Interest INT: Active project: MGC and Denix Alternative Mauser. Steel or Aluminum KIT

mgoob

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
First things first,,,, im need to figure out what mech we can use............ going to try and use what the mgc did as a start. It seems to function similar to the real mauser

My suggestion:

Forget all the internals: you just need to make a trigger and hammer move.

Copy what Master Replicas did for their die cast Elite Edition: just a few parts- it'll be too complicated to replicate a locking block etc. for something no one will ever see, nor need.

Trigger & hammer- that's all.

:)
 

Vanitas

Well-Known Member
My suggestion:

Forget all the internals: you just need to make a trigger and hammer move.

Copy what Master Replicas did for their die cast Elite Edition: just a few parts- it'll be too complicated to replicate a locking block etc. for something no one will ever see, nor need.

Trigger & hammer- that's all.

:)
I suggested that a while ago, actually - I think I took a couple pictures of the MR EE's internal frame for reference. The only thing they'd have to add is a moveable bolt and saftey; both are static on the MR.
 

mgoob

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
We never saw anyone move a bolt, ever.

We never saw a folding stock on the E-11, ever.

Those were the reasons the replicas weren't made to do so, as I was consulting w/ them.
It kept costs down, which is what everyone wants.

Only the rear tabs fo the bolt were made, screwed in place.
The extractor area was just a 5 sided part screwed into place.

The safety was made in either the safe or fire position, depending upon how it was seen in the film.
Making it move costs money, and I don't need to pay for something that's not needed/ accurate to the prop itself.



K.I.S.S.
 

Marcos22579

New Member
I vote for a loose or removable safety depending on the DL-44 version.
The safety has no purpose as a safety on the prop and on the blueprint drawings is always listed as a magazine extractor.

Sent from my moto e5 plus using Tapatalk
 

mgoob

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I vote for a loose or removable safety depending on the DL-44 version.
The safety has no purpose as a safety on the prop and on the blueprint drawings is always listed as a magazine extractor.
Sent from my moto e5 plus using Tapatalk
Blueprints of the in-universe blaster had to find a reason for that part to be on the BlasTech DL-44, so it was labeled the "power pack release lever."

Screen Shot 2018-09-24 at 3.24.29 PM.png
 

Marcos22579

New Member
Blueprints of the in-universe blaster had to find a reason for that part to be on the BlasTech DL-44, so it was labeled the "power pack release lever."

View attachment 844446
Yes, power pack release. The magazine plate holds the power pack in some way. I imagine it would eject the same way it does on a M-712.

Sent from my moto e5 plus using Tapatalk
 

Gerard2567

New Member
We never saw anyone move a bolt, ever.

We never saw a folding stock on the E-11, ever.

Those were the reasons the replicas weren't made to do so, as I was consulting w/ them.
It kept costs down, which is what everyone wants.

Only the rear tabs fo the bolt were made, screwed in place.
The extractor area was just a 5 sided part screwed into place.

The safety was made in either the safe or fire position, depending upon how it was seen in the film.
Making it move costs money, and I don't need to pay for something that's not needed/ accurate to the prop itself.



K.I.S.S.

I'm open to having movable parts. It just provides a better sense of realism. I don't think having a moving safety is too much machine work compared to milling a static one, but I could be wrong.

If I found out this project was on the way earlier, I wouldn't have spent countless hours looking for a reasonably priced MGC. Having functionality to me is just more beautiful, and although this may be a reach, maybe even gun collectors would be buying it just because it may be one the best replicas on the market.

Not trying to be offensive or aggressive in my statement.

Mgoob, while I see where you're going, using the "We didn't see it, we dont need it" can also be a little bit arrogant as we could say we can use a Denix since we never saw the mauser closeup on the film to criticise it. But we know it's functional when we disregard the film, I think to some of us, that's the most important issue.



*Unrelated note to reply* This is a little contradictory aswell

I may have missed the earlier posts, please forgive me if I'm questioning something that was already answered.
As an Internation person, Is there obvious designs made to ensure it looks like a replica and can't be used as a real firearm? Such as part of the barrel is solid and a firing pin that looks the part, but cannot be removed nor function?
 
Last edited:

mgoob

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Gerard2567

I think it's a bit of a stretch to say my comments are arrogant.

My point is: keep costs down- we want to make a replica of a prop, not a firearm.
While the prop needs to be based on an accurate replica of said firearm, it doesn't need to function as a firearm.
That's all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

kpax

Sr Member
All good points and thoughts above.


As far as functionality goes, I agree we should keep it as simple as possible but we may find that replicating the moving parts, especially when precision molded metal, it will be just as easy to have separate parts that may or may not be movable rather than CNC from a solid block such as the safety.

Again, I feel a cross between the MGC and Denix mechanisms will ultimately be the goal.

Perhaps even looking at the fire control mechanism for the airsoft versions may provide some ideas for trigger and hammer function ?

I have never disassembled one of the airsoft versions so I am not familiar with how the hammer trigger and both work.


Any thoughts?
 

Marcos22579

New Member
All good points and thoughts above.


As far as functionality goes, I agree we should keep it as simple as possible but we may find that replicating the moving parts, especially when precision molded metal, it will be just as easy to have separate parts that may or may not be movable rather than CNC from a solid block such as the safety.

Again, I feel a cross between the MGC and Denix mechanisms will ultimately be the goal.

Perhaps even looking at the fire control mechanism for the airsoft versions may provide some ideas for trigger and hammer function ?

I have never disassembled one of the airsoft versions so I am not familiar with how the hammer trigger and both work.


Any thoughts?
I disasembled my Umarex M712 blowback for the paint process of my DL-44 and saw that the trigger and bolt are contained on a two part frame held by some screws. Two compression springs. One for the trigger mechanism and a small one to return the bb feed to the original position. The bolt is a separate part with plastic front held together with a long allen screw and the bolt square thing wich name I can't recall. Two different compression springs inside the bolt. The main long one and a small for the blow back motion. I will look on my computer backup for pictures later today.

Sent from my moto e5 plus using Tapatalk
 

mgoob

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Here are parts from the Master Replicas Han Solo ANH Elite Edition.

I can't tell you how it goes together as don't have the frame with me.

I took it apart long ago, and the frame is still at the shop, waiting for the grille to be machined off.

As you can see, the trigger & hammer are movable due to springs and a piece of plastic.

The bolt is just 2 pieces as shown in the photos: just what we need to see, not a working bolt.
IMG_1231.JPGIMG_1233.JPGIMG_1235.JPGIMG_1237.JPGIMG_1239.JPG
 

Marcos22579

New Member
Here are parts from the Master Replicas Han Solo ANH Elite Edition.

I can't tell you how it goes together as don't have the frame with me.

I took it apart long ago, and the frame is still at the shop, waiting for the grille to be machined off.

As you can see, the trigger & hammer are movable due to springs and a piece of plastic.

The bolt is just 2 pieces as shown in the photos: just what we need to see, not a working bolt.
View attachment 845041View attachment 845042View attachment 845043View attachment 845044View attachment 845045
I don't like it that simple. I am used to the Denix bolt clacking sound and trigger.

Sent from my moto e5 plus using Tapatalk
 

Dann

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
It's definitely interesting to see how they designed it, but yeah, I'd also love to be able to pull the bolt back!

Still, it's definitely not a deal breaker, as long as the trigger and hammer still function, and they're built tough, with at least as strong a spring as the MGC, preferably stronger.

Sent from my VS996 using Tapatalk
 

Marcos22579

New Member
Here are my pictures of the Umarex M712 insides.
Way too complex. Very similar to the real gun in functionality and movement. It has at least 3 unnecesary movements because is a blowback action automatic.
bafe0ae1b94114e16445aa2522ed2e0a.jpg
fac5230b6a3dfd3a7a116a88a70464fb.jpg
a2271ab267ce58adc1073fb488339cd2.jpg
f904ba725038c0043a6bb6e391f0f5e7.jpg


Sent from my moto e5 plus using Tapatalk
 

Davy Jones

Well-Known Member
I'm interested in one of these for sure.
Just to clarify for me, is the end goal of this project to make a pistol that looks just like the real Mausers? Or like the MGC ones that they used for most of the original blasters, if I'm not mistaken?
 

chubsANDdoggers

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I'm interested in one of these for sure.
Just to clarify for me, is the end goal of this project to make a pistol that looks just like the real Mausers? Or like the MGC ones that they used for most of the original blasters, if I'm not mistaken?
They used real live fire c96’s for the hero prop’s in all 3 original trilogy’s. For the hero prop in Star Wars specifically from my understanding they only built one and it was on a live fire c96 not an MGC..
b874e5cbe3bee91c86a5919c354796d0.jpg
So hopefully the goal is a real deal c96 replica as that would be epix
 
Last edited:

Davy Jones

Well-Known Member
Gotcha. I know both these guns were MGC replicas but the ANH blaster was a real gun. Which blasters in ESB or ROTJ were actual Mausers then?
-8137692600527364071.jpg
6406c61dd84fe70a69b9ba7369d4f42c.jpg
 

chubsANDdoggers

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
This here is Luke’s bespin on a real c96..
ca45ebea98ae022cbf3f3d4e505b5bd5.jpg

And this I believe is the live fire from ROTJ (or someone’s duplication of it - not 100% sure)
1cb879c0ee4a421fb60baac2207bdbcf.jpg


I could be wrong but I don’t think there is a picture of an MGC bespin anywhere. I’m sure they must have built a few of them though..

These were the only MGC builds that I’ve seen..
4002bf4416d094960cc36a0e3443c4fe.jpg
18ca708b0ac3d26dc96146b4d5b57780.jpg
 
Last edited:
Top