Different versions of the ROTJ blaster

Boba Swede

Active Hunter
Hi.
Are there more than 1 version of the ROTJ blaster, and i'm not thinking of the cut and uncut version, but "stunt" and "hero" version?

I got an offer to buy a ROTJ blaster on another forum but there are 3 major differences which i could see straight away at the pictures.

1. The bomb racks were missing.

2. The sight was uppside down, ie the knobs were on the bottom

3. The sight was mounted backwards, ie the long part of the sight was towards the stock.

Was there more than 1 version of the rotj blaster?

*** EDIT ***
BTW. The maker of the blaster is really big on Screen accuracy.. so.. hence my question.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I might have heard something about itthough it's foggy as to where...it could be based on something that nobody realy pays attention to like the damaged JP. Maybe we just assume that the blaster looks one way and when we see the other we automatically correct it. Well, I'll watch tonight and see if I can spot it out. Interesting... pics would be awesome or a link.
 
Pics? Oh sure.. i should have posted them in the first post..

bobablaster.jpg


BobaROTJ.jpg
 
Well that one looks like the sight is mounted correctly and does have the bomb racks but is mounted backwards. Where is this thread? I still have yet to rewatch ROTJ...been very busy with work.
 
The bomb racks are exactly that. They were taken from a model plane kit (I'm sure someone will chip in and say which) and mounted on the cylinder of the blaster.
 
The simple answer to your question is

YES, There is more than one version of the ROTJ blaster (I at least count 3).

However, the blaster in question I would have to say isn't 100% 'screen' accurate.
As you have already pointed out, the Blaster is missing the 'bomb racks' and the scope is attached incorrectly.
But such things can be added and fixed. Otherwise it looks pretty good.
Each pic is a different blaster

EE3 Vers1 27.jpg


EE3 Vers2 12.JPG


EE3 Vers 3 01.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This thread is more than 15 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top