EE3 scope. An alternative to the ASI. Vintage part bashing. Pic heavy.
- Thread starter intwenothor
- Start date
propmaster
New Hunter
Hi all, been lurking for a while and keeping an eye on the glut of ebay offerings, one even made it to £180 and was not even a 4x20, it looked like a 4x15 but offered as a 4x20. I've been researching all the bits for a blaster build (I'm an engineer, so this is my sort of thing) and the scope bits seem available, but as what sort of price? Some of the stuff on ebay recently has been rubbish, but fetched crazy money, so what would the realistic ballpark figures be for a set of very good blaster bits?
I've been researching the whole series of available scopes which are similar to the ASI, from what I can tell, the oldest companies (ASI and Nikko Sterling) are the only ones with metal eyepieces dating from the late 1950's, where the glut of newer companies date from the mid to late 1970's and are only available with plastic eyepieces.
propmaster
I've been researching the whole series of available scopes which are similar to the ASI, from what I can tell, the oldest companies (ASI and Nikko Sterling) are the only ones with metal eyepieces dating from the late 1950's, where the glut of newer companies date from the mid to late 1970's and are only available with plastic eyepieces.
propmaster
intwenothor
Well-Known Hunter
In terms of scopes I can truly say that the crazy prices are realistic and happened so recently that they should not be denied. As mentioned above I was lucky enough to get an ASI with incorrect Mount for £65.00 and the identical Sussex with the same incorrect mounts for £5. I guess it comes down to how much exposure the sale has. Giving consideration to the recent sales then an ASI with the correct receiver rings and tall mounting pads/feet must be worth at least £200.00 to the right buyer.
intwenothor
Well-Known Hunter
Locitus, thank-you for taking the time to post the pictures, that is a great looking scope, I kind of wish I put a bid or two in now. I was wondering if you might clear up a few points for me based on trying to compare the Hunter scope and some of my picture in post # 7
The Branded eyepiece: The stages where the angles and tapers change look to have greater definition and be sharper than the pictures of the ASI, Sussex and Webley eyepieces - is the branded eyepiece made of plastic?
The unbranded eyepiece: Does is have extra lip I referred to where the eyepiece meets the tube of the scope? It looks as if it may but hard to tell as the receiver rings are very close and secondly is the unbranded eyepiece missing a section at the end? All of then unbranded eyepieces above have and extra ring that screws into the end that is around 1 - 2mm in depth. I can't see from the pictures if it there or not but it looks not to be as I can't see the tell tale groove where the two pieces meet when screwed together.
Whatever the case that scope is certainly very close to the Sussex and the ASI. Good for you. One to add to the list!
Thanks again for posting.
Andy
The Branded eyepiece: The stages where the angles and tapers change look to have greater definition and be sharper than the pictures of the ASI, Sussex and Webley eyepieces - is the branded eyepiece made of plastic?
The unbranded eyepiece: Does is have extra lip I referred to where the eyepiece meets the tube of the scope? It looks as if it may but hard to tell as the receiver rings are very close and secondly is the unbranded eyepiece missing a section at the end? All of then unbranded eyepieces above have and extra ring that screws into the end that is around 1 - 2mm in depth. I can't see from the pictures if it there or not but it looks not to be as I can't see the tell tale groove where the two pieces meet when screwed together.
Whatever the case that scope is certainly very close to the Sussex and the ASI. Good for you. One to add to the list!
Thanks again for posting.
Andy
Thanks. 
Now that you mention it, yes, the branded eye piece does taper a little bit different than the sussex. And it's made of plastic. My sussex is metal (aluminium?)
The unbranded eye piece feels like metal, but it's so tightly screwed on I can't get it off to check. It does not have the same lip and is completely smooth all the way back. The lens is screw in as an inset, rather than a "add on", explaining the lack of that lip. The windage knobs also seem to be positioned circa 5 mm further towards the front of the scope (the unbranded end).
Now that you mention it, yes, the branded eye piece does taper a little bit different than the sussex. And it's made of plastic. My sussex is metal (aluminium?)
The unbranded eye piece feels like metal, but it's so tightly screwed on I can't get it off to check. It does not have the same lip and is completely smooth all the way back. The lens is screw in as an inset, rather than a "add on", explaining the lack of that lip. The windage knobs also seem to be positioned circa 5 mm further towards the front of the scope (the unbranded end).
intwenothor
Well-Known Hunter
Thanks, I thought it might have been plastic. How does the knurled rings compare? It's hard for me to tell but it looks.......... fatter possibly or sits higher from the branded eyepiece? It's hard for me to tell but obviously I don't have the two scopes to compare.
I didn't notice the positioning of the windage block at all.
With the unbranded piece do you mena that it sits entirely flush to the tube where the two meet? I'm a bit confused... which isn't difficult. Really.
I didn't notice the positioning of the windage block at all.
With the unbranded piece do you mena that it sits entirely flush to the tube where the two meet? I'm a bit confused... which isn't difficult. Really.
The knurled ring used to adjust the branded eye piece is slightl different in how the knurles are. They are slightly longer, and the ring as a whole is maybe ½-1 mm longer in total.
No, the unbranded eye piece is a separate piece, but the forward lens is screwed in inside the eye piece, rather than as a separate "stage" creating that extra ring you mentioned.
intwenothor
Well-Known Hunter
Thanks. I'm not sure the windage blocks look off. Couldn't tell without comparing the different scopes together. Appear to be right to me though.
intwenothor
Well-Known Hunter
How did it come to this?
intwenothor
Well-Known Hunter
My girlfriends eyes glaze over instantly. In fact, I'm amazed she's still around.
propmaster
New Hunter
Using the terms Objective lens and Eyepiece might clear things up a bit 
So, putting aside the crazy scope prices, what are the other bits likely to cost? Especially the Webley, that seems to be the hardest to find and therefore price.
Some great info here, I take my hat off to you all for your attention to detail.
propmaster
So, putting aside the crazy scope prices, what are the other bits likely to cost? Especially the Webley, that seems to be the hardest to find and therefore price.
Some great info here, I take my hat off to you all for your attention to detail.
propmaster
intwenothor
Well-Known Hunter
Using the terms Objective lens and Eyepiece might clear things up a bit
So, putting aside the crazy scope prices, what are the other bits likely to cost? Especially the Webley, that seems to be the hardest to find and therefore price.
Some great info here, I take my hat off to you all for your attention to detail.
propmaster
A reasonable point about objective lens and eyepiece, the reason I haven't used these terms is because on the prop the scope is mounted backwards and sometimes confuses the issue as to which piece is being referred to. Even accepting that this renders the scope unusable it therefore means that the branded eyepiece is pointed toward the 'object'. By referring to the 'branded eyepiece' there can be less confusion. Only one end has writing on it. Add in the factor that the correct name for something is often not the name generally understood by people on the boards whom may know it by an entirely different name. It gets even more confusing where some bits (of bits) are called by their real names and some bit are known by their prop names.
With regard to your question about the Webley; price will depend greatly on where in the world you live. My internet searches indicate there are more available in the US than my native England, although this may mean acquiring one of the Nickel plated police baton round guns. More than price I would look to availability and that will inform your concept of price. I direct you to Odiwan72's wtb thread in the cargo hold. He's been looking for ten years. I looked casually for a couple and then spent three years really actively searching, which included scouring car boot sales, antiques fairs, military shows and fairs as well as the normal internet searches. I'm talking a serious investment of time and driving all over the country trying to track one down. If someone like Odiwan72 has been looking for ten years and the two of you ended up in a bidding war over the same Webley then who's to say how far each would go. You might be thinking, assuming you've only just started looking; 'Wow I thought it'd take longer for one to come up' where as he might be thinking 'Ten years, I must have it'. I'm not ashamed to say that in my case I spent a fortune to acquire mine and I consider it money well spent. It cost me the same amount of money as I spent on my MR Millenium Falcon, albeit I bpought that when first released and prices hadn't reached anywhere near today's fever pitch. In the end it was the persistance that won through. My advice is that if you really want one and one becomes available to you then you should go all out to get it. In order to make it more attainable consider the following; I started saving after the first couple of years of having no luck, once I had realised how difficult one would be to obtain. I kept saving until I had saved a lot of money and my budget for one kept creeping higher and higher as more money was saved - that was what I was saving for. When one became available I had the money ready there and then to go and could have bid any sane person who wasn't obscenely rich out of the park. I got my prize and still had plenty of saved money left over.
Last edited by a moderator:
propmaster
New Hunter
Thanks intwenothor, this might now be a slightly longer term plan than originally envisaged. Still, I'm pretty good at hunting down random stuff so this will efinitely be fun/obsessive.
propmaster
propmaster
intwenothor
Well-Known Hunter
Sigh...... Here I go again.
Another one for your consideration. I bought this from eBay this week. It was about £30. The reason I really wanted to have a look at it was because it was new 'old' stock. Exactly as it would have been when sold over thirty years ago. It came boxed and with instructions and came with the hero/receiver rings with the tall feet/pads/mounts attached. Both my ASI and my Sussex came with a one piece mount (pictured below) and I took the rings and feet from other scopes. The only other ASI 4 x 20 and Sussex 4 x 20 I have seen for sale on eBay in the last six months also came with the same type of one piece mount (including a Sussex that came boxed - wish I'd bought it now) although I am sure there are boxed ASI's out there that came with the correct mounts and rings I have yet to see one.
Anyway............................................
The Milbro 4 x 20.
Comparison to the ASI. I have not compared to my Sussex as it is identical to my ASI. The Milbro is always on the right (except in the picture where it is clearly on the left).
Eyepiece comparison. Way line symbol present. The eyepiece on the Milbro is definitely plastic. The ASI is definitely Metal.
Knurled ring comparison. The Mibro knurled ring is clearly slightly bigger in the grooved section. This reminds so much of Locitus' Hunter 4 x 20 it is uncanny.
Windage Block et al. Same.
Unbrande eyepice (objective end - Just for you propmaster:cheers). ASI on top. There is a slight difference in shape here. I think the Milbro starts to taper slightly sooner that the ASI.
Comparison of where unbranded eyepiece meets tube. Less of a 'lip' on the Milbro but there is still one there.
Together.......
Mounted on a replica prop and painted and weathered so that the light wouldn't betray the fractionally different dimensions and I wouldn't be able to tell them apart without a very close examination and I'd find it next to impossible if I could only look at pictures.
Lastly, a picture of the type of single piece mount that I got on both my ASI and Sussex
I think that the Milbro looks a lot like Locitus' Hunter 4 x 20 and is definitely one to add to the list for consideration along with the usual suspects. I now make that to be:
ASI 4 x 20 Scope
Sussex Armoury 4 x 20 Scope
Hunter 4 x 20 Scope
Milbro 4 x 20 scope
'Jason' Scope? - I have never seen or heard of one of these but I am sure I have read 'Jason' referenced with the Master Replicas recreation of the ROTJ EE3.
and of course....... the Vintage part bashed Frankenscope.
I have also edited some earlier posts - most notably post 15 in order to contain more helpful information for those trying to track down the correct hero/receiver rings and tall feet. The edits are easy to find.
Andy
Another one for your consideration. I bought this from eBay this week. It was about £30. The reason I really wanted to have a look at it was because it was new 'old' stock. Exactly as it would have been when sold over thirty years ago. It came boxed and with instructions and came with the hero/receiver rings with the tall feet/pads/mounts attached. Both my ASI and my Sussex came with a one piece mount (pictured below) and I took the rings and feet from other scopes. The only other ASI 4 x 20 and Sussex 4 x 20 I have seen for sale on eBay in the last six months also came with the same type of one piece mount (including a Sussex that came boxed - wish I'd bought it now) although I am sure there are boxed ASI's out there that came with the correct mounts and rings I have yet to see one.
Anyway............................................
The Milbro 4 x 20.
Comparison to the ASI. I have not compared to my Sussex as it is identical to my ASI. The Milbro is always on the right (except in the picture where it is clearly on the left).
Eyepiece comparison. Way line symbol present. The eyepiece on the Milbro is definitely plastic. The ASI is definitely Metal.
Knurled ring comparison. The Mibro knurled ring is clearly slightly bigger in the grooved section. This reminds so much of Locitus' Hunter 4 x 20 it is uncanny.
Windage Block et al. Same.
Unbrande eyepice (objective end - Just for you propmaster:cheers). ASI on top. There is a slight difference in shape here. I think the Milbro starts to taper slightly sooner that the ASI.
Comparison of where unbranded eyepiece meets tube. Less of a 'lip' on the Milbro but there is still one there.
Together.......
Mounted on a replica prop and painted and weathered so that the light wouldn't betray the fractionally different dimensions and I wouldn't be able to tell them apart without a very close examination and I'd find it next to impossible if I could only look at pictures.
Lastly, a picture of the type of single piece mount that I got on both my ASI and Sussex
I think that the Milbro looks a lot like Locitus' Hunter 4 x 20 and is definitely one to add to the list for consideration along with the usual suspects. I now make that to be:
ASI 4 x 20 Scope
Sussex Armoury 4 x 20 Scope
Hunter 4 x 20 Scope
Milbro 4 x 20 scope
'Jason' Scope? - I have never seen or heard of one of these but I am sure I have read 'Jason' referenced with the Master Replicas recreation of the ROTJ EE3.
and of course....... the Vintage part bashed Frankenscope.
I have also edited some earlier posts - most notably post 15 in order to contain more helpful information for those trying to track down the correct hero/receiver rings and tall feet. The edits are easy to find.
Andy
Last edited by a moderator:
intwenothor
Well-Known Hunter
I'm no expert but I thought that was an Original Model 7 4x20 scope.
