Looking for scope help

It's a frustratingly complex mystery. The tabs look different front to back too. Are the front tabs knobs? I'm sure yours will be close enough for my M2 blaster :)D ) but it would be so nice to know what the original was.

Personally i think they put 'innertube caps' on them to hide the flaps.

Thats what they look like to me in photos.
 
Will you have the front clamp around the flash tube or the barrel? This is really directed towards your build thread but is only really relevant in the midst of this conversation - so forgive the off-topic everyone else.
 
Id say they go on the barrell right? Ive never seena photo elsewhere. But again, ive been doing this for a year now. im not near as knowledgeble as a lot of others.

I planned the mounts to go on the front,a nd rear of the barrell.

The way im making the scope, they should have some leway.

Im confident i can get one of the nicest scope/mount/greeble kits to date in kit form.

Thats because I eat my wheeties.
 
Art's picture shows it really looks like it's mounted on the flash tube.

Executor-Bridge-10.jpg
 
i think the front mount is on the tube...that is how a few other kits have the mounts done...now, that may not be correct, but i know from my other kit the smaller, front mount was indeed on the flash tube...
 
I think your right. I missed that, but I missed it because it supports my thinking.

If you look closley at this pic, something is between it. And its not on perfect plane.
Ill have to re-adjust the way im doing this, but I think that that actually helps me. A TUN:) WOOT
youll see tomorrow:)


clampnew.jpg
 
Ok so next question is the only set of clamps I have seen in person, are greebled on on side, as in th pic, and no greebles on the other. Wouldnt you think it would be symmetrical.

Also. this looks like two diffrent metals to me. (The pics above. the part is a little different than everyone thinks if this pic is acurate. )

So heres what this pic shows in 3d.
clamp3d.jpg


Reason being is the lin that goes up the clamp, does NOT perfectly trapezoid into the bracket. Its more u shaped than perfedt y shaped.

Now. the most interesting thing to note, is the molex is almost vertical. yet the clamp is at an angle where you can see it.

I think that shape is a piston arm. I really do:)
 
I can concede that, but the mount is definitally at a differnt angle than the lower part.

The angle of the mount as it leave the upper half of the clamp, to where it goes into where it attaches to the actual mount, is 2 angles, not just a pyramid with a flat top.
 
The rear mount is an A, the front mount is absolutely not. It has two angles.

attachment.php


If you follow the line of the circle clamp. and draw it to the top, where the scope ring mounts attach, there is NO possible way its an A shape.

Im convinced that not only are they fabricated parts, they are different front to back.

Ive seen a pic of the rear, with the molex off, and its a straight line A block, but the front, is not.

That being said, im not ready to fabricate the front differently. So for now, this is the way Im making my mounts.

mounts.jpg
 
Great job, it looks closer than we have seen for a scratch build which is fantastic for your run of blasters - I'll happily get a set for my stormrider trooping blaster and maybe one for my replica blaster too but eventually, hopefully, we'll still find the original part.
 
I actually like two things for the front clamp.
This:
clamps-b.jpg


And this on the antique lights, which would be somethign they would almost certainly take apart to make the mount.
clamp%20lamp2.jpg


pPETS-3763570t400.jpg


Ive seen all shapes and sizes of these in person, and some are a really close match, with a shape cut for the inner space.
 
That's looking pretty darned good so far Storm. Here are a few constructive points as I see: The top C-shaped "sash" should be a tiny bit thicker, and a wee bit more squared off. Also it has two holes through the front (and I assume) rear faces. The center "spine" should be thinner, and not tube shaped. Just some observations. Darned fine work bro!
 
Unfortunately I cant show the photo, but the center is definitally a tube in the front, not sure about the rear. I was shown a high res photo that showed the tube running up the center. Which also makes me believe tht this is some sort of a mount, with a screw down the center on one side, mounted to a metal mount like in the photos above.

Im sure youve all seen them, they attach to rods, and have a screw that goes downn the cetner and 'bites' into whatever its attached too.

Im wondering if theres some photography equipment used to hold the heiland tubes or something, that looks like this.

The top sash is what the mounts 'clip' to, so the thickness is determined by the scope mounts. If the scope mounts were further apart, the sash would be thicker. Does that make sense?

I cant say the scopes that everyone says are 'acurate' arent acurate, but im sure the modern mounts are not quite acurate. But your correct. And the holes do need to be drilled. I dont think these are more than 70% acurate really. But for molding purposes (simplicity) and rough acuracy, i think they are getting close.
 
So, lets see if we can all agree to elminate some ideas, insrtead of agreeing on some.

First, lets talk about the front mount. This is of a copy of arts posted pic.

Can we agree on the following:

1 The mount is not an A, at least in the sense were all used to. In the following picture I have drawn in the 'readily accepted' shape of the mount. Looking at the lines of this pic. can we agree this is not the correct shape?

2 The angle of the molex in the front MATCHES the angle of the base of the mount, but not the angle of the upper part of the mount (Thats going into the scope area) therefore further eliminating the 'A' frame idea.

3. The UPPER portion of the mount, does not smoothly transition into the lower 'clamp part' of the mount, further moving away from the accepted (even the mounts I made) shape of the mounts.

bottomline.jpg
 
Your "A" is much too tall.
The sides should match the angle of the Molex and it should end just above the Molex.
There's a block missing that goes on top of the A.
See the pic shabad posted from Saxe Coburg.
The "A" is blue, you're missing the orange part on top (under the purple).
 
1. The shroud covers the block

2. If the block isn't this tall or close the mounts height do not match up

3. And most important if the vertical line ended at the moles, the line past it is diagonal. Which is my point

By all means, illustrate it
 
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