Han Solo ANH Blaster From RIA, Prev on Pawn Stars

[deadbolt]

Keep in mind people, that Mauser hasn't been seen since 1983 at most..

There's a very likely chance that the original Mauser is not in Bapty's possession anymore, anyone who pays enough attention here on the RPF can take an accurate, educated guess where it likely is if you really study and pay attention rather than making guesses and assumptions.

That Mauser is NOT the original whatsoever, however the scope 'may' be. But still far too little public evidence to tell..mostly due to people hoarding photos that should be shared with the public, rather than just amongst a couple of members who take pride in keeping things secret from the majority and other real fans/obsessors of this prop.


-Carson

If the serial number does match the original, then it will be the same base gun without any doubt. For a start, that pistol is still in the inventory, so no reason to deceive. Second, it is illegal to change the serial number on any firearm within the UK, and Bapty are strictly controlled and audited in this regard due to the nature of their business. If a serial number had been removed and a different one added, then they would have a serious time on their hands trying to explain why a firearm was suddenly missing. We would be talking jail time and a massive fine and/or closure of the business. So that is certainly never going to happen.

But do the numbers actually match? I think most of this theatrical Porn Stars performance, is exactly that. Theatre made for an undemanding audience. On the facts side, the ANH Mauser and accessories to a greater or lesser extent, are certainly still in Bapty’s inventory. But a more thorough investigation into the actual parts on the gun at the time of filming needs to be done to realise the prop as it was back then in its entirety. So on the plus side, only good can come out of this in the end.

 

[teecrooz]

That Mauser is NOT the original whatsoever, however the scope 'may' be. But still far too little public evidence to tell..mostly due to people hoarding photos that should be shared with the public, rather than just amongst a couple of members who take pride in keeping things secret from the majority and other real fans/obsessors of this prop.

It’s not hoarding when they aren’t allowed to share them. Some of them work for Lucasfilm with NDAs and their livelihoods depend on maintaining discretion, others are consulted with under confidentiality agreements as experts. I can’t stand this entitled mentality. And to say they aren’t real fans... Chris and Scott have done a ton for this hobby over the years.

 

[scottjua]

If I'd taken them myself I could make a judgement call like that. But since things are shared with my in confidence and they are not my property I have no problem respecting wishes to keep things private. It's how trust works

 

[deadbolt]

I point that out primarily because there have been many cases over the years, especially with this prop, where people state 'facts' that aren't publicly observable by their peers, which then turned out to be incorrect and eventually disproven. Round bull-barrel with offset flash hider, two different sized pieces making up the grill, t-track on the barrel, etc.. A lot of things ended up being false over the years once photos/reference became public and/or surfaced for public scrutiny.

I mean no offense, honestly, but it's become obvious over the last couple decades that we can't just take people's word for everything without some sort of proof.


-Carson

 

[Trooper_trent]

..mostly due to people hoarding photos that should be shared with the public, rather than just amongst a couple of members who take pride in keeping things secret from the majority and other real fans/obsessors of this prop.

How did you determine that the private photos should be shared with the public?

 

[chubsANDdoggers]

This could get derailed fast with who can see said photos, who has said photos, who owns said photos. If u sign an NDA then isn’t the discussion of said photos or simply sharing them privately against all of that? It’s a “None Discloser Agreement” isnt it? I could be wrong.

I do happen to agree with deadbolt comments though. Some RPF members just don’t want to share photos to any regular Joe. To each there own but it does make it difficult to decipher fact from fiction in some cases.

 

[kpax]

one thing no one mentioned (I think) is the lack of Grill or Glue... not gorilla glue. on the mag well...

 

[kpax]

unfortunately sharing images or knowledge is subjective and there are many things to consider. I do agree that there have been misinterpretations and statements of fact over the years that turned out to be not 100% correct, but that's life. We do our best with what we have and we have done pretty good. I am grateful for everything shared! I also thank Carson, - It was Deadbolt that noticed the lump and found the TomTitt parts and we are grateful. These found parts really gave us the best details of the original prop and actual parts to use!

 

[Vanitas]

Hoo boy.

I don't want things to devolve into into an argument about whether or not private photos should be shared publicly; it's been done before. I can still see both sides of the argument here - with the people who do have/seen them often being under NDAs or only shown them under the confidence of privacy, etc. But also there is the fact that not only have such statements been unreliable in the past, but also there feels like an elitist sense whereby information is being hoarded from the masses and kept amongst a select few (not that I think most people really do feel this way at all, but I think there is a reverse impression from the "average person" that such a thing is occurring over them, if that makes sense).

But really, let's just take things as they come and not make demands from people who don't have any real obligation to you. If someone claims to have such information and they are later proven to be wrong, then it is their reputation that will suffer for it. So let's keep things civil folks

 

[chubsANDdoggers]

It’s pretty clear that this isn’t the same blaster prop. Regardless of the serial number you can clearly see the discrepancies. The bull barrel, the underbelly of the mount, the mount rail and wheels, the flash hider bullets. None of it passes the eye test. It’s clearly not the same but I don’t think Tony Watts himself knows that. Probably doesn’t what to believe it either. I’m sure those parts did come from Bapty though, they just didn’t rebuild it with the correct parts is all. About 3 years ago someone reached out to me to share a conversation he himself had directly with Tony regarding Solo’s ANH blaster..

“I got chatting to the owner Tony Watts. He had old Sterling SMGs and I joked that these were stormtrooper blasters (also a Star Wars nerd) which led him to tell me he had all the Star Wars guns at one stage.“

“When he (Tony) saw the original Bapty went out of business he wanted to start his own firm, took out loans and stayed up by buying as much of Bapty's stock as he could. As Bapty had a huge name in the business he simply used their name and carried on where they left off. When looking through one of the containers he found ANH props, mainly E11s and what he called "Han Solo's Pistol".”

”He struggled in the early years to stay in business so he sold off each blaster over the years. However he said he'd never sell the pistol as it was his "pension piece". It wasn't in the armoury, he kept it in a safe at home.”

Thanks to RPF we now know Tony doesn’t have the complete Hero but he may have parts of it which is still pretty darn cool and valuable for sure..

 

[Halliwax]

There's a very likely chance that the original Mauser is not in Bapty's possession anymore, anyone who pays enough attention here on the RPF can take an accurate, educated guess where it likely is if you really study and pay attention rather than making guesses and assumptions.


-Carson

So I’m confused.. we have some people saying the Mauser is still with baptsy. But your comment makes me believe there is another story?

What facts make you believe that?

 

[scottjua]

The pawn stars gun has a different serial with the upper and lower and lock frame all matching. The hammer is a pre war that does not match.

These are facts. I can't show you but I'm telling you something that can be proven.

Those serials DO NOT match any of the original prop gun parts.

 

[Halliwax]

The pawn stars gun has a serial of 299415, with the upper and lower and lock frame all matching. The hammer is a pre war that does not match.

These are facts. I can't show you but I'm telling you something that can be proven.

Those serials DO NOT match any of the original prop gun parts.

In Scott I trust

 

[kpax]

Thanks Scott.

Anyone know of any replicas with a mount crossbar connection like this? Obviously not the dovetail from SW and ST.

 

[thd9791]

I've been wondering this, it does nail some of the details like the straight knurls. We didnt know that until recently. Did someone make their own version to finish it off using the original scope back then?

This includes the bull barrel, I'm guessing that's a slip fit repro too

 

[KramStaar]

scottjua you're a good man. Like everyone here I was scratching my head over this so your input is sincerely appreciated.
I’m very interested in clarification on where they both look at the photo and the prop and say the numbers match. Clearly not possible...

 

[David3]

In the video on page 2 they don't actually say the serial numbers match up. Before they meet Carl (the ANH armourer) Rick from Pawn Stars says "the serial no. is right there in the photo. So.." then before he checks the number on the prop there's a cut where he goes on to say "everything matches up, perfect".

Like scottjua said, the comment ‘everything matches up' is either taken out of context or the photo itself needs to be questioned.

 

[MastahBlastah]

The pawn stars gun has a serial of 299415, with the upper and lower and lock frame all matching. The hammer is a pre war that does not match.

These are facts. I can't show you but I'm telling you something that can be proven.

Those serials DO NOT match any of the original prop gun parts.

Could it be possible that the "original prop photo" with which they are comparing the pawn stars blaster is a continuity photo from one of the (possibly) other bapty/production-made blasters he is referencing, hence the comment that the serial numbers are matching? Can we tell from the video that the photo they are looking at is in fact of the screen-used?

 

[Vanitas]

Could it be possible that the "original prop photo" with which they are comparing the pawn stars blaster is a continuity photo from one of the (possibly) other bapty/production-made blasters he is referencing, hence the comment that the serial numbers are matching? Can we tell from the video that the photo they are looking at is in fact of the screen-used?

The 'continuity photo' the seller seems to show Rick looks like a black and white version of the pre-production photo of the genuine Hero prop before the grill, mystery disc and greeblies were added.

 

[MastahBlastah]

The 'continuity photo' the seller seems to show Rick looks like a black and white version of the pre-production photo of the genuine Hero prop before the grill, mystery disc and greeblies were added.

It certainly does, but just posing the question: Is this confirmed? Wouldn't the prop dressers likely have laid all of them out on the same table under the same light and taken photos of them for the same purposes? If traits of the hero can be identified from this photo of a photo, then I digress. Also, couldn't Rick simply have been looking at the serial number on the scope when he said that it "matched" the photo?