Darth Vader square shroud dedicated stunt saber + Barbican
- Thread starter eethan
- Start date
thanks 
I agree with you with the holes for the missing grips, this is what I already assumed as well, and I now corrected that missing grip placement on my model too.
and thanks for the pommel, I just wish there was at least another ref of the pommel and emiter with a bit more definition to see better how the different steps are machined.
ahah, so this is giving me stupid ideas! so, I can definitely machine the old pommel with "machining aluminium" like I intended, BUT, use 7075 aviation grade aluminium for the added pommel part and it will be much shinier. that being said, I guess polishing the part slightly would also work!
I agree with you with the holes for the missing grips, this is what I already assumed as well, and I now corrected that missing grip placement on my model too.
and thanks for the pommel, I just wish there was at least another ref of the pommel and emiter with a bit more definition to see better how the different steps are machined.
ahah, so this is giving me stupid ideas! so, I can definitely machine the old pommel with "machining aluminium" like I intended, BUT, use 7075 aviation grade aluminium for the added pommel part and it will be much shinier. that being said, I guess polishing the part slightly would also work!
Benjo
Well-Known Member
Great idea to launch that thread.
I myself did a bit of research about this prop and also made a replica. One question remains about the main tube diameter. I guess everyone here uses the 1.5 diameter as a base, like every other lightsaber props but seriously think that saber was built around a 1.6 diameter tube.
Did someone found any confirmation about that? The MPP clamp has a plastic sleeve, but it is not there on the Barbican, though the clamp doesn't seem to be more tighten.
I myself did a bit of research about this prop and also made a replica. One question remains about the main tube diameter. I guess everyone here uses the 1.5 diameter as a base, like every other lightsaber props but seriously think that saber was built around a 1.6 diameter tube.
Did someone found any confirmation about that? The MPP clamp has a plastic sleeve, but it is not there on the Barbican, though the clamp doesn't seem to be more tighten.
Last edited:
Poikilotherm
Sr Member
We came back to this problem again. On the day I built the Barbican lightsaber, I discussed with you about the diameter size, which is also my current question. I chose 1.6 without hesitation on that day, although there is no definite evidence yet. But I still have the same idea as you, the Barbican was built on a 1.6 diameter.
hey guys,
this is an interesting question and for a minute I was about to seriously consider changing the tube to 1.6". that being said if you look at all my previous perspective match and models, my models are based on measurements from a real MPP clamp and if I use a 1.6" tube, nothing is matching anymore on the cameras without the clamp becoming bigger.
if you look at that ref for instance, you can see that the clamp is definitely quite tightened with the small gab there is between both bars and also that there is a bit of space between the clamp ring and the aluminium tube. Clearly, the plastic sleeve under the clamp is absent, but maybe they put a little spacer there that we don't see, like a sheet of paper or something
visible here as well:
this is also a good clue, the clamp is around 1mm thick, but there is at least 2mm here:
my biggest issue with the 1.5" tube is that it seems they didn't use a raw tube, they either sanded it on a lathe or even turned it down until it was clean with turning tools. we can see the lines all around the tube and the specific specular an aluminium tube takes when it is turned. doing that will remove 0.02mm at least from the tube, it is extremely minimal but if we are already not sure about the 1.5" diameter, it adds to the issue. that being said, I don't think there are tubes between 1.5" and 1.6", to me, if we used a 1.6" tube, it would need to be turned down at least 1mm to be accurate.
I'll give this more thoughts, but to me, the 1.5" tube looks like a really good candidate
this is an interesting question and for a minute I was about to seriously consider changing the tube to 1.6". that being said if you look at all my previous perspective match and models, my models are based on measurements from a real MPP clamp and if I use a 1.6" tube, nothing is matching anymore on the cameras without the clamp becoming bigger.
if you look at that ref for instance, you can see that the clamp is definitely quite tightened with the small gab there is between both bars and also that there is a bit of space between the clamp ring and the aluminium tube. Clearly, the plastic sleeve under the clamp is absent, but maybe they put a little spacer there that we don't see, like a sheet of paper or something
visible here as well:
this is also a good clue, the clamp is around 1mm thick, but there is at least 2mm here:
my biggest issue with the 1.5" tube is that it seems they didn't use a raw tube, they either sanded it on a lathe or even turned it down until it was clean with turning tools. we can see the lines all around the tube and the specific specular an aluminium tube takes when it is turned. doing that will remove 0.02mm at least from the tube, it is extremely minimal but if we are already not sure about the 1.5" diameter, it adds to the issue. that being said, I don't think there are tubes between 1.5" and 1.6", to me, if we used a 1.6" tube, it would need to be turned down at least 1mm to be accurate.
I'll give this more thoughts, but to me, the 1.5" tube looks like a really good candidate
Benjo
Well-Known Member
Good pointhey guys,
this is an interesting question and for a minute I was about to seriously consider changing the tube to 1.6". that being said if you look at all my previous perspective match and models, my models are based on measurements from a real MPP clamp and if I use a 1.6" tube, nothing is matching anymore on the cameras without the clamp becoming bigger.
if you look at that ref for instance, you can see that the clamp is definitely quite tightened with the small gab there is between both bars and also that there is a bit of space between the clamp ring and the aluminium tube. Clearly, the plastic sleeve under the clamp is absent, but maybe they put a little spacer there that we don't see, like a sheet of paper or something
View attachment 1597726
visible here as well:
View attachment 1597727
this is also a good clue, the clamp is around 1mm thick, but there is at least 2mm here:
View attachment 1597728
my biggest issue with the 1.5" tube is that it seems they didn't use a raw tube, they either sanded it on a lathe or even turned it down until it was clean with turning tools. we can see the lines all around the tube and the specific specular an aluminium tube takes when it is turned. doing that will remove 0.02mm at least from the tube, it is extremely minimal but if we are already not sure about the 1.5" diameter, it adds to the issue. that being said, I don't think there are tubes between 1.5" and 1.6", to me, if we used a 1.6" tube, it would need to be turned down at least 1mm to be accurate.
I'll give this more thoughts, but to me, the 1.5" tube looks like a really good candidate
. I don't know why that saber looks slightly larger than the others on some pictures but I must say you're probably right.
no worries, i'll keep that in mind and test until I'm extra sureGood point
yeah, something like this I assume. they took a tube of normally the proper size but then realized that after surfacing it and removing/loosing the clamp plastic sleeve, the clamp was not secured, so they added a bit of tape or something...
I have started experimenting a bit with real parts today. It's very difficult to come to a good conclusion here, the tube that I used was slightly under 38mm by default, so already less than 1.5", then I had to turn it down a bit to get a perfect surface, in the end it was 37,7mm I think, so, that is too thin obviously. This is stock that I had on hand, hopefully the new tube I ordered will be in inch and will be an actual 38.2mm diameter...
so, with that thin tube, I had to put 3 layers of tape so the clamp would fit without tightening it more than what I see on the refs. to be honest, with the parts in hand, it looks a bit too spaced between the parts and feels a bit off. but it's so subtle, I'm sure that with actual 1.5" stock, it would work like the actual saber. to me 1.6" would be way too much and would need to be turned down at least 1 full mm or even 1.5mm.
so yes, here the spacing seems a bit too much, and we can see my tape because I put too close to the sides of the clamp:
but here, even if my focal is way off with the phone's camera, we almost have a match in diameters between the clamp and tube and the refs:
so, it's just a matter of a few 10th of a mm. Hopefully the aluminium tube i'll receive will be better.
question, what do you guys think about the turned finish? it looks pretty shiny because it was just turned, but I think they did the same way on the actual prop.
cheers
I have started experimenting a bit with real parts today. It's very difficult to come to a good conclusion here, the tube that I used was slightly under 38mm by default, so already less than 1.5", then I had to turn it down a bit to get a perfect surface, in the end it was 37,7mm I think, so, that is too thin obviously. This is stock that I had on hand, hopefully the new tube I ordered will be in inch and will be an actual 38.2mm diameter...
so, with that thin tube, I had to put 3 layers of tape so the clamp would fit without tightening it more than what I see on the refs. to be honest, with the parts in hand, it looks a bit too spaced between the parts and feels a bit off. but it's so subtle, I'm sure that with actual 1.5" stock, it would work like the actual saber. to me 1.6" would be way too much and would need to be turned down at least 1 full mm or even 1.5mm.
so yes, here the spacing seems a bit too much, and we can see my tape because I put too close to the sides of the clamp:
but here, even if my focal is way off with the phone's camera, we almost have a match in diameters between the clamp and tube and the refs:
so, it's just a matter of a few 10th of a mm. Hopefully the aluminium tube i'll receive will be better.
question, what do you guys think about the turned finish? it looks pretty shiny because it was just turned, but I think they did the same way on the actual prop.
cheers
Benjo
Well-Known Member
pretty shiny but it will get dull as it is aluminium, yours seems close. The original one has the same lines so they probably did the same.
That thread gets really interesting
I think if you take the turned tube finish you just made, and let it sit on a shelf for 35 years it would look exactly like the Barbican now
Just catching up now, late to the party. This is one of my top favorite sabers. What an amazing job with the modeling!!!
These shrouds I think are high demand in the community and no one ever wants to do a run
We recently learned that this motor stunt was not alone in ANH, and she had a twin. The twin had alot of missing paint on the shroud and the shroud is cut in a different angle making it look much shorter
I’d love to see you do a run of all 3 versions
These shrouds I think are high demand in the community and no one ever wants to do a run
We recently learned that this motor stunt was not alone in ANH, and she had a twin. The twin had alot of missing paint on the shroud and the shroud is cut in a different angle making it look much shorter
I’d love to see you do a run of all 3 versions
Benjo
Well-Known Member
Wowowow, hold on, What
?! Is there a thread about that?
Hey Danny,
YES, that doesn't surprise me at all for the shorter shroud!
There was no way all those ESB snapshots were from the exact same saber, that shroud is much shorter and there also seems to be some weird angle going on on the square part on the first picture below (left angle of the square shroud)
thank you very muych for the kind words, i will definitely run both the square shroud and the barbican version. Not sure yet about that 3rd version as the references are much poorer and it becomes complicated to do so many options for a lower demand item such as this saber, I hope you guys understand, i'm the guy that does the low demand stuff, just can't do too many options all the time
I was honestly already not planning to do the Barbican, it all went very fast when people told me that it was the same saber as the square shroud saber, i was initialy just planning to run that square shroud because i love it so much!
cheers
there needs to be a thread on this.. pronto.
Hey guys,
sorry, not much to show for the last couple days, the closer you get to accurate, the slowest it gets, it's normal
I started working on a new perspective match of a more close up view that is helping quite a bit locking up details
made me realize the set screw was much bigger than i first modelled it for instance
the clamp a bit more tightened as well, still going in the direction of the 1.5" tube
still nothing final, everything is still moving a tiny tiny bit in every direction until everything matches as best as possible on every view.
it's a fun project
I read again the Barbican thread and suddently realized when i read "plastruct" in the last message from Tom that I had the parts for the black caps on the side on my desk all allong! those are also used for the fifth element multipass that I have been working on for more than a year! (just in a different size). fun stuff!
cheers
sorry, not much to show for the last couple days, the closer you get to accurate, the slowest it gets, it's normal
I started working on a new perspective match of a more close up view that is helping quite a bit locking up details
made me realize the set screw was much bigger than i first modelled it for instance
the clamp a bit more tightened as well, still going in the direction of the 1.5" tube
still nothing final, everything is still moving a tiny tiny bit in every direction until everything matches as best as possible on every view.
it's a fun project
I read again the Barbican thread and suddently realized when i read "plastruct" in the last message from Tom that I had the parts for the black caps on the side on my desk all allong! those are also used for the fifth element multipass that I have been working on for more than a year! (just in a different size). fun stuff!
cheers
Sym-Cha
Master Member
So I guess eethan you are aware that Roy just replicated the accurate half of that greeblie with his DV ROTJ Stunt kit? Here's what I mean :
You'll just have to cut a bit off and add a painted black brass thingy and 2 screws to attach to the body of the Barbican saber. Knowing Roy he'd be more than willing to accommodate you with this part when you're about to start a run. And are those T-tracks taller on the Barbican or are they the same as the DV ROTJ Stunt? If the same then that's another part readily available
Chaïm
You'll just have to cut a bit off and add a painted black brass thingy and 2 screws to attach to the body of the Barbican saber. Knowing Roy he'd be more than willing to accommodate you with this part when you're about to start a run. And are those T-tracks taller on the Barbican or are they the same as the DV ROTJ Stunt? If the same then that's another part readily available
Chaïm
Hey,So I guess eethan you are aware that Roy just replicated the accurate half of that greeblie with his DV ROTJ Stunt kit? Here's what I mean :
View attachment 1598504
You'll just have to cut a bit off and add a painted black brass thingy and 2 screws to attach to the body of the Barbican saber. Knowing Roy he'd be more than willing to accommodate you with this part when you're about to start a run. And are those T-tracks taller on the Barbican or are they the same as the DV ROTJ Stunt? If the same then that's another part readily available
Chaïm
yes of course
the T tracks I was indeed planning to either use Roy's or just let people buy them themselves
for the control box, I am aware as well but my model is a bit different actually. I don't know yet how I'll go about this part, if people want it in aluminium or in plastic. still need to figure that out
