Last edited:
Sds e-11
- Thread starter Howard
- Start date
defstartrooper
Sr Member
I'm curious how he gets round the replica weapons laws with this.
I was wondering if it isn't the same thing being sold over at the FISD:
http://forum.whitearmor.net/index.php?showtopic=6694
http://forum.whitearmor.net/index.php?showtopic=6694
Ghost Host
Sr Member
Hmm, not too impressed. He made some interesting decisions like having metal bits here and there and possibly sourcing the correct T track (still looks a bit thin), but there are alot of wrong details on it and too much real detail filled in. I've seen fan reproductions that left way more detail on it. And his descriptions are truly nauseating.
" The Ultimate E11 blaster !
A real complement to your SDS armour.Built with the enthusiasm, Originality and quality that you expect from all SDS products"
A real complement to your SDS armour.Built with the enthusiasm, Originality and quality that you expect from all SDS products"
Originality !!!! :lol
lonepigeon
Master Member
Just amazing what this idiot thinks he can get away with.
It looks like an MR ripoff. He even stole the scope graphics.
The scope is the same model as the MR, poor choice as it's only seen on one gun in ANH (maybe).
Scope rail is wrong. T-track is too thin.
Nice idea on the plug-in "power pack".
Obviously the thing is made for trooping and a little simplified.
It looks like an MR ripoff. He even stole the scope graphics.
The scope is the same model as the MR, poor choice as it's only seen on one gun in ANH (maybe).
Scope rail is wrong. T-track is too thin.
Nice idea on the plug-in "power pack".
Obviously the thing is made for trooping and a little simplified.
MarkG
Well-Known Member
Here's what I've heard / read about it..
All the parts are cast from genuine Sterling parts and correct accessories.
A replica sterling E-11 was used, which is owned by a 501st UK member.
It's plastic (poss vac formed) with a foam type filling to make it light yet rigid.
Photos on the SDS site ARE NOT final pictures, hence missing/wrong t-track etc.
As for the scope inserts, there's plenty of them going around, and therefore not just limited to the MR version.
My only gripe is the price.... bit too high IMHO.
All the parts are cast from genuine Sterling parts and correct accessories.
A replica sterling E-11 was used, which is owned by a 501st UK member.
It's plastic (poss vac formed) with a foam type filling to make it light yet rigid.
Photos on the SDS site ARE NOT final pictures, hence missing/wrong t-track etc.
As for the scope inserts, there's plenty of them going around, and therefore not just limited to the MR version.
My only gripe is the price.... bit too high IMHO.
voice in the crowd
Sr Member
I have always wondered how LFL / MR / Palitoy / Kenner etc got away with making props / toys that are clearly all found parts. If anybody can explain to me how these companies can claim any rights to these items I would love to know.
It appears to me that LFL claim rights to the E-11 blaster and yet the gun is property of the Sterling Armament company, counter property of Hengstler, and gun scope property of Minneapolis Honeywell Regulator Company
All these original items are over 50 years old so possibly copyright has expired on them. I know nothing about UK copyright but lately some 1950s musicians (Cliff Richard the highest profile) were complaining that they had now lost the rights to their music as it was 50 years old - not sure if the same thing applies.
Either way SDS / AA are totally shameless now when it comes to products and product names. The shadow trooper being nothing to do with the original production which AA was involved in.
Clearly Andrew Ainsworth couldn't care less about being sued anyway. LFL have tried already and still haven't stopped him even by going through the UK courts.
From the pics it looks pretty poor anyway.
Chris
It appears to me that LFL claim rights to the E-11 blaster and yet the gun is property of the Sterling Armament company, counter property of Hengstler, and gun scope property of Minneapolis Honeywell Regulator Company
All these original items are over 50 years old so possibly copyright has expired on them. I know nothing about UK copyright but lately some 1950s musicians (Cliff Richard the highest profile) were complaining that they had now lost the rights to their music as it was 50 years old - not sure if the same thing applies.
Either way SDS / AA are totally shameless now when it comes to products and product names. The shadow trooper being nothing to do with the original production which AA was involved in.
Clearly Andrew Ainsworth couldn't care less about being sued anyway. LFL have tried already and still haven't stopped him even by going through the UK courts.
From the pics it looks pretty poor anyway.
Chris
sskunky
Sr Member
Hi,
I can answer this as I am the guy that supplied SDS all the original parts that these blasters were molded from.
They are injection molded plastic with a very dense foam filler. The level of detail is outstanding far superior to anything that has been cast out of resin IMHO.
They will be left black and new looking so anyone who purchases one will be able to customize and weather it to their own wants and standards.
They are incredibly light and very strong yet feel good in hand and would be perfect for trooping.
The one thing I would say is that it was very hard to find the correct T Track although it looked close I think for all you SA fans you might want to replace it which should very easy as I believe they are just fixed with tension and not glue.
I am in no way affiliated with Sds and will earn nothing from the sales. I am just getting one as a thank you and that's fine with me.
I just thought it would be nice to have a fairly accurate blaster off the shelf and at a reasonable cost and that is my reason for getting involved.
You have to see this in the flesh to appreciate it.
When I get mine I will post some more detailed pics up.
JFYI the pics posted up on the SDS site are not the final pics and yes your right one of the 6 x T-Tracks is missing as is the little crescent shaped part towards the front in the pics, the final pieces will have these on. That's what rushing to get these pics on the site does for you!
Thanks for pointing these mistakes out, you guys never miss a trick! That's what I love about this place.
Is there anything else I have forgotten?
We wanted this to be as accurate as we could make it at a reasonable cost.
As I have said before I'm not on the pay roll. I just thought it would be a good idea to be able to buy a very accurate blaster off the shelf at a reasonable price that was light and strong enough to troop with.
I just wish people would put their opinions of SDS aside for a minute. The ST armor is a different story altogether and I had nothing to do with that.
The scope everyone is saying is a MR rip off , you are wrong it is directly cast from my m38 scope and the counter is cast from my real Hengstler counter and the cylinders are cast from the ones I made and from the template that me and a couple of other guys did on the FISD. The scope graphics are pulled of the net too and are not final.
I would be interested in some constructive criticism if you have it but just to slag it off isn't doing anyone any good.
Thank you
Mark.
I can answer this as I am the guy that supplied SDS all the original parts that these blasters were molded from.
They are injection molded plastic with a very dense foam filler. The level of detail is outstanding far superior to anything that has been cast out of resin IMHO.
They will be left black and new looking so anyone who purchases one will be able to customize and weather it to their own wants and standards.
They are incredibly light and very strong yet feel good in hand and would be perfect for trooping.
The one thing I would say is that it was very hard to find the correct T Track although it looked close I think for all you SA fans you might want to replace it which should very easy as I believe they are just fixed with tension and not glue.
I am in no way affiliated with Sds and will earn nothing from the sales. I am just getting one as a thank you and that's fine with me.
I just thought it would be nice to have a fairly accurate blaster off the shelf and at a reasonable cost and that is my reason for getting involved.
You have to see this in the flesh to appreciate it.
When I get mine I will post some more detailed pics up.
JFYI the pics posted up on the SDS site are not the final pics and yes your right one of the 6 x T-Tracks is missing as is the little crescent shaped part towards the front in the pics, the final pieces will have these on. That's what rushing to get these pics on the site does for you!
Thanks for pointing these mistakes out, you guys never miss a trick! That's what I love about this place.
Is there anything else I have forgotten?
We wanted this to be as accurate as we could make it at a reasonable cost.
As I have said before I'm not on the pay roll. I just thought it would be a good idea to be able to buy a very accurate blaster off the shelf at a reasonable price that was light and strong enough to troop with.
I just wish people would put their opinions of SDS aside for a minute. The ST armor is a different story altogether and I had nothing to do with that.
The scope everyone is saying is a MR rip off , you are wrong it is directly cast from my m38 scope and the counter is cast from my real Hengstler counter and the cylinders are cast from the ones I made and from the template that me and a couple of other guys did on the FISD. The scope graphics are pulled of the net too and are not final.
I would be interested in some constructive criticism if you have it but just to slag it off isn't doing anyone any good.
Thank you
Mark.
voice in the crowd
Sr Member
Hi Mark,
You are earning something from SDS a blaster.
In the SDS email I got it states -
Scope – a direct cast from the original prop
Scope power unit with spec details – a direct cast from the original prop
Grip – a direct cast from the original E11 prop
Clearly by your post these statements are untrue.
I know you want people to view this with an open mind but these are some big claims by SDS about being direct casts from the original prop.
Good luck
Chris
Last edited:
