Luke ROTJ V2 lightsaber
- Thread starter ob1al
- Start date
spidersolo
Well-Known Member
Apparently there are two molds made, the ones made off of the wooden blank (thus the wonky gripped sabers) and another cast with (fatter grips ring sabers) you can't cast small and build up and then machine as the metal will separate. I am fully aware of the cast marks and seams in many of the sabers.So that leaves the question what blank was used to make the mold the sabers with the big rings cast from? We know the wooden blank mold exist. Are you saying there wasn't a machined master with big grip rings?..............please edify me . I remember so many people (a few of you that commented in this thread) telling me the cave scene didn't exist years ago. Funny huh? Does anyone here have a picture of the V2 Hammil has? The MR certainly wasn't a v2 it was a compilation of sabers. Does anyone have an accurate count of all these sabers? I am aware that clamps boards and levers were replaced as needed on sabers during production so how many variations ? I would say that the information is unknown. I am also aware that some have lathe marks on the pommel and some don't. I believe although many of the cast versions were machined they do not have the lathe marks (hole in center of the pommel) even though the were obviously on a lathe. I believe that only the ones machined from scratch have the hole in the pommel. Also the ob1 stunt and v2 had mechanics inside to rotate the blades. I highly doubt that they are cast from on solid piece it doesn't make any sense to make a mechanical saber that can't be taken apart. Perhaps some were cast in individual parts? The pommel would need to come off in order to install the parts.Do you think the display sabers are all that exist?..I'm simply asking for some edification on all of the things I touched on not trying to start a fight, These questions are based on the information in this thread as well as other articles........Sym-Cha I really didn't expect that kind of comment from you perhaps you should look at all the information and lack thereof. Sorry if I offend you guys but perhaps I have touched on some things that haven't been brought up and perhaps you can share some knowledge. I believe the original V2 was machined if you have pics and evidence to show otherwise I would appreciate it. Please just add constructive comments not emotional ones I have never attacked anyone here so please don't do it to me. Perhaps the information and available photos should be re-evaluated. I would be interested to hear some machinist and metal workers opinions.
Lichtbringer
Master Member
Joined 2011 ... and told you "years ago"? What was your name at that time?
To your other questions - for the machining it doesn´t matter if a round cast material is used, or a piece cut from round stock.
If it was chucked correct, at that length and dia a centerbore is not nessessary for each work - some machinists try to avoid them, other use them whenever possible.
If one was build from several pieces there are even more possible variants of making the individual sub-parts.
Rings of equal or different thickness say nothing other than how sloppy the machinist worked, it´s all about his diligence when making the cuts, nothing more. Cast material or round stock, it makes no matter at this, too.
Spidersolo, it usually doesn't work like that...
I'm all for exploring the details, hopefully to reveal new aspects of the saber. The fresh debate over what the lever looks like is exciting to me, and a totally valid topic based on photo evidence.
Proclaiming that the V2 was machined is not a valid point of discussion without some evidence.
One of the most compelling aspects of the V2 is the mystery. I am not yet ready to abandon the idea that the V2 and shared stunt are the same hilt. This is my own theory, with many details I cannot account for... but I don't drop by the thread to educate much more established members to tell them what they know is wrong.
spidersolo, if you read this entire thread, and the linked information it contains you'll find some clarification on the points you have made. Barry from efx/mr personally examined the Shared Stunt and found that both the emitter and pommel rotate. The same can be said of the V2 when found on the emperors chair. The weathering stays in the same spot, but the D ring has rotated to a new position. We don't know exactly how the pommel attaches or how the blanks were hollowed out. Cutting pommel cubes isn't exactly a picnic but I'd expect a separate part like that would have a number of machined markings. This doesn't necessarily prove the entire saber was machined.
I'm all for exploring the details, hopefully to reveal new aspects of the saber. The fresh debate over what the lever looks like is exciting to me, and a totally valid topic based on photo evidence.
Proclaiming that the V2 was machined is not a valid point of discussion without some evidence.
One of the most compelling aspects of the V2 is the mystery. I am not yet ready to abandon the idea that the V2 and shared stunt are the same hilt. This is my own theory, with many details I cannot account for... but I don't drop by the thread to educate much more established members to tell them what they know is wrong.
spidersolo, if you read this entire thread, and the linked information it contains you'll find some clarification on the points you have made. Barry from efx/mr personally examined the Shared Stunt and found that both the emitter and pommel rotate. The same can be said of the V2 when found on the emperors chair. The weathering stays in the same spot, but the D ring has rotated to a new position. We don't know exactly how the pommel attaches or how the blanks were hollowed out. Cutting pommel cubes isn't exactly a picnic but I'd expect a separate part like that would have a number of machined markings. This doesn't necessarily prove the entire saber was machined.
spidersolo
Well-Known Member
I have gathered knowledge. I have listened I just simply do not agree with all I have heard. There isn't enough evidence to prove me wrong. Do you have a pic of the original V2? Could you refer me to information to sway my opinion? If you do please help me. Are the people that post here the only source of information for you? Do you believe that perhaps other knowledgeable people exist outside of this community? Perhaps someone may know someone that has information other than people here on this forum. I find the sabers used in ROTJ very interesting. I have studied about them for a long time as it is a hobby.I was intrigued when I was working at the track in Sonoma and struck up a conversation with someone who was very involved with ROTJ he shared information (that's how I knew about the cave scene years ago). However I never discussed the current topic at the time.... I also understand that the traveling show props were modified and there are several unseen versions.
One source is not the alpha and omega. I would appreciate any information that you may have but please do not direct me to the blog as others have, though it may be accurate it isn't up to date information.I am well aware of Chris' contribution to SW and admire him for it. Thank you
spidersolo
Well-Known Member
Thank you for the polite reply. I have read the thread thoroughly that is why I chimed in...it appears that many here have misinterpreted the information. Perhaps I have. Based on that information the V2 appears to be heavily machined from cast stock or bar. I really wished I would have kept to myself.
Last edited:
spidersolo
Well-Known Member
Thank you for the edification. But it still doesn't explain why there where two molds(one for the wonky grips and one for the even grip) We both know you cant machine material that isn't there as on the "wooden" based cast.It is commonly known fact that there are two different "styles" of cast sabers. I would like to find out what was the original blank for the one with the even grips? Did anyone stop to wander if (the yet unseen since the movie) V2 was the basis for the mold? I appreciate your information........... It appears you have knowledge about machining so perhaps you can add some conclusion or questions.
Last edited:
spidersolo
Well-Known Member
I have not denied the evidence other than I believe the V2 to be heavily machined. There are obviously two molds used one from the wooden master (with the wonky grips and another one with even grips. What was used as the master for the even grips? Somewhere there had to be another master and I believe the v2 was the basis for the mold...........I am well aware of Chris' contributions and I appreciate and respect them.
So if I have a difference of opinion that can not be confirmed or denied I smack of obstinance?
lonepigeon
Master Member
What "styles" of cast sabers are you referring to?
I think your terms are different than what most of us use and it's confusing the conversation.
What lightsaber are you talking about that has fat, even grips?
Please post a picture or link to a picture on the web.
I don't know what 2nd mold you're trying to claim exists.
The Shared stunt and V2 came out of one mold. They were cast from aluminum. They are the only two screen used sabers from that mold that we know of. There is no reason to believe there are more, but it is possible. The wooden master still exists, as does an extra unused casting that is missing the pommel.
Other known cast ROTJ sabers were resin. There's the R2 launching saber and casts of the ROTJ Hero. The sail barge saber is presumed cast, but everything about that saber is pure conjecture from one photo.
Sym-Cha
Master Member
Hi spidersolo ... if you'd have read my post and noticed the hidden humor by means of quotes from the star wars movies ... and would know that I did not write that post to intensionally offend you in any way ... just wanted you to acknowledge the fact that indeed it was you who were offending other more experienced and knowledgeable members by claiming solidly and firmly that they must be mistaken and that the V2 is and can only be machined ... until you are provided with and have seen any real valid evidence to the contrary ... provided by others or me. In essence it's not what you said but how you said it that made me write that comment ... even in an attempt to steer you and others away . . . from the argument at hand.
Since I obviously did offend you ... I sincerely apologize ... now let's get back on topic ... please.
-Chaim
Since I obviously did offend you ... I sincerely apologize ... now let's get back on topic ... please.
-Chaim
Last edited:
spidersolo
Well-Known Member
Sorry about the confusion. When I say style I mean uneven grip rings and even grip rings. If you look at the various castings they are different. What was the basis for the mold " it certainly couldn't be the wood master as it doesn't match". If the shared stunt and V2 are the same molds what was used as the master? Why are the grips even on the v2 and uneven on the shared stunt? The raw casting looks like it would loose a lot of material to straighten out those grip rings as the raw casting looks very uneven to me.
Is it possible that the v2 was the original machined prop? I have a lot of questions I know but there is a lot of controversy surrounding these props.
Thanks for anything you can add.
Mara Jade's Father
Master Member
I am confused by the belief that the wooden saber is used to cast the other sabers. I admit I do not know all the saber variants but any wood saber has evidence of only existing during ROTJ, right? However, doesn't the v2 have a history of being used in ANH? Is so, wouldn't that be used as a master if they used a master at all?
I just do not understand the reasoning involved here. It seems like there is an attempt to link all sabers from a method to atempt to replicate them exactly. Is there any evidence that the production of the rotj cared whether props looked identical or not? It would seem that they assumed no one would ever scrutinize these props as we do now.
Now, I have no insight to how all these sabers were made or what method. But due to the lack of love and care given to these props in construction or continuity, it seems like and machined sabers would have been done individually by hand and although some concern was given to making them look similar, their was not a lot of concern for the fine details such as if the rings were even or not.
I would also speculate that a wooden saber would have been constructed the same way, maybe as an afterthought due to a need.
Like I said, I have no idea how many, how they were made. But I really doubt the people making the movie cared back then as much as we do now about prop continuity.
I just do not understand the reasoning involved here. It seems like there is an attempt to link all sabers from a method to atempt to replicate them exactly. Is there any evidence that the production of the rotj cared whether props looked identical or not? It would seem that they assumed no one would ever scrutinize these props as we do now.
Now, I have no insight to how all these sabers were made or what method. But due to the lack of love and care given to these props in construction or continuity, it seems like and machined sabers would have been done individually by hand and although some concern was given to making them look similar, their was not a lot of concern for the fine details such as if the rings were even or not.
I would also speculate that a wooden saber would have been constructed the same way, maybe as an afterthought due to a need.
Like I said, I have no idea how many, how they were made. But I really doubt the people making the movie cared back then as much as we do now about prop continuity.
Last edited:
spidersolo
Well-Known Member
I really didn't mean for it to come of that harsh. I believe the V2 to be machined extensively either from a casting or bar stock. I have been told this but I have no way of proving it. Either way if cast it had to have a master and it couldn't possibly be the wooden one as it's grips aren't even close. So that being said, what is the basis for the mold of the v2 or shared stunt? Is one the machined master and the other a clone? or is there a master I am unknowledgeable about? Thats the one thing no one has discussed unless I missed something.
spidersolo
Well-Known Member
Very well said.
Lichtbringer
Master Member
I´m sorry, i can´t - to be honest, the ROTJs are not very distinguishable for me. One has a box with copper edges, another has a Graflex-clamp - basically that´s for me, at least the part i can remember longer than 5 minutes. I know there are other details, but nothing i recall long ago after no longer watching to a pic. :lol
It´s sabers, no blasters :love - nice, but ..... well, there is still my sig-line for explanation. :cool
I just chimed in to say that each stuff could be used for machining, cast and round stock - and a definatly machined part of it doesn´t imply nessessary that all of it was machined.
But up to know i havn´t seen any pics good enough to say "no machining was done". From what i have seen i would have assumed it was machined, but no idea to what degree, and also not from what base material/shape. Also cause i see no sense in metal castings - making a master, then a mold, cast alu, mold is destroyed (i assume sand casting) after each cast, making a new mold, .... Metal casting is not as easy as throwing out a lot of resincasts from a rtv mold. And after casting it ... the cleaning, and not to mention any additional machining - making them hollow, threading or other connections, all that takes the same time at both "materials". Under the line they probably would have been faster if machining each completly, esspecialy with their usual sloppy approach to do things.
But under the line - it may be a stupid way to make them, but i don´t know what they have really done - i have no secret insights, and have to rely to the people who have. :confused
Holy cow - a few years ago I didn't understand many of the things Lonepigeon and Nighteyes are talking about. I asked many, many questions (almost too many, haha sorry guys!) and when I had another theory I popped the question, with photos and an explanation of my doubts, and members were kind enough to discuss them with me. 90% of the time I was wrong, but with an open dialogue, all that matters is the information.
Honestly, it's been requested that you (spidersolo) provide a picture or something to give us some context of your ideas, maybe even bullet points for us to discuss. Your ideas are new and different from people that have been in the archives and handled these props - and this is why members are slightly taken aback.
The thick, even grip rings theory and the second mold/master theory are what throw me the most - I have no idea where these ideas are coming from. In fact the grips are un-even on both the ANH re-used sabers (V2 and Shared Stunt) as well as the ones made for ROTJ (Yuma, Hero). While they are extremely different neither have even grips, or even an perfectly circular profile (ANH era). Your feelings and thoughts are valid, and we'd like to discuss the evidence that already exists, as it seems you have some doubts about it.
Honestly, it's been requested that you (spidersolo) provide a picture or something to give us some context of your ideas, maybe even bullet points for us to discuss. Your ideas are new and different from people that have been in the archives and handled these props - and this is why members are slightly taken aback.
The thick, even grip rings theory and the second mold/master theory are what throw me the most - I have no idea where these ideas are coming from. In fact the grips are un-even on both the ANH re-used sabers (V2 and Shared Stunt) as well as the ones made for ROTJ (Yuma, Hero). While they are extremely different neither have even grips, or even an perfectly circular profile (ANH era). Your feelings and thoughts are valid, and we'd like to discuss the evidence that already exists, as it seems you have some doubts about it.
Sym-Cha generously drew bright red Arrows for me on a close-up of the shared stunt that shows a casting seam running down the length of the prop. (Grips, clamp section). Again, all these photos are posted in ROTJ saber threads.
spidersolo
Well-Known Member
That was the same conclusion I had about the spinning blade versions v2 , Why go to the trouble of casting something that would in the end need to be extensively machined anyway? It made little sense and would be redundant to cast, The Yuma saber appears to be machined as well ( I believe it was confirmed as being machined by a gentleman in CA).......The Shared Stunt static prop I can understand as being cast it just gets mildly tweeked and you can still see the seam halves, but to cast a mechanical saber makes no sense to me and it would be a huge waste of working hours. Basically you confirmed what I thought....:thumbsup
I think all of the mystery surrounding the V2 is intriguing . I wonder if there is one person who knows the history or perhaps it is a combination of several prop depts. in the UK as well as the USA or if it is all lost in time.
lonepigeon
Master Member
As others have said the Shared Stunt and V2 both have uneven grip rings, the same uneven pattern since they're both from the same mold.
The wooden master used to make the mold and an unused casting from it came up for auction many years ago on eBay. The seller was a prop builder from John Stears shop ( they built the stunt sabers and droids for ANH). I exchanged a few emails with the guy. The pieces were later bought by Propstore. I don't know if they've sold since then.
The Yuma saber (aka Rotj hero) is a machined copy of one of these anh stunts. Machined but hardly identical. It has its own wonkiness and unique pattern of uneven grips.
The wooden master used to make the mold and an unused casting from it came up for auction many years ago on eBay. The seller was a prop builder from John Stears shop ( they built the stunt sabers and droids for ANH). I exchanged a few emails with the guy. The pieces were later bought by Propstore. I don't know if they've sold since then.
The Yuma saber (aka Rotj hero) is a machined copy of one of these anh stunts. Machined but hardly identical. It has its own wonkiness and unique pattern of uneven grips.
spidersolo
Well-Known Member
Yes, I do not disagree with that and we are all aware of this. The jest of the conversation is.
1. What was used to mold the v2 /Shared stunt. As it was certainly not the wooden blank as the grips are vastly different.(you would have to add material if this casting was used)
2. Is the V2 machined and perhaps the master for the mold? The screen shots of the V2 do not show signs of casting and it is very heavily machined. Although it is possible that the V2 was machined from a casting, it would be very wasteful in time and material to make a mechanical device that way.
Perhaps the shared stunt is cast and the V2 is machined, this is what the circumstantial evidence would point to.
