Solo ANH Hero Scope Mount. New Pics near the end

[Prop Runner]

I got the link to the above photo from another member, but to date no-one has been able to find this particular vintage SKS mount. Could be a variation on the Russian mount, made by China, Czechloslovakia, Romania, Vietnam, Egypt, or some other former satellite state or strategic/pinko-Commie ******* ally.

My main problem even with these is that the screen-used hero rings had screw thru-holes drilled off-center to the flanges, and not only that, on one side there's no scallop cut to provide clearance for the screw head, meaning the hole would have to be drilled much closer to the flange edge:

The asymmetry and sloppiness of the screw holes is frankly driving me nuts. :confused

- Gabe

 

[gavidoc]

If the cradle is fabricated for this mount, there is a good possiblity that the front scope ring is also fabricated and the rear ring was used as a master for the machining.

Would explain why the rear ring looks symetrical and has the scallops centered in the ring while the front one has an off center scallop on the one side and no scallop on the other side.

Also, if the cradle and T bracket are fabricated as a one off and are one piece, you are either going to have a fillet or you're going to have a flat transistion between the two. Don't see how you can have a point.

 

[spinner 44]

You'll probaly aware of this pic already http://www.officialpix.com/estore/proddeta...IA%5F401&cat=14
but I saw it just the other day and I think could be really interesteting to have a hopefully clear shot of the lower part of the cradle, plus maybe we can see iif the wheel is knurled or not.

Please keep the AMAZING work. I just love good ole research threads.

 

[Prop Runner]

Originally posted by gavidoc@Dec 21 2005, 05:52 AM
If the cradle is fabricated for this mount, there is a good possiblity that the front scope ring is also fabricated and the rear ring was used as a master for the machining.

Would explain why the rear ring looks symetrical and has the scallops centered in the ring while the front one has an off center scallop on the one side and no scallop on the other side.

I'd love to agree with you, Gav, because it fits in perfectly with my theory. However, neither rings have centered flange holes, which leads me to think that BOTH top rings were fabricated from scratch or were based on blanks. Does seem like an extreme solution instead of just using a different pair of rings... :unsure

Also, if the cradle and T bracket are fabricated as a one off and are one piece, you are either going to have a fillet or you're going to have a flat transistion between the two. Don't see how you can have a point.

I do agree with you there. I suppose I just don't see as big a fillet as the one you incorporated into your CAD model and line trace. It really can be as small as 1mm.

- Gabe

And John: WOW.................... :eek

I'm going to have to order that ASAP. I'm surprised nobody's found it until today, unless it's a brand new offering. Gotta see what others they have...

- Gabe

 

[Brinn 71]

WOW. I've NEVER see that Han Solo pic before.
AWESOME.


B

 

[spinner 44]

Originally posted by Prop Runner@Dec 21 2005, 08:21 PM

And John: WOW....................  :eek

I'm going to have to order that ASAP.   I'm surprised nobody's found it until today, unless it's a brand new offering.  Gotta see what others they have...

- Gabe

[snapback]1140912[/snapback]​

Hey Gabe. Its Sergio here actually LOL The spinner 44 from the Blade Runner blaster threads... I have something with Harrison Ford and guns I may have to consult with my psychiatrist lol

Yes it surprised me because I saw this one like 1 month ago when someone was linking to a Skywalker with binocs pic in the same site. As nobody mentioned it I thought it may have gone unnoticed. There's this say in Spain "Four eyes see better than two" - I guess you have a similar one- well luckily we have a lot of eyes here. Gotta send me a good scan when you get it please, though I'll be ordering a bunch in a not so distant future.

 

[Prop Runner]

Originally posted by Definitely Not Moogybaby@Dec 21 2005, 03:10 PM
Cool pic.

I'm starting to go back to my old theory that the cradle is one half of an old UK pipe repair clamp.

Similar styles are still available today, but they are stamped sheet metal now.

It fits in with the theory about the front cylinder being from a cut-down hose coupling.

Tom

[snapback]1141032[/snapback]​

:lol at your ID...

Ok, I remember now, thanks. As you may recall, I had my misgivings, but since it's a UK part, all we can do is appeal to UK members to rummage through old plumbing supplies.

To your theory's credit, any mismatch between a vintage pipe clamp and real scope rings may very well account for the off-centered top screw holes.

Slàinte. :cheers

- Gabe

 

[Prop Runner]

Originally posted by spinner 44+Dec 21 2005, 03:38 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(spinner 44 @ Dec 21 2005, 03:38 PM)</div>

<!--QuoteBegin-Prop Runner

@Dec 21 2005, 08:21 PM

And John: WOW....................  :eek

I'm going to have to order that ASAP.   I'm surprised nobody's found it until today, unless it's a brand new offering.  Gotta see what others they have...

- Gabe

[snapback]1140912[/snapback]​

Hey Gabe. Its Sergio here actually LOL The spinner 44 from the Blade Runner blaster threads... I have something with Harrison Ford and guns I may have to consult with my psychiatrist lol

Yes it surprised me because I saw this one like 1 month ago when someone was linking to a Skywalker with binocs pic in the same site. As nobody mentioned it I thought it may have gone unnoticed. There's this say in Spain "Four eyes see better than two" - I guess you have a similar one- well luckily we have a lot of eyes here. Gotta send me a good scan when you get it please, though I'll be ordering a bunch in a not so distant future.

[snapback]1141058[/snapback]​

[/b]

:lol Sorry Sergio - I'm having a slow day... :$

I just placed the order for the photo - hope the Christmas mail rush is over and it won't be delayed. I'll post a close-up scan as soon as I get it, and would be happy to send the entire scan to anyone who wants it.

- Gabe

 

[DARKSIDE72]

But why would a hose coupling be so thick? Generally they are quite thin.
Coupling from a military application?

 

[Prop Runner]

Originally posted by DARKSIDE72@Dec 21 2005, 03:54 PM
But why would a hose coupling be so thick? Generally they are quite thin.
Coupling from a military application?

[snapback]1141069[/snapback]​

Assuming Tom's theory is correct, I would agree that the clamp would have had to have been used in a very punishing, high-pressure flow, or corrosive environment to justify casting it rather than stamping it out of sheet metal. Otherwise, for such a low-cost hardware/plumbing supplies store item, stamped parts were being manufactured before WWI...

- Gabe

 

[DARKSIDE72]

It also surprises me that all scope mounts have been rejected at this point. Or have they? The Mosin-Nagant 91 sniper rifle for example has a varient scope mount that has many of the characteristics. As far as the skewed bolts etc on the rings a scope mount is only needed to keep the scope secure, the elevation and windage do the work. Maybe it was a sloppy cast...

 

[Prop Runner]

Originally posted by DARKSIDE72@Dec 21 2005, 07:21 PM
It also surprises me that all scope mounts have been rejected at this point. Or have they? The Mosin-Nagant 91 sniper rifle for example has a varient scope mount that has many of the characteristics. As far as the skewed bolts etc on the rings a scope mount is only needed to keep the scope secure, the elevation and windage do the work. Maybe it was a sloppy cast...

[snapback]1141189[/snapback]​

From my experience with steel and aluminum castings, holes are typically drilled and tapped as a secondary operation, along with grinding of mating surfaces and deburring. So if anybody was sloppy, it was the gunsmith or prop master who built the mount. What's odd to me is the fact that they would have had blank castings to begin with, because investment casting isn't something you can do in your workshop: you need foundry-level facilities. Either that, or the ring manufacturer used to offer blanks so gunsmiths could custom-fit them to a variety of mounting systems.

I also initially liked the Nagant as a candidate manufacturer, but the more I examine the Sitting Target bracket, the more it looks like it was tailor-made to fit this particular model 712 Mauser.

Gav: on second thought regarding the underside cradle-bracket fillet round, why couldn't the machinist have used the same cutter as the one used to create the Weaver/dovetail mount? I agree that there'd be little reason to, but the photos don't lie. I guess we'll all know more after I scan that Solo photo I ordered today.

- Gabe

 

[gavidoc]

Originally posted by Prop Runner@Dec 22 2005, 12:44 AM
Gav: on second thought regarding the underside cradle-bracket fillet round, why couldn't the machinist have used the same cutter as the one used to create the Weaver/dovetail mount?  I agree that there'd be little reason to, but the photos don't lie.  I guess we'll all know more after I scan that Solo photo I ordered today.

- Gabe

Theoretically possible if the cutter was long enough but I personally think unlikely.

A cutter like that would have to be rigid to keep tool chatter to a minimum for the cutting of the dovetail for a tight fit which means a short cutter. HOw would he get it in there to do the cut where the mounting area would be?

 

[Prop Runner]

Let's wait & see what details the new photo will yield - I'm VERY optimistic.

At this point I don't care who's right - I JUST WANT CONFIRMATION...

By the way - all the scope mount experts I've been e-mailing keep telling me it looks like a Russian design. Here's another modern SKS scope mount - notice it even has the slotted rail for a dovetail block:

Despite my "one-off" theory, I'm not giving up the search, wild-goose chase or not.

- Gabe

 

[spinner 44]

A fast question Gabe

What size pic did you order? Please tell me it was 16x20"

 

[OldKen]

gabe im in no position to even speak with you on such a subject (bows to the master) but man, that russian scope mount deffinately looks to be in the same vein...

Originally posted by Prop Runner@Dec 22 2005, 06:37 PM
Let's wait & see what details the new photo will yield - I'm VERY optimistic.

At this point I don't care who's right - I JUST WANT CONFIRMATION... 

By the way - all the scope mount experts I've been e-mailing keep telling me it looks like a Russian design.  Here's another modern SKS scope mount - notice it even has the slotted rail for a dovetail block:

Despie my "one-off" theory, I'm not giving up the search, wild-goose chase or not. 

- Gabe

[snapback]1141804[/snapback]​

 

[Prop Runner]

Originally posted by spinner 44@Dec 22 2005, 05:11 PM
A fast question Gabe

What size pic did you order? Please tell me it was 16x20"

[snapback]1141945[/snapback]​

ACK... :cry I was so eager to order I just clicked "BUY" and didn't realize there were more sizes... It was too late to get anyone at Official Pix on the phone, so I left a message and also shot them an e-mail requesting an exchange in case they haven't mailed it off yet. At the very least I'll get the 8x10, scan it, and return it in exchange for the larger one.

Ich bin eine idiot...

 

[Serafino]

You should come out okay, they are pretty responsive to emails.

 

[Prop Runner]

Originally posted by Serafino@Dec 22 2005, 07:29 PM
You should come out okay, they are pretty responsive to emails.

[snapback]1142032[/snapback]​

Yep. Got a prompt e-mail back saying they'd be happy to take it back for an exchange and apply the credit toward the larger print.

- Gabe

 

[Prop Runner]

Ok, so I got the 8x10 today and scanned it. Here are the frustratingly anticlimactic results...

Since for some reason all my scans deliver a larger than 1:1 raw copy of the original (anyone know why?), here's a 1:1 crop of the raw Han scan:

Magnified 200%:

Magnified 400%:

Don't ask me why the 200% one is more pixilated than the 400%. If anyone cares, I saved the raw scan as a 2.31 MB .PNG file and then saved the cropped Han and magnifications as .JPEGs for posting.

Brinn: I sent you the file to see if you can lighten it up and draw some details out of the bracket-cradle area.

A few observations:

• What the FRACK is that monstrosity on the bull barrel just behind the suppressor?.?.?.? :eek :confused It's bigger than anything even remotely resembling a "front sight" we've encountered before, and it leads me to conclude that the prop guy on hand at the photo shoot simply sfuffed a wad of "something" in the gap between the bull barrel and the suppressor to keep the latter concentric and straight. What say you all?
• What might appear to some as the ends of the "T" crossbar, to me more than ever appear to be the bull ring mounting flanges on the other side of the cradle.
• I'm now more inclined to believe that the center thumbscrew has no knurling on it, since only a smooth surface will produce such a consistent reflection as what we see in this photo (notice that the front thumbscrew doesn't reflect squat...)
• It appears that the socket cap screw on the underside of the suppressor is actually not covering the entire 5mm diameter bottom vent hole, and is actually hanging off the front edge of the hole:
  
  
  
  
  
  Or could I just be seeing the screw head's shadow? Grudging agreement? Mocking laughter? Anything? Where's Drew? Drew loves to see things in shadows... Wait a minute... I shouldn't even be discussing the suppressor in this thread - SORRY GAV...
  
• Where'd the blood stripe on Han's pant leg disappear to? :confused Vince, what's your take? (again, Gav - sorry for the OT comments, I couldn't help myself :cry )

So does anyone honestly think that the 16x20 print will be any less vague on details? I'm not convinced at this point that it's really worth exchanging... :unsure

DISCUSS, KIDS, DISCUSS.

- Gabe