OB1 ANH Saber - PARTS LIST

[lonepigeon]

So will there finally be a machined grenade with an accurate neck? (curved base)
I'd like to see the stamped lettering as well.

Those two factors have always kept me away from machined grenades and happy with my cast from an original one. The machined ones just never "feel" right to me.

It's unfortunate with all these new parts it seems we may all be starting from scratch again.
Not even existing clamp spacers will work with a full new booster.

 

[Serafino]

Originally posted by lonepigeon@Nov 1 2005, 09:41 PM
So will there finally be a machined grenade with an accurate neck? (curved base)
I'd like to see the stamped lettering as well.

Those two factors have always kept me away from machined grenades and happy with my cast from an original one. The machined ones just never "feel" right to me.

It's unfortunate with all these new parts it seems we may all be starting from scratch again.
Not even existing clamp spacers will work with a full new booster.

[snapback]1108121[/snapback]​

Curved base? That's an interesting issue. That feature varies quite a bit. I'll have to check and see whether Chen's are less radiused there than any historical ones. As I recall it's hard to tell exactly how radiused the prop is--it seems to be rather at the low end of the scale at any rate. The grenades at the Inert-ord private pages are a good example of the differences.

It would be very helpful if we could get a higher-resolution version of the pic of the grenade with the "mystery emitter candidate" part.

As for the lettering, an extremely faded, almost not there stamping would be fun to do, but it is a very expensive option. Personally I don't think the stamping has enough sure presence in the photos to warrant the high additional costs.

But we'll look into that, and I'll take another look at the photos.

As for the booster, if you hold out for a super-accurate, or a real handwheel, you'll want the fully accurate booster anyway and could then just cut down your clamp spacer to fit the booster flange. If you just want an accurate 'gear' to replace one on a threaded rod saber, well I'm sure there will be a suitable option available.

If I were doing a run of boosters I'd want to make such a version available. *cough cough* Hrrm, excuse me.

 

[lonepigeon]

I remember discussion about the radiused base of the neck not being possible on replicas. I didn't read anything about it not being correct. Checking some grenade examples I see now this is a variation (one that is difficult to check on the real prop). I do think the pic from the Cinema of George Lucas looks like the neck base is radiused.
The stamped text seems more obscured by dark weathering than faint, but I can see most people not wanting this on a replica grenade.

Do we know the ring of holes part of the booster was used? I see from Franz Bolo's pics that this piece is removable. Since it fits in the Graflex clamp I guess it seems likely.

I guess I can always do two sabers once I get that last gear I ordered

 

[Killdozer]

Not being possible? Weird.

But a run of grenades and emitters? whee.

I, too, would like to see the stamped lettering on the windvane.

When you say "dark weathering" Chris, do you mean the overall paint (?) job on the grenade and the emitter? I know there's still some debate on the actual colour, which could be explored now that the real obi cloak has surfaced. Is there a consensus on how completely painted the stem and emitter are onscreen?

KD

 

[Serafino]

Strongly radiused corners shouldn't be a problem if the machining is done with CNC.

I don't think 'weathering' could hide even the faintest stamping to the degree it's 'hidden' on the prop. I'd like to see a grenade example which shows this. From what I've seen the metal discolors but the stamping remains visible to whatever degree. We have seen fairly faint stamping but nothing where a few letters barely show at all. The prop grenade is in a very good state of preservation (although its apparent darkness in the Lucas book is a clue otherwise, it is clearly not heavily eaten by corrosion as all 'dug' grenades are).

KD--I don't think there's a consensus. I think paint is likely, I'm sure some would argue it's not. It is interesting that the grenade pictured in the Lucas book is very dark, that is strong evidence against painting.

 

[amish]

OK, so who will be doing a run of complete accurate saber replicas? That is the question on mind

Sorry for going off topic. I am not familiar at all with the differences between the grenades and find this very interesting.

Thanks everyone.

Tom

 

[Killdozer]

I guess I assumed that real grenades had the stamp and that it was a propmaker's obligation to intentionally obfuscate trademarks and manufacturer's labels, as on the MPP, Graflex, Eumig and Kalimar parts.

Whether that's with paint, putty, tape, scratching, I don't know.

And darkness is evidence against painting? How so? I['ve never seen a collector's windvane that wasn't brassy. The "Lucas" photo is very flat, while the "Chronicles" photos are very satiny, IMO. Wear? brass black, bluing or otherwise not paint? I'm curious to hear opinions.

KD

 

[Serafino]

Amish--I doubt there would be enough support for a super-accurate full saber run, it would cost too much and there are too many parts out there which most people consider 'good enough' or whatever.

KD--Some real grenades have no stamp. I think the jury's out on whether they covered the Graflex logo during ANH.

Darkness is evidence against painting in that it removes the reason for painting. Since one must theorize the simplest explanations, dark grenade=less likely they painted it to make it look dark.

I agree all published grenade vanes show brass--but the one in the Lucas book looks black. Then again it shows what looks like an area of chipped-away paint--maybe it was already painted?

The Chronicles photos show shiny, but they also show mottled steel on the frag body so I'm inclined to allow for lighting regarding the differences.

The vane and stem are SO black that it's hard to ascribe the color to brass black or similar, but the stem bottom is so velvety that it's hard to ascribe that to paint. To me the vane has always looked a bit like it was painted, and the frag body just like it was either naturally very dark, or had once been painted and lost most of its paint (the black 'mottling', a long shot but possible--in pattern the wear is not entirely dissimilar to the wear of the paint on the stunts.)

I tend consider this issue too vague to resolve, and an area for personal interpretation to reign until we get more information.

Originally posted by Killdozer@Nov 2 2005, 09:19 AM
I guess I assumed that real grenades had the stamp and that it was a propmaker's obligation to intentionally obfuscate trademarks and manufacturer's labels, as on the MPP, Graflex, Eumig and Kalimar parts.

Whether that's with paint, putty, tape, scratching, I don't know.

And darkness is evidence against painting? How so? I['ve never seen a collector's windvane that wasn't brassy. The "Lucas" photo is very flat, while the "Chronicles" photos are very satiny, IMO. Wear? brass black, bluing or otherwise not paint? I'm curious to hear opinions.

KD

[snapback]1108410[/snapback]​

 

[Reel Fakes]

I was looking at this site:
http://members.shaw.ca/dwlynn/british/britid.htm

And there are apparently 2 versions of the No 3 Mk1

Standard:

and No. 3 Mk 1 drill:

Note the color.
Is this news to anyone? It was to me

-Chris

 

[Serafino]

It's not news, that was the first site referenced regarding these grenades, and the difference in types overall is just one of paint color. Mr. Lynn himself told me this.

There are probably more differences between various 'standard' grenades than between the smaller numbers of 'drill' versions and the 'standards'.

The apparent darkness of the 'standard' grenade is due to lighting/photography. I have seen clearer pictures of that one and it's just a steel color--which means the original paint job has worn off.

 

[Reel Fakes]

I figured as much...oh well - it was worth a shot.

 

[JHVanOphem]

The other thing to keep in mind is did the prop maker use a real, de-milled, grenade or was it a dummy prop grenade to begin with.

A prop grenade wouldn't necessarily have to be 100% exact to a real one afterall.

 

[Serafino]

Originally posted by JHVanOphem@Nov 2 2005, 12:20 PM
The other thing to keep in mind is did the prop maker use a real, de-milled, grenade or was it a dummy prop grenade to begin with.

A prop grenade wouldn't necessarily have to be 100% exact to a real one afterall.

[snapback]1108535[/snapback]​

I just can't see them making detailed replicas of a WWI rifle grenade to use in a movie. The prop clearly has many small details of a real one--the detonator safety pin holes, the threaded stem and most importantly the very-difficult-to-machine windvane. Given the wide variety of parts Bapty drew from, and the steady supply of these grenades we've seen since, I think it's much more plausible that they used a real one.

 

[Sporak]

From what I can see in those pics the drill grenade seems to have the ridge on the vane, while the standard doesn't...

Mine is a standard Mark I it seems... exact but without the ridge on the vane.

Incidently...On mine you 'could' read parts of the words on the vane, but I colored it with brass black and now I can't find a trace...for what it's worth.

 

[Serafino]

Originally posted by Sporak@Nov 2 2005, 02:18 PM
From what I can see in those pics the drill grenade seems to have the ridge on the vane, while the standard doesn't...

Mine is a standard Mark I it seems... exact but without the ridge on the vane.

Incidently...On mine you 'could' read parts of the words on the vane, but I colored it with brass black and now I can't find a trace...for what it's worth.

[snapback]1108611[/snapback]​

But it's important not to allow this myth to build up that the physical shape of drill grenades was different from the standard ones. It comes up every six months or so.

In the details, there is no such thing as a 'standard' Mk I.

I'd LOVE to see before and after pictures of the stamped lettering disappearing Sporak, if you can dig them up, very useful that would be.

 

[lonepigeon]

Originally posted by Serafino@Nov 2 2005, 04:21 PM
I don't think 'weathering' could hide even the faintest stamping to the degree it's 'hidden' on the prop.

I disagree. As you noted the windvane appears very dark in the prop photos. In fact it's even darker than the frag body. The stamping is actually clear in the one highlight area. On an object that dark and dull I would not expect to see the lettering visible in the shadow areas. The letters aren't that big, deep, or sharp to catch highlights. Only the vertical of the "L" in Graflex is visible in the shadows and that's shiny metal (deeper letters too).

As you said though it would be costly to add and not everyone would want it.
It's an accuracy issue not all agree on (real world lettering on SW props).

 

[Treadwell]

The specific brand of transistors were identified a while back. I don't have the info, but someone must have it saved. There's a big "N" on them.

 

[Romans Empire]

Originally posted by Serafino@Nov 2 2005, 12:17 AM
Roman's machined aluminum one-piece run is coming.

That's a big NEGATIVE.

Mine is being made in pieces. It's already rolling.

 

[Serafino]

Originally posted by Treadwell@Nov 2 2005, 02:41 PM
The specific brand of transistors were identified a while back. I don't have the info, but someone must have it saved. There's a big "N" on them.

[snapback]1108621[/snapback]​

That thread is still up I believe.

Chris--all I ask is to see examples of stamping so faint that it would work the way you speak of. The Graflex lettering shows SOME even in the shadow areas, whereas the stamping on the vane sleeve is an arguable vague 'something' even in the highlight area.

As you all know by now, I'm perfectly content to be proven wrong given a strong enough argument.

 

[Serafino]

Originally posted by Romans Empire+Nov 2 2005, 03:04 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Romans Empire @ Nov 2 2005, 03:04 PM)</div>

<!--QuoteBegin-Serafino

@Nov 2 2005, 12:17 AM
Roman's machined aluminum one-piece run is coming.

That's a big NEGATIVE.

Mine is being made in pieces. It's already rolling.

[snapback]1108632[/snapback]​

[/b]

Well I'll be horngoggled Roman. :lol

All we gotta do is for enough people to yell loud enough I guess... I look forward to seeing them.