Chef

To be honest... In all my Scout buckets I've never needed fans. The air circulation is pretty good when you cut the ear vents out. Some people put mesh across the ears and mount the fans directly behind the mesh so the fans draw air in from the outside. Me, I just stand and face the breeze for a bit. Does exactly the same job.

well, if you can get acetone..... melt a bit of that plastic in it. Nothing like using the same stuff for the repair. and if you can't get this... superglue and bi-carb of soda. both pretty simple and effective.

There are a number of methods... You can use the acetone melted plastic method that I have described in another topic. Glue a square of plastic on the inside of the hole and fill with the melted stuff. when cured, just sand it smooth and weather. You can also go down the Super-Glue/Fabric method. Liberally apply superglue around the hole (on the inside obviously) and then apply a little swatch of fabric over it. When this is dry, turn it over, fill the resulting dimple with bi-carbonate of soda and then drop in a couple of drops of superglue. This will go hard, and when it's done, you can sand this flat. Or the automotive filler (Bondo), but this will obviously need painting, the other two, less so.

I have to say, that the basic layout of these gloves is about as good as people are going to get in the absence of SA gloves. They are by far the most 'right' looking of everything that has been put out there currently. I'd even go as far to say that it would have to be the most anal of GML's to not clear a costume on the extra knuckle rib when there is no alternative, and doing so would be a bit of a monumentous task in itself. I had to stop and count them the first time round. Sewing the suede on shouldn't be too much of an issue. Just a bit time consuming. Cut the right shape and a bit of over stitching should be more than enough to get it looking right.

Here's a quick initial test pull for me to gauge what needs doing, just of the faceplate and shroud at the moment., The shroud itself isn't too bad. I need to make it a bit taller so I get a better return edge, and mark in the trim lines. The faceplate I'm not so pleased with initially. It needs a lot of the detail tightening up and as John said, about a million more vac-holes, especially on the snout. It pulled and released OK, but the detail is a little weak, so I'm going to have to sharpen all the edges to get the most out of the 3mm material I'm using. But, overall, not a drama. Nothing I hadn't expected to be honest. Coming along!

Each bucket is slightly different. but the rather large overhang that this template has 'should' (although best to check), be sufficient for most buckets.

There you go buddy.

Normally dry within 24 hours or so. It is a filler material, and acetone does mess with plastic (otherwise it wouldn't melt in the first place), so caution must be exercised when using this method. If the area you are trying to fill is large, I suggest you use small bits first and build up gradually. Try a small test area to make sure there are no unwanted effects. As with all these things, it is user responsibility. I have used the method myself with success, but I cannot accept responsibility for it, should it all go pear shaped. You are dealing with a substance that melts plastic. Don't forget that.

I'd say for screen accuracy yes... but ultimately it's up to your GML to decide. Why not put a couple of poppers/snaps through the velcro before you sew it to the vest? That way it will line up perfectly but you won't be able to see them? Just a thought.

Yeah, if anything, all the indents are going to need to be widened out by 6mm, to allow for material thickness once pulled. Snout will need deepening as well as the visor bolts. I'm probably going to need to adjust the faceplate so it's a better fit in the visor, but I'm going to have to pull the visor before I can make that judgement. I'll be running around all the detail and sharpening all the edges. This has been taken from my own bucket, so I'm essentially going to have to adjust what is a finished bucket back into Buck Masters. It's not going to be a straightforward task, I know... But then this is costuming, when ever is it straightforward. John, I'll probably catch up with you on FaceAche if that's alright.

Finally got my helmet bucks back from my buddy Nath. They're going to need a bit of final fettling before they are ready to pull from and I've got my head very deep in a colonial marine project at the moment, so they're going to be a few weeks away yet from anything like a test pull, but progress is progress. Sorry some of the pics are upside down. I can't seem to edit photo bucket from my iPad. When I get the laptop back I'll amend this rather serious breach of form! I've gone for the traditional method of construction. Whilst more complex. It is more screen accurate. Stay tuned.

Sending you a PM buddy.

Never heard of the chap, but then I wouldn't consider looking at a Kenner blaster... Much too big. But that said... Send him an email, and open a dispute through ebay. Not to be an arse, but purely to cover yours. If he's genuine, he'll bend over backwards to get it sorted. If he's not, you need to be in there before your time limit expires to do anything about it. Safety first!

Belissimo!

Yeah, good post, but a bit full of fluff. I think a thread with just the details on, without all the picture quoting and back-slapping would be beneficial. But that's just me. What say the rest of you?

Yeah, I know... Hence the reason I suggested we do another. I don't think we need to do side by side comparisons, mainly because getting them all together might be a tad difficult. But what we could do is decide on what sort of dimensions we are going to measure, and then whoever has got which ever lid, gets out the tape measure and does the write up. Each can then be compared to the other... I've never seen one of those lids in the flesh... I'd be a bit concerned that it's only 2mm thick. That's pretty thin for GRP and thus would be a little fragile. That sounds like a Gel Coat and a couple of skins of tissue.. If it were me, I'd ask the chap about the exact construction method. Which weight mat is used and what resin, before committing to buy one. Yeah, the sculpt looks OK. Looks like a re-worked Rubies/DP to me. The US one.... er.... not quite as good. Looks like a slush cast resin one (and I'm never convinced of their rigidity). It looks like it will need a good deal of surface work as it seems a bit wibbly wobbly. Again, more than likely to be a Rubies/DP base.

right over left.

Can you not remote host the pictures like on PhotoBucket?? That way they take up no forum space, or is it different for embedded stuff in the machine parts of the website?? I don't know. I'm not saying anyone has with MG armour.. it's to illustrate the point. But the thing is, there IS more accurate stuff out there than the likes of SC biceps and old knees, and this is my issue. If people are being told their strapping isn't the right thickness, or their pouches are too far apart or their flak vest hangs too low, then they should also be told that their armour isn't up to scratch. If they want to go Lancer... then they should be prepared to make it screen accurate, even if that means sourcing updated armour parts or modifying their existing ones. THAT is getting as 'close as you can'. I think if you scrutinise the screen caps, especially the blu-rays, certain details can be picked out like the belt fastening. The argument is there for the bund material because you can definitely see a slight colour/texture difference on screen, and this is just backed up by the other supporting material. But there is nothing (that I have found... so please feel free to find it and make me eat humble pie), that suggests the t-bits are handed and there ever was a chin cup used on screen. I can find a picture that in my opinion suggests that one wasn't used. and the rest.....

Well.... for me... I'd like to see Screen Caps posted up for each of the detail parts to show exactly what the Lancer regulations are referring to. We talk about fit and finish for the gaining of approval.... I'll run two scenarios past you to illustrate my issue 1: Jim (sorry Grif... I'll use you as my mule) submits his costume for approval. He's got MonCal armour, but hasn't changed his t-bits around.... He's rejected. 2: Jim again submits his costume. This time he's got SC armour, and his t-bits the right way round. He's approved. Now... Is there any Screen Cap evidence to suggest that the T-Bits 'have' to both face forward? I've not been able to find anything conclusive. And... now no disrespect to Jeff, but the profile on his Biceps, just isn't screen accurate. So, you reject one application based on a supposition that something should look like it does, and accept another when it clearly contains a part that is not screen accurate. Surely, if you're going to be picky over the width of strapping, then glaringly obvious incorrect parts, like any of the MG armour (which should be banned in it's entirety in my opinion), SC Biceps, SC Knees (early ones, as I know he has updated the bucks for these) and the such likes should really be rejected too and the owner have to source more accurate parts. Stuff like the Chin Cup... Any screen evidence to back up that one was used. The only bit I can find suggests it wasn't. (I know you can see one on pictures of the lid when one came up for sale or the such likes.... but can you see it on screen?). Allowing anywhere between 1-6 stripes on the tank.... when on screen, only 1, 4 or 6 were ever seen. For me, it's the inconsistency of the rules. One inaccuracy is acceptable, yet another is not. I don't mind jumping through hoops, but where there appears to be not much in the way of logic behind them, then I start to question why my feet are off the ground. If it's striving for screen accuracy, then stick to what can be seen on screen. That's it really.

Heidi... that's my point... You're going for Screen Accuracy... not Lancer. It just so happens that when you do.... You'll be at Lancer spec anyway. So you're approaching it in the right frame of mind in my opinion. You can follow the Lancer spec as a guide, but as has been shown by the belt closure thing, the exact wording of the text may not be entirely accurate. The only real way to be sure, is research and scrutiny of the screen footage. Badge... Well, you get a Lancer Tag on your screen avatar, and you can buy a Lancer patch, that only Lancer approved people can buy.

Ultimately... you do not NEED to go for Lancer status. Obviously, if you make it as screen accurate as you can, you should breeze Lancer status anyway, and really it's this that people should aim for, and not the badge. Marcel... I wouldn't worry about John's comments. This place is hardly 'elitist' and I don't think we're fragmented at all. If anything this is one of the more laid back "busy' detachments there is. Spec Ops is horizontal, but then there are only a few people there. I do think personally.... (and I'm not expecting any discussion on the subject, it's purely my opinion).... that there are some inconsistencies within the Lancer program, hence the reason I've never applied. But I do think that discussion of these 'finer points' is truly necessary, for people to gain a better understanding of the costume and allow them to build it 'right' from the start. Whether the detail is included in the Lancer wording, for a sake of clarity, is really down to you chaps to decide.

I'd agree with Terry on this one... Having trawled through numerous screen shots, I'd say that no buckle exists and the velcro closure is how it was on Screen. I'd also concur that the chest strapping is not 2" (50mm) wide. That does seem mighty massive. And if you take someone like Ian Maginn, who is a bit on the short side (and Andy for that matter), 2" is about 1/5 of their total height! I'd say it's more like 1 3/4" (44mm) but I'm not sure how available this size is.... Just checked and 45mm seems to be readily available. There are a few other things I'd like to see on the Lancer page... but that's really for another time.

Well..... there only seems to be Patrick, John and I who are bleating on about it.... every one else seems a little non-plussed either way. But yes... I'd like it in there! I'm sure Patrick will too.

Works with HIPS and ABS... others I don't know.... never tried it. Get a small jam jar (or other glass receptacle with an air tight lid). Bung some Acetone in and plastic, leave it overnight and see what you get in the morning. Not going to cost you much if it doesn't work. I have a pot sitting in my workshop. Comes in handy!

Terry... The problem was 5 years ago, half this information didn't exist, and half the people weren't willing to provide the rest!! The community is a much better place now than it was back then. It really was like the blind leading the blind. MonCal was some sort of mythical beast and every time someone mentioned his name you could just hear the theme tune to the A-Team scoring up in the background.... Jeff was about the only bit of decent reference material and getting hold of stuff was like pulling teeth. I ended up making my own because it was nigh on impossible to find anything. It wasn't UNTIL you got cleared that suddenly you actually managed to find any information. The place was like "Fight Club". Whereas now..... it's go here, here and here... Hey presto. Instant Scout off the peg!! But it's this transparency that could well be people's undoing. How long will the "House of Mouse" turn a blind eye to what could be a good money spinner for them. Over-priced Rubies tat anyone??