Magic of Myth ( MoM ) Luke RotJ Hero ( cave build ) lightsaber research, images, reference, & collaborative model builder's discussion.

Just for kicks and giggles

View attachment 1023466
Roman Props Inception
Korbanth K4
Roman Props V4 gen 1
KR Sabers V2
Korbanth LS6

i always hoped for roman to keep both gen 1 and gen 2 design versions.
gen 1 is an insane rotj hero option, too bad the gen2 replaced it completely, since people could not be so interested in the tlj creepy uncle as they would be in the hero...
 
Probably the width of the blue strips.
Sequence of how far those ridges are in by line.
12 blue solder lines.
Lines 1-3 with the widest insets from the centerline. 4-5 medium width etc ;)

Sorry I know it’s not straight forward. It hardly is late at night haha.

I’ll have a much clearer version I’ll put up later (this week)
 
What do you think?
 

Attachments

  • luke rotj pommel compare.jpg
    luke rotj pommel compare.jpg
    96.7 KB · Views: 393
Similar:

I think a fusion of where we are and that is probably in-range.

1023567

I have a feeling your valleys are about right (I think ours should be wider) but our cube face position seems more the right size and angle at the moment.
Love honing in like this

Don’t quote me on that though I think Adam still wanted to adjust the cubes
 
What do you think?

As BR mentioned we are not far off from each other. Incidentally... I believe the main body area just forward of the gear, and the endcap to the rear of the gear have different diameters.

The part of the gear that blends into the endcap has NO lip in the center of the valley between gear teeth. In other words, the depth of the gear valleys matches the diameter of the endcap, but is slightly larger than that of the main just forward of the gear.

What BR and I surmise is the diameter of the endcap is 35mm. The valley between the teeth of the gear is a flat plane on the tangent of that 35mm.

The main body just forward of the gear we suspect to be 34 or 34.5mm so it creates the lip over the entire circumference of the forward part of the gear.

Just what I have noticed.

Look carefully at the center of the gear tooth valleys when looking from behind in various photos.

(And this even shows up in your reference photo... the lip is on top, but not on the bottom suggesting the transition to the endcap is seamless at the center of the tooth valleys).
 
i always hoped for roman to keep both gen 1 and gen 2 design versions.
gen 1 is an insane rotj hero option, too bad the gen2 replaced it completely, since people could not be so interested in the tlj creepy uncle as they would be in the hero...


Yeah, no kidding. The various Creepy Uncle props from Roman and Lukyanov look fantastic, but I cannot and will not endorse even the coolest-looking props which come from the films that killed the franchise. And that includes the new Graflex variations, as much as the siren call of the TFA/TLJ version is tempting me.

A super-accurate ROTJ hero, on the other hand, is right up my alley!


Meanwhile, I printed out the scaled render and set it next to my 7C/PP hilt. Couldn't get a good photo of the comparison without misleading lens distortion, but the 7C/PP does indeed seem to be about 2cm shorter. Basically, the length of the emitter nipple.
 
1023819

Another sample. I believe the cube faces may need “hair” adjustment but the overall geometry I'm thinking is so so close.
 
Comparing the nicksdad to the images I think shows that as well.

Adam is rocking the pommel gear, just a minor tweak for cube face and I think it will be spot on.
1023842
 
good eye on the diameters above and below the cubes!

do the cubes vary in widths? (face) a couple of mine seem smaller
 
good eye on the diameters above and below the cubes!

do the cubes vary in widths? (face) a couple of mine seem smaller

Quite possible. Adam surmised that the workpiece probably wasn’t centered during machining on the original... so there is some small variation.
 
As I recall, quickly comparing mine to the Frankenprint the biggest differences were the emitter flange thickness and the nipple height. Both were bigger on the Nicksdad than on the print. The rest aligned pretty well.

Thanks Drew!
 
Quite possible. Adam surmised that the workpiece probably wasn’t centered during machining on the original... so there is some small variation.

Correct. There is some clear artifacting when you look at multiple photos from both front and back... coupled with the fact that some cube chamfers in the front and back have varying "ledge" thicknesses (all the way from what appears to be 0 all the way to 0.5mm)... given my own experience on a lathe these are pretty telltale signs of an uncentered workpiece when the hilt was turned and milled.

Unfortunately that would be nearly impossible to model in such a way as to communicate to a machinist in any sort of predictable way within common tolerances.

Best way to handle that aspect (Which is what BR and I are doing) is reflecting the "flaws" but in a more uniform and law of averages sort of way.
 
Ah, I meant the face of the cubes, as if the gaps between them were milled out in different thicknesses as opposed to the lathed axes

I think Sym-Cha noticed this fun artifact
1023961


It only appears in a few shots, the dimple must be really shallow!
 
Ah, I meant the face of the cubes, as if the gaps between them were milled out in different thicknesses as opposed to the lathed axes

I think Sym-Cha noticed this fun artifact
View attachment 1023961

It only appears in a few shots, the dimple must be really shallow!

1.) yes. The pommel cubes could have variance in both position and width based on how the work piece was indexed. In an ideal world you would want everything on 60-degree intervals around the cylinder (360 / 6 = 60)... but... clocking and indexing on a manual lathe can be very tricky indeed.

2.) yes I have noticed the tiny and shallow drill hole. I plan to include it but just have not put it into the model yet. But the final one will have a super shallow hole like that.
 
Back
Top