period.
If the claim is that the new PS gun HAD lines on it that “suggest” there used to be a mount on it…
So what. ?
Could be the Protectors gun. Made AFTER SW.
Could be newly made marks -made by Carl fabricating this replica. ?
Meaningless.
The PS gun is NOT the HERO gun. There are NO witness marks on the PS that could possibly line up with the preproduction HERO photo Tony showed and claimed.
It is not the same upper or lower receiver. Period.
If the claim is that the new PS gun HAD lines on it that “suggest” there used to be a mount on it…
So what. ?
Could be the Protectors gun. Made AFTER SW.
Could be newly made marks -made by Carl fabricating this replica. ?
Meaningless.
kpax
Sr Member
Nice find.
Yeah. That mount must have been very rusted and Carl removed a lot of material getting down to metal again. He just didn’t take any time to restore the lines or accurately copy the original.
kpax
Sr Member
The unpainted crossbar had gouges on it in the preproduction unpainted image.
Wouldn't need to take it off many times to get the other scratches on the crossbar. Soft aluminum with crappy paint vs hard steel mount. Scrapes right off.
Some marks (paint removal) happened when they first assembled the Blaster no doubt. Some more paint flaked off over production. In and out of holster etc.
While removing the mount off the crossbar is possible and intended to do as in Sitting Target, to do this for SW, as Tony described -they would need 2 identical Dovetails to be mounted on each different crossbar. Not impossible but not as easy as removing the 2 thumb nuts and taking off the crossbar assembly as we all know from our replicas! Just the way the other guns - NR, Sweeney and R&H scopes are removed. Makes more sense from a Carl POV IMO.
Tony & RIA have only ever been shooting for the "technical possibility" bar as far as I can tell, so I think that's all their claim boiled down to.
IF the C96 was authentic, it's reasonable to think it might show marks from the former mount placement, therefore marks = consistency. Nothing more, nothing less. But now we can show that even if marks existed, they were only consistent in the general sense, not the specific placement sense. As you suggest, even if they did line up with the known hero, they wouldn't definitively prove it had been an ANH mount; they would merely be "potentially indicative of." Regardless, moderate consistency is better than weak consistency, and thanks to chubsANDdoggers we can now confidently rule out moderate consistency.
Seems like a decent point. So while two dovetails technically remains a possibility that Tony & RIA can fall back on, it arguably fails the Occam's razor test against the alternative that has now been shown to contradict their story.
We may never be able to absolutely bust their claims, but all of this does serve to box the claims in. The only way they can work is under a very narrow set of conditions... whereas our "counterclaim" of doubt is essentially without condition.
kpax
Sr Member
Well the big CLAIM is that the PS is 1 of 2 built AS Solo's blaster for ANH - AND was ON SET. ( they had to drop the used by Han Solo claim)
We know it was not used on screen or promo ever. Only the HERO and Greedo have that honor.
The is little doubt Bapty had multiple (up to 4) cut barrel Mauser c96 guns in inventory. With or without mount lugs unknown.
Having a gun in inventory is no proof of being used or even available for the production. They have offered NO public proof of this and I would be amazed if any photo they could have could possibly show it. They would literarily need to have a photo of BOTH blasters together on set that show the PS SN to prove the PS is 1 of 2.
Again: No evidence ever of more than one blaster and holster.
Although I will repeat. MAYBE the weird Bapty blaster was the prototype ESB style blaster Roger said was made for Luke (if he needed it)
Fits Rogers story at least and also could explain a mis-remembering by Carl to Tony that a second blaster was "available"
We know it was not used on screen or promo ever. Only the HERO and Greedo have that honor.
The is little doubt Bapty had multiple (up to 4) cut barrel Mauser c96 guns in inventory. With or without mount lugs unknown.
Having a gun in inventory is no proof of being used or even available for the production. They have offered NO public proof of this and I would be amazed if any photo they could have could possibly show it. They would literarily need to have a photo of BOTH blasters together on set that show the PS SN to prove the PS is 1 of 2.
Again: No evidence ever of more than one blaster and holster.
Although I will repeat. MAYBE the weird Bapty blaster was the prototype ESB style blaster Roger said was made for Luke (if he needed it)
Fits Rogers story at least and also could explain a mis-remembering by Carl to Tony that a second blaster was "available"
Similar threads
