Looking for scope help

Hey all!

Does anyone have a clearer, high resolution version of this shot, specifically the boxed red area. (In case anyone can't post a complete image, which is understandable)

Like this?

Yes! That's exactically what I meant! Art, I've said it before, I'll say it again. you ROCK!

Again, this opens up more questions... :O What are the Knob looking things on the bottom of the scope mounts?!?! They look like black knobs, with a silvery base.

Also, what is the right shape of the piece that the molex plugs and the scope are mounted to? Did anyone ever determine what this could have been made from? Christian's (MoW) rifle has some detail on the JB rifle that I've never seen before. Is this interpretation or is there some indication of this.

The two pieces you are seeing at the bottom are the two halves of the clamp that goes around the barrel. As far as the block betwene the barrel and the scope, this is the best photo I can find at the moment.

Don't use the hyper-firm blaster for ref.... it's an awsome blaster, but the details are all off when it comes to the scope mount. Stick with the production and screen used pics.

First these are just my opinion, I am in no way an expert at much of anything let alone Boba. This is roughly how I think the mount went together. Chances are it’s much different from this and out side of the Molex connectors, I have no clue what the parts were made from. Also the upper 2 vertical pieces would be the base of the actual ASI scope ring. I’m just posting these up for conversation purposes only. These 3D images were created very quickly from my memory and I didn’t have any reference in front of me at the time, so I apologize if some of the details or proportions are off.

Thx Saxe...:thumbup

that looks pretty close

Shinobi, you building a scratch scope?

Nah, but I have a "Frankenstein" scope assembled from some other scopes, with a little bit of modification. The Look of the elements are good, so I'm happy with it. I could buy a resin cast of an A.S.I, but I'd rather a real scope. It lends to the "real weapon" feel of it. The mount itself I'll have to build though, that's what I'm trying to do now.

Very nice pics Jon...

WOW! Thanks Saxe! That's pretty darn good, and VERY helpful too! These things are driving me spare!

Wow, Jon, that does look really impressive and probably one of the closest breakdowns I have seen!

Originally Posted by BobaFettSlave_1

i do believe the real deal for the scope mounts have been found. I dont personaly know what they are and the identity hasn't been publicly released yet. also for the sake of the guy who has them cant say his name
they do look to be all one peice and look to be an expanding ring
so the mystery will hopefuly soon be revealed

Dana

Just a bump for the sake of the whole "revelation" thing.

BUMP! See below!

Originally Posted by Shinobi_Fett

BUMP! See below!

What??? Am I missing something!

Alan

Originally Posted by wizardofflight

What??? Am I missing something!

Alan

Hey Alan...
Could he have meant 'see above'

Oh.. I have my preference set to "newest at top" that's why below. Was just bumping the thread with my illustration.

That is looking pretty good. I have been studing this part for some time know and you have captured what I have seen based on the exisiting reference material.

Alan

Hey Alan! Thanks! This is driving me bats! On a side note - I'll be working on a scratch built pack body from your plans soon!

Scope clamp/mount:

I'm sure this has been researched to death. Has anyone looked into "clic support hanger clamps" ? Or maybe a variation of this type of tension hanger? They have the built in spacer which I found interesting. They are used in electrical, plumbing applications.

J

Yeah, I've looked at a bunch of those kind to DS72, but I don't think that's it. The piece as far as I can tell is a compression-style "clamp" that's squeezed to open. You can sort if tell this by noticing the "tabs" on the bottom are farther apart in the one closer to the flashtube, since the diameter of the gun barrel is wider closer to the breach. Still scouring, nothing yet...

Anyone have any new leads on this? I just started looking into this part today and this thread seems a really promising start.

I've sent off a few questions to some UK electrical engineers. Is this the last enduring mystery part of the ESB blaster?

this, the box on the stock, and the disk under the v8 arm have not been ID'd yet

Originally Posted by BobaFettSlave_1

this, the box on the stock, and the disk under the v8 arm have not been ID'd yet

..so what are you guys waiting for!! get to it.LOL!

nice work on this thread so far guys.

More thoughts, I can't sleep for thinking about this part now

Could be an exhaust pipe hanger clamp?

Looking at Art's picture in post #5 it looks like there is a gap in the bottom of the ring at least on the front clamp on the flash tube.

I've been thinking the trapezoid shape is part of the clamp.

So far Shabad, I've looked at tons and tons of automotive clamps, pipe hangers, conduit clamps, plumbing clamps and photography equipment. I've yet to discover something close This part is obscure!

Ive seen that pinch clamp before. And im trying to remember where.

It seems like they were in the engine of my dads old car. A triumph TR7

On rubber hoses. We had to pinch them off to get to the spark plugs one time. I was only 12.

Isnt a triumph a british car? Im not saying that for sure that those would be totally acurate, but ive seen those on the inside of engines back in the late 70s early 80s working with my dad. Well he worked. i was playing space ninja AKA Jedi.

Thats where im starting

Those look good stormrider! Great searching, I've seen so many clamps this week

I'm not sure if it's the right part (I still think it might be all one piece) but it definitely deserves to be followed up. I contacted that supplier and they only have the clamps with a max expanded diameter of 42.42mm in stock, the larger 45mm ones are obsolete. They have a minimum order of 1900 but would work with a minimum of 500. I didn't get into cost.

They offered to send me samples. I'll do that and we can see what they look like.

Keep us posted!

Those are all the same kinds of clamps I've been seeing Storm! The "two pincher" one at the bottom is the closest, but.... I'm fairly convinced that the whole mount (apart from the molex bits) are one piece, not a clamp and "riser" as some have made. We'll find it eventually

This is what I believe the mount to look like. I think that the one used is this, with a plastic standoff attached.

Im not sure if they are truely one piece, or a plastic housing on a metal clamp, which is what I personally think, but i dont thinkt hey were fabricated to be part of it. i think its somethign used as a hose riser, to keep electrical lines off heated lines.

Heres the clamp as I see it. Correct me if im wrong.

I'm still sold on the idea that the whole she-bang is a solid piece, at least up until the flat piece on the very top that folds over the front and back. Initially, I thought the "nibs" on the squeeze tabs were round too, but I'm more inclined to believe they're flat either rubber or plastic "caps" on them tabs.

I dont think its a solid piece. heres why:
1. Time/era. Making it (The clamp) out of plastic wont work, its got to be spring to be a compression clamp. That means machined. Not cast. You cant cast spring steel, at least not that I know of.
2. Weight. The weight of the thing would quadruple if the riser was steel. Again, weight = money.
3. Energy transfer. Why make a 1 piece mount? What are you raising away? Your either raising another tubing, or holding the tube away from something, usually for heat reasons. Solid metal would transfer, vibrate, etc. This is the weakest of the four arguments.
4. Mount being solid would stop the spring from flexing at all in almost 50% of the area, causing it to be a lot weaker, because allof the stress would be on the arms, where they thin out in order to overlap/wrap and be sprung. Again, not a good design. The ribs on the mount are to stabilize lateral movement, as well as horizontal. Otherwise it would be a solid piece. Because its 'ribbed' means they were keeping weight, and materials down while adding stability. The 'addition' of stability would difinitively stop it from flexing and defeat the purpose of a 360 spring clamp.

I would bet its a spring steel clamp, with holes in it, and the riser has tabs that fit into each hole. Its not glued, or it wouldnt flex properly. Now, i dont think that they scratch built it. I think its a piece, thats two parts, but probably doesnt come apart without breaking it.

*hammer*

Rebuttle?

Those are good points. I know absolutely nothing about manufacturing, so I can;t really give you proper feedback on those theories... It's really difficult to see, but look at how the from "face" of the piece continues unbroken from the trapezoidal shape straight into the clamp section. That's the main reason that I still believe at least that part is a one-piece construction. the squarish shape that's between the "body" and the top "strap" part may or may not be part of that, but there's no way for me to know.

Heres an avi on how I think it goes together. Or at least close (some of the shapes could be off, but id place money that this is really close to the mechanics of it).

The silver would be black metal, but I wanted to illustrate the two pieces.
http://www.starwarsuniverse.com/clamp.avi

Hopefully someday the person that says they 'know what it is and have one' will shed some light on it

Could be, it is hard to see a line separating the two shapes in the pictures we've seen so far.

I got the clamp samples from EFC, they are too small for the webley barrel and the groove for the center tab makes up almost the entire clamp circumference when held at full open, that isn't seen in the pictures.

Painted all black you wouldnt see the seperation at all. Because it would have to be really pricise to give stability. Any gap would compromise it exponentially.

I have yet to see the proper clamp, but im going to measure my webley tonight, and order some samples from a site I found online. Its got two tabs on one side and one on the other, so its not the same as this one, but it will be close.

Im building my own clamps and riser atm. ill post what i end up with.

That AVI is cool Storm! One thing though is on that model the trapezoidal section looks too tall. If that's just for illustrative purposes ignore this

Yah i whipped it up without any reference

I just wanted to show the way Im gonna do them.

At least in theory

Originally Posted by shabad

Those look good stormrider! Great searching, I've seen so many clamps this week

I'm not sure if it's the right part (I still think it might be all one piece) but it definitely deserves to be followed up. I contacted that supplier and they only have the clamps with a max expanded diameter of 42.42mm in stock, the larger 45mm ones are obsolete. They have a minimum order of 1900 but would work with a minimum of 500. I didn't get into cost.

They offered to send me samples. I'll do that and we can see what they look like.

So 42.42 wont go around the barrell?

Heres my 20 minute PVC clamp.


The distance in the bracket greatly depends on the size of tube and bracket. Because this is stretched a lot, it shows a lot of indention.

If it were bigger, it would show very little. But notice the top picture you dont see any indention? Well its there. which I think is what you see on the esb photo, somewhat.


This thing was made in 20 mins with a dremel. Its probably close to what ill go with.

Look at the pic Art posted in post#5 The front clamp sits on the flash tube and it doesn't look like there is anything between the ends of the "clamp" such as the indentation of a spring clamp. That said it's a great looking quick mock up!

The 42.42mm is the maximum opening of the clamp and pulling it that far open distorts the clamp out of being a proper circle making it impossible to fit around the end of the webley, add to that it would need to sit at the thickest part of barrel, beyond the limits of the clamp, it wasn't going to work. I can get it around the flash tube and take a picture if it would help illustrate what I mean.

Another problem with the spring clamp is at full open sprung the clamp is almost entirely either a thin strip on one side or a dual strip of steel on the other. Its hard to see any evidence of that in the pictures we've seen.

I did a search today and went down a whole new rabbit hole.

Search: pipe hanger

Dumb question. anyone ever gone through the rivell engine kit to see if this piece, or part of it is in there?

Wanted to show the same scope slid up, to show how it gives the appearance of '1' tab because of barrell size difference.

Originally Posted by SaxeCoburg

I don't know. I don't see the notch on the "clamp" band on the actual blaster. The difference in the spread between the front and back tabs makes it seem like it's a clamp with tabs but wouldn't it have a notched band as yours does to allow the compression if it was a clamp?

could that gap be on the other side of the blaster's barrel? like, the clamp was put on the other way?

looks good M2, one question...could the clamp you got there in the pic be modified to where the bottoms acutally come together? to make just "1" piece on the bottom? shortened maybe? to make those little tabs meet right at the bottom of the barrel?

yup. It could be on backwards. it could be a non overlapping clamp that is spring steel. Its just a c, and the ends are together. and its supposed to have a screw in it to open it. And not be an overlapping c.

Could be a tun of things. It could have been put on, and then the clamp 'filled' visually so you dont see its a clamp. It could also be painted to give a different visual effect.

*shrug*

Im sure this isnt 100% acurate, but I think its pretty close. Im gonna cut some spring steel clamps and see

The clamps coming together would depend how much 'overlap' you cut into it. In this case, i cut like3 3/4 inch overlap. If it were 5/8ths it would probably line up perfect. Or a different size tube with different properties.

I have another idea today too and the mount building supplies i ordered should be there today.

but we will see

Originally Posted by FettDad

looks good M2, one question...could the clamp you got there in the pic be modified to where the bottoms acutally come together? to make just "1" piece on the bottom? shortened maybe? to make those little tabs meet right at the bottom of the barrel?

how did i know you had an answer for me...??

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 ( ) but it would be so nice to know what the original was.

And to note, we havent seen many photos much clearer than this. which clearly hides the indention on one, and makes the tab a single piece on the other.

And I took these pics to SHOW detail.

Lastly. if the bottom pic was flipped over, there would be no indention in the bracket seen.

Originally Posted by shabad

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 ( ) 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.

Right now im looking for something 'thinner' than pvc to make them from. im going to home depot in like 20 minutes

Originally Posted by Stormrider

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

Thats what they look like to me in photos.

Yes! Exactly like that.

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.

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

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.


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

This part is the scope ring mount.

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.

Originally Posted by SaxeCoburg

Maybe, but in this image the molex seem to match the angle of the "trapezoid" in this one. I think more photo reference is needed.

And SaxeCoburg's breakdown still seems right on.

Originally Posted by SaxeCoburg

The rear mount is an A, the front mount is absolutely not. It has two angles.



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.

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:


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




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.

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

it makes sense that if the front mount is on the flash tube that it would HAVE to be taller than the back one...if not, the scope sits too short in the front and wouldnt be parallel to the barrel...

^ ^ exactly FD.

The back mount is about 1/4 to 1/2 inch higher up. due to the barrell change in size.

The mounts are both roughly the same size at the top. Which means ones a squatty A and ones a tall A. The talls in the front.

The 'shroud' looks like it acts as a rail for the scope mount. Theres a screw that stops the 'shroud' from being on top of the rail. Theres not room. Which means it IS the rail.

The rail, has enough room for the scope bracket to pinch under it, But its not raised up on a giant block like in the diagrams.

Now, regardless, two things catch my eye on arts picture.

Theres a diaganol line, and no horizontal line, leaving the top of the molex. Heading towards the top of the mount. And at the bottom of the molex, you see another angled piec cutting in towards the clamp.

I think that's a visual trick from the combination of the curve of the top of the A block and the curve of the bottom of the scope mount clips. This pic from the other thread shows it better.

There's no doubt the A blocks are different shapes front to back, the front A block is taller and skinnier. The stem in the A block looks square and as deep as the sides in that image too.

I know exactly what the shoud looks like. Ive seen a high res pic of it. Its close enough detail to even know that its black anodized metal.

And You can see the angles perfectly.

But im not sure what you mean above 'I think that a combination of the curve of the a and the curve of the scope mounts clips'

Could you explain which piece your referring to as 'that'. I see arrows pointing to the shroud, but am confused to what your referring to.

Do me a favor, draw over that pic with where you think the lines of the mount run.

For some reason im the only one thats done that. Im curious if your lines will run directly through lines that can be seen or not.

The arrows aren't mine, sorry about that, it was from your scope mount thread and referred to the holes - I used it as just a clearer picture of the same that Art posted.

I'd need to reboot into Linux to use gimp to illustrate what I mean. Knowing you have access to the higher resolution pictures sort of makes it all academic, it's silly for me to try and see different details in low resolution pictures Let us know what you discover, I'm keenly interested in seeing this part examined!

I'll be back after I get some crude lines drawn...

Hardly perfect, but this is about what I've been seeing. Lonepigeon should have a far more advanced perspective. Chris?

I ignored the mount block in this and was mainly looking at the A, and it's relationship to the scope clamp and molex. The mount block (with the holes) looks to be a angled block on top of the A that the scope clamps to.

The pic i was shown ( I dont own copies of them perse) was of a different part, and cropped.

Im curious as to how people arent seeing what I see in the above pic.

Parrallell lines going vertical behind the molex and then parrallell lines going diagonal to the top, instead of parrallell lines going from the clamp to the top.

The shoud is the only thing ive been able to 100% determine the size and shape of. As well as its proximity to the mount, and the way it fits in.

Well that and the rear mount being 100% an A like pictured in the drawings above. But the front mount is not the same. It has totally different lines. Not at all an A.

I cant say what it is exactly, because parts are still obstructed, but its not an A with an O under it. It has two different sets of parrallell lines, that converge right near the top of the molex.

This is what I think:
'Take dat scope off dat beebee gun and use it. Before that kid shoots his eye out'.

'Aight. But we needs a mount.'

"Yo, this ________ makes a noyce front mount G'

"Aight. Use it. Grind the bottom off, Glue it to a clamp and make it happen boyeee.'

"Aight"

'Yo, what about da back bracket? The barrells bigger, it dont fit.'

'Hmm. just get something dat looks similar, or make one.'

'Hmm that shapes got a bunch-O-Curves. Gonna take me a while. And I wanted to see dat gold bakini'

'Just make something close... Bikini'

'But peeps will know its different'

'Nahh, just el-slappo one of these molex connectors on each side, itll hide it'.

Bada Boom Bada Bing.

That conversation should apply to all Star Wars props

Good thats exactly what im referring too

You agree withme on the shape. The readily accepted shape was one angle, from clamp on the tube, to top of the mount.

The small details are different between us, but the basic 'not an perfect A shape' is the same.

The 'mounting block' isnt actually a block.

Its a rail system thats curved forward.

Theres something we cant see in any picture that acts as a base.

The part that looks like a block with holes is in fact a thin sheet of metal, that bends forward, twice. Thats what the mount is attached too. Ill make a 3d model.

Im glad at least someone else and I are on the same page.

My drawing above of an A was to illustrate an Incorrect A block. not what I thought it was. Gimme a minute.

Originally Posted by shabad

Hardly perfect, but this is about what I've been seeing. Lonepigeon should have a far more advanced perspective. Chris?

This is not acurate dimension wise, but a breakdown of the rough shapes and the way they go together. I think the angles on the sides of the top of the clamp are incorrect here, but i havent got any real way to get any source. But this is roughly how all the pictures come together.

I think the lower part of the top piece, is more vertical, and the upper part more horizontal.

Some indicate the center brace, is a tube, not a block. Because they all have a gradient to them. Gradients tend to indicate tubes. Unless its a coincidence, but almost every pic shows the center piece as a gradient.

Click the link for the avi

http://www.starwarsuniverse.com/frontclamp.avi

from what ive seen of the real deal. the ring seems to wrap all the way round the barrel. no open space on the bottom

This looks like there's a gap though -

It's not that there's a gradient that makes me think the center "spine" is not tube shape, its that there's a hard-line of shadow with an indication of a perpendicluar inset.

The top of the "A" is flat, not a second angle.

You're still missing the orange piece, see below: