HELP: REAL or FAKE MPP???

OdiWan72

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Hi all

I need some help from those of you, who own / have owned a REAL MPP.
I recently bought a "real" MPP through ebay. It was supposed to be C-10.

Well, it isn´t so I´m struggling with the seller right now.
During investigating my MPP, I started to worry about it´s being real or fake.

Please...I need DETAILED pics of the attached/ de-attached bulb-release, the inside, the clamp etc. asap.

MANY THANKS for your help guys.

Markus
 
Well Markus that shouldnt be too hard....the real MPP will turn on and a bright red beam should emit from the shroud. It should cut through many materials. If it doesnt, I wouldnt but it. :D


Good luck btw.
 
Do you have any pics of the MPP?
I would really need to see pics to tell. There are so many variants of MPPs it would be hard to pin point it's authenticity by verbal description.

One way to tell is by unscrewing the endcap and smelling the inside. No matter how good the condition it will still smell like it's 40-50 years old.

Look in the crevaces for dust or grime.



DS
 
Well...there are several issues with the -supposely- real MPP I have :unsure
That´s why I wanted to have some pics of a real one first.

Anyway...what specific parts/areas should I take a close-up pic of?

Markus
 
Here you go...

What worries me is the fact, that the seller told me the MPP to be C-10.
Well, it obviously isn´t, but beside of that, it was clean and greasefree when he sent me pics of it and now it smells like he boiled coffee in it and tried to clean it up with WD40 :confused

I haven´t shown you the heavy scratching and the dents of this C-10, but that´s not what this thread is about...

BTW: Did YH ever produce aluminium MPP shrouds?
The seller told me he´d have the real, undrilled one still at home but to me his looks like a plastic YH to me (not the one I posted a pic of.).

DSC00222.JPG

DSC00223.JPG

DSC00224.JPG

DSC00225.JPG

DSC00226.JPG

DSC00227.JPG

DSC00228.JPG

DSC00229.JPG

DSC00230.JPG


Thanks WC....

Markus
 
That is in REALLY beat up shape. It could be worked with but it is no where near Better or Best condition.

(Honestly I dont know what "c-10" stands for. But my two MPPs are in almost mint condition.)
 
I know, that´s why I´m struggling with the seller right now.

But what about the origin of the flash. IS IT a REAL one?

Markus
 
There are better "experts" here than I, but I would say yes it is judging by the first and secound pics. Also, the damage to it would be consistant with its use as a flash.
 
I would gamble that it's real, but only judging from the extensive weathering, although I hesistate to say that it's impossible to weather a Parks MPP to look like that.

Your only solution is to find distinguishing details that are only present on Parks' MPP's, and verify them with yours. Only trouble is finding them.

You said that the original pictures showed no weathering. Perhaps the seller used substitutional pictures (of a Parks MPP), and later took pictures of the actual item.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the letters by the ports different on Parks?
I wouldn't say it is impossible to weather a flash like that. I think some acid and/or running a high current through it could do weird things with the plating.
At least we know the sidebars are not Parks, because his are black powdercoated and straight.
 
Originally posted by Darth Lars@Sep 24 2005, 07:07 AM
At least we know the sidebars are not Parks, because his are black powdercoated and straight.
[snapback]1083028[/snapback]​
He, evidently, offers silver slidebars as well...

OdiWan72, is there wear on the inner surface of the clamp sleeve? Also, are there only nicks on the shroud, or are there intermediate weathering on the black, stone-finish surface as well? Are there any sections that are scratch-free, brand new--hence, standing out from the overall weathering? Can you detect any battery corrosion around or above the spring?
 
I´ll have to check this.

Aren´t there other slight differences?
What about the bulb-release, the shroud etc.?

Is the shroud correct?
What about the threading within the hole in the endcap?
Did Parks or Larry´s MPP have this?

Markus
 
Originally posted by OdiWan72@Sep 27 2005, 02:28 AM
Aren´t there other slight differences?
What about the bulb-release, the shroud etc.?
I'm afraid I've never gotten a good look at the Parks MPP. If only I could see detailed pictures of his replicas, I will be able to identify discrepancies that are coined on his MPP's, and determine whether yours is, definitely, a Parks.

Does anyone have pictures of Parks' MPP?

Is the shroud correct?
What about the threading within the hole in the endcap?
Did Parks or Larry´s MPP have this?
The shroud is accurate to the Vader ANH and ESB. As for the endcap hole, I've seen threading on just about every MPP I've seen. If I'm not mistaken, it's a requirement for insalling the battery spring, just that there are probably many different styles of threading.

[image]http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y265/Imperious825/myfirstMPP5.jpg[/image]
As you can see, my endcap hole is a variation of yours, and I believe, the common type.

Your MPP appears very close to the one that was referenced for the HK MPP's--the detail namely of which is the tapering of the slidebars. However, Larry's may not have threading on the endcap, since his flashes were never meant to be used as an actual camera flash.

[image]http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y265/Imperious825/MPPM39.jpg[/image]
This is another one that's similar to the HK MPP.
 
Originally posted by OdiWan72@Sep 24 2005, 08:05 AM

DSC00230.JPG



BTW,
AFAICR, the replica MPPs I got from Jack Bauer had the black plastic flash knob sitting in the black housing more flush, i.e. it wasn´t that much protruding. Another difference to a replica.

Michael
 
Check to see if there are any numbers on the tube.
There should be a string of numbers and alpahbets on the main body and a digit number towards the end of the tube where the shroud will cover up when put in place.
 
This thread is more than 18 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top