Original film gun in display case

[joberg]

Agreeing with Andy, Propjonnyb, Staar, DeckB...and a big thanks to Karl for those side by side shots (that's what we needed).
If it's a fake, or a reconstruction of a long lost 2nd back-up gun, I wouldn't mind having it in my prop collection )
Having said that, we can only speculate about it (or go crazy): without a proper forensic exam (we could actually see the real serial#on the Steyr) it's going to remain a mystery...but boys, what a fun discussion it has been!

[phase pistol]

Yes I agree, it's a fantastic piece no matter what its pedigree turns out to be. The pride of any collection!

If some fraction of the blaster is made from "the correct parts", or even parts left over or cast from the same molds as the parts used to make the Hero Prop", then even better.

Other than that it's all semantics as to whether you can get away with calling it a "restored unused second hero prop" or a "replica that contains some production-used components".

And of course if it's mostly replica bits with only a couple parts that are from the correct guns... let's just call it a "replica."

K

[propsjonnyb]

I do feel sorry for the owner though , given all that we have collectively said , he's the one that suffers in the end , as he bought the thing in good faith , in a similar way, I have been caught in the past - buying what I thought was an off the set prop with provenance, only to discover it was a fake!! I don't mind paying for a good replica - but I do object to someone passing off a good copy as the 'real deal' . I treasure all my 'original' props, I also have some very good replicas made by exceptional artists, I don't regret buying them. I along with probably about 5 others here could make a similar exact replica , using old CA and Styer parts incorporating bit of Coyles or Sidkits and it would be closer to the original hero that a plain build up of a Coyle or a Sidkit . Now that's what I'd pay a premium price for and lust after building , I tried once and yes I admit it ! I ruined a good Styer rifle in the process , I didn't have the workshop tools I needed then, to do it justice , I think I'm in a better position now, to try again , discarded CA Bulldog bits and Styer's gratefully recieved - joking apart and since most countries gun laws are prohibitive, I could only ever build one for myself or sell one to another certified Firearms owner though an authorised dealer, a Coyle or a Sidkit are much better alternatives and you do have a handmade item after all, with all the best possible features, improvements, finishes and pure artisitic skill that you can proudly display , even if you build it youself or get a professional to build it for you.

[propsjonnyb]

Hold the phone !!!!!

I just re-read the small print from rocketboy's post of what the owner said about the history and I quote

"He bought both props from the prop department shortly after production wrapped up and was aware that the hero had already been sold. It came in a case that is stuffed full of spare parts used and left over from the build of the gun. Like bulbs, wiring, masking tape used to hide the wires during filming, some damaged handle grips, moulds etc."

Now correct me if I'm wrong - but both props means two ?

plus the hero sold means one?

doesn't that add up to 'THREE ?????!!!!!'

and the case with the bits and moulds ???? that certainly would suggest the possibility of restoration/ re mould/ re-cast etc which excites me !!

[phase pistol]

I think "both props" is supposed to mean the gun and also the apartment card.

Got any photos of that apartment card?

But anyway, yes if you take that info at face value, it seems to be saying the owner of this piece "knew the hero prop had already been sold" (to Jeff Walker), and he was getting the "second prop" plus a box of miscellaneous parts and stuff.

So yeah, that leaves a lot of room for this piece to be technically as advertised... materials acquired from the production anyway, which were fixed up and restored to appear as we see them now. Or maybe it really was built by the Blade Runner prop people, restamped serial number and all. Who knows.

What this story needs is some provenance. At least in the case of the "Worldcon" hero prop, it went directly from the production to Jeff Walker, who owned it right up to the minute it was sold at Profiles. Plus you can prove Walker's connection to the film. Doesn't get any better than that.

k

[andy]

Unfortunately, as much time I have looked this thing over, I have seen nothing to prove that any part of this gun was a secondary cast from the same stuff the Hero was made from, or cast from the hero. All the "created" parts are different in many small details, showing they have been made from a separate original. So I don't see anything to prove that spare parts for a secondary hero were used to make this.

I agree that the person that put it together had tried very hard, and mostly succeeded in making a close replica of the hero using the worldcon photos and other information found here as reference. The last point means that it is also likely that the creator is either a member here, or even just visited here regularly. I wondered when I first saw this, if it could be Adam Savage's version of the gun, but his progress seemed to be slightly behind this gun, but his part list is almost identical.

The weathering and age in the parts in this gun is inconsistent enough for me to think that this is a recent "Replica" made from multiple sources, including real gun parts. Considering that the guns construction follows the blueprint of how I would want to make one of these for myself, in exactly the same manner as Adam Savage, and a few other members here, I believe the gun was made by a fan, and probably not as a forgery. Just as many of the lightsaber makers obsess over making their replicas from authentic original parts. And, what is the point of making something from original parts if you can't imagine the possibility of having the real thing, and fooling a few friends into thinking that you do Living the fantasy is the only logical end result of such an obsession as we have here

Andy

[joberg]

As Propjonnyb said: I hope the guy didn't pay too much for that piece.
Sure, it's a nice one, but again is it the "second Hero"?

[DeckB26354]

Well, I think we have gone as far as we can on this! I feel we may start going in circles! The only option we have left is to ask if Rich or another member here can examine the prop. I think it's worth a try but I suspect it aint gonna happen!

I think the fan made thing may be a step too far Andy only because of time & money but someone who has visited this site, anonymously could be a possiblilty. However, everytime I go back to those photos I am so impressed by the ammo housing LEDs and switch and also that left side plate. They look genuine to me. Why leave that right one looking so rough? See, I'm now going around in circles!

Whatever, it's a beautiful peice and the most impressive replica I have seen to date and I wish it was mine!!

[Staar]

[DeckB26354]

Lol - Yes I am being greedy I know!

And thank you for the compliment.

But this is the difference between a Lotus & a Ferrari!

Wonder if he'd swap...........

[joberg]

I almost lost the feeling in my pacemaker!! Yeah, like, o.k. you have that beaut. already DeckB

[DeckB26354]

LOL
u guys really crack me up!......

.....and keep me grounded. I klnow, I know, I AM being greedy!

[propsjonnyb]

No not greedy, just really wishing we had something closer to the hero, and I honestly can say I empathize exactly with you and almost everyone else on this forum and btw a very good replica!!

[Hasenbrau]

I love being directed to details I obviously completely missed during my initial, cursory perusal of the photos. You guys have certainly got a lot on me when it comes to the details of all the various replicas and the real Hero prop, and that's why I love it when you all get rolling with this stuff, as I acquire all sorts of little historical tidbits and get introduced to features of the Blaster I wouldn't have caught on my own. I'm always playing catchup here, but I love it!

I'd have to agree that the only way to really know for sure would be to one: see the prop in person, and two: acquire some sort of provenance about the piece. It seems to me that comparing this blaster to the Hero prop, as seen in it's various states over the years, can only take you so far. In my humble opinion, the closer it gets to exactly imitating the aging and neglected Hero Prop, the more it looks like a lovingly recreated replica. Patina, rust, scratches, polish residue, broken wires, old batteries, etc, can all (some more difficult than others) be recreated or acquired. I would imagine that given the handmade nature of the Hero prop, that any additional "backup" props built would be distinctly different than the original build, in that the builder would have perhaps done any of the following:

-Made improvements based on lessons learned from the first build.
-Taken shortcuts knowing that this prop was only a backup.
-Used what was at hand, resulting in not exactly identical parts.
-introduced variations simply because of the handmade/hand altered nature of certain components.

DeckB26354 mentioned Lotus and Ferrari, to me it's pretty obvious that one Ferrari parked next to another Ferrari are both Ferrais. However, you start examining the details, comparing their weld lines, leather stitching, bolt, rivet and screw positions, panel alignment, etc. you're going to find that each is it's own unique car (with it's own unique serial number ). Thing is, it pretty much goes the same way for a pair of Lotus. For me, it's the little imperfections and differences that help sell it as a possible backup prop vs a replica. nothing I've

Perhaps the Ferrari analogy isn't all that relative, because let's face it, it's a lot easier to replicate a Blade Runner Blaster than it is a Ferrari. As another example however (still using cars I'm afraid), I own a '65 HiPo Fastback Mustang, that just so happens to be sporting a Wimbledon white paint job, with Guardsman Blue side stripes that read "GT 350," A black interior, Torque-Thrust D rims, and a myriad of other accurate GT350 restoration parts. As it happens from time to time, I get the "Is it real?" To which I typically reply, "What do you think?" Which is every bit as telling as saying, "No, it's a replica." But the point is that they had to ask, and the only way they would ever know is for the owner to say "no it's not." Should the owner say "yes it is" they'd still never know. I succeeded in recreating a GT350 (It's got everything but the VIN...though one could even have that if they were so inclined). Some parts are 46 years old and some are 2, but you can't tell the difference just by looking. In fact some of the newest parts have the most rust.

It's too bad the owner wishes to stay anonymous. As a name and a little personal history on the owner might lend some credibility to the claim that this was a prop purchased right off the set after filming, which is what has been relayed to us. It would have to be someone who had the good graces enough for the privilege to buy such a prop (or maybe just a box of parts). If only we had a name.

Very cool thread!

[propsjonnyb]

Apologies , yes you're right I forgot about the appartment card !
However , we do have the provenance on the original hero from Jeff Walker up to the point it was auctioned off, we know that someone 'fixed' the LED's to make them work, and from Karl's photo's, Rich C and Phil S, we have unique 'tells' that identify the Hero, Rich can identify all his Blasters , which is why he can say quite rightly, it was copied , as if you're recasting , you would just throw rubber over it and pull your cast , easier than starting from scratch , which obviously copies all the tells- so when you look - you know who made it!. If you do the work with a CS Bulldog and a real Styer and either Sidkit or Coyle parts, it would also be easily identifyable , as you have to reproduce the work done on the CA and Styer by the gunsmith exactly - and that leaves identifyable evidence - I and several other here are knowledgeable enough about the prop to say for certain, if we could examine it, what it is , we can all identify a Coyle and a Sidkit , or a hybrid ! I suspect this one is a forgery ( A really damm good one!) from all the evidence and comparisons done , If I , Rich, Phil, Andy or Mark were given the opportunty to handle the gun - we would know in an instant, since we do not have that luxury, it boils down to our knowledge of the gun and photographic evidence , and as we all concur , it's a fake.

But I'm still convinced by all the evidence that there was indeed a second 'firing' gun!!

Making a copy of the hero that would pass the tests is not impossible today, all you need is a vintage CA Bulldog, a ditto Styer Rifle and a Coyle or Sidkit and away to go., it is not of course that simple, as has been pointed out , you do need specialised equipment to die stamp the upper receiver , bolt arm and gun frame. Either a gunsmith and/or an experienced engineer built this replica and it's been done to fine tollerances - that shows it's possible and I know a number here are comtemplating doing the same and I'm very jealous . I had both real guns ( although not of the correct vintage) some years ago , and had the opportuunity to visit the Styer factory and shoot on their target range, so I've seen how they are made - have handled and shot with them - I hold several marksman badges awarded , so I do have an intimate knowledge of the guns , not as much as others I'll freely admit , but I have shot with them , field stripped each and so I know how they go together , I also as a hobby, collect build and restore Film and TV Sci-Fi models and weapons , not just Blade Runner !, so I do have an extensive knowledge built up over 30 years ,have had the opportunity to vist most of the film studios and get to know quite a few of the propmaker and shops and therfore privvy to information and detail that most do not get access to , so I like Rich take exception , when we are baited and criticized almost vilified for what we say, we all have an opinion and our own personal views , but quite a bit of that, is because we actually know the actual absolute fact. Question us Yes , but please believe us when we are certain of out facts , do we know everything - NO! - are we willing to listen to other's YES of course , but please present us with evidence , not hersay, so we can validate and confirm what we know and add to the knowledge base and improve the replicas - we all want at the end of the day a better more accurate gun !!

[andy]

I do see one important piece of evidence that makes me think that this is a fake. The slotted screw, where the weaver scope knob now is on the worldcon hero, is lined up with the cylinder crane on the hero gun, and also on the stunt casts. On this version of the gun it just a little bit forward of the crane, lining more with the reciever frame, or the seam between them. The same spot where Rich Coyle has his screw lined up. The main reason this is important is that I believe since the cylinder locking pin is cut off, the whole assembly would just blow open without the slotted screw locking it into place when they fired any ammunition in it. Therefore this gun would not function very well as a working prop.

Andy

[phase pistol]

Interesting observations Andy.

Could it be then that this was merely an assemblage of parts that was used as the master for casting the stunt gun?

Then later it was "finished" and turned into n approximation of the hero prop?

[phase pistol]

Wait, what are we looking at again?

[andy]

You can see that in both the stunt and the hero the screw/knob position is set behind the edge of the cover plate just about half the width of the crane arm on the other side of the gun. Both pictures are slightly tilted forward and back but you can still see the difference. In the pictures of Hero shown for the auction and the ones taken by Tomenosuke at the preview show a tapped hole going through and into the crane in that same spot. In the "second hero" pics it is lined up with the edge of the plate and too far forward to go into the crane arm. Doc3D speculated on this when he created his working version of the gun, but instead went with grinding in a catch in the front of his reciever to hold the cylinder release pin that he had cut down. The same way that Craig Kovach had done on his version of the fully functional gun. They did that to keep the cylinder locked in place when the force of the rounds gasses vented out around the cylinder. Without it the gun would fly open every time you shot it since the front of the cylinder pin is cut down and can no longer hold it in place. That is why Rich Coyle's first guns needed to have the Steyr ammo housing removed to load the gun, because he kept the pin intact. It is also why I know believe the weaver knob was an addition after filming, because it is not long enough to hold the crane, while a screw from a scope mount would be the perfect length.

Andy

[andy]

picture showing inside of cylinder with the holes ligning up in the crane and through to the otherside right behind the weaver knob.


I don't believe at all it could be a master for casting the hero, because the hero parts are clean and fit perfectly, suggesting they were fitted directly to it and would be more likely the master pieces, while this gun's pieces look cast and sloppy, or at least the right hand cover does.

Andy