Jump to content

Lancer spec: Chest back elastic width and belt closure discussion


Recommended Posts

Being on the Lancer Panel, I can categorically say that I WILL FIGHT TOOTH AND NAIL to make sure that bit does not stop your lancer application.

 

It's the screen accurate way of closure, it's proven by screen grabs and how it should be done.

 

So despite what the specs say. Fear not Eric. I'll give it the nod.

 

And I'm 99.9% certain all the others would too.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Chef, what steps should we take if we want to make suggestions to update the Lancer requirements? I think there's enough "evidence" in this thread re: the elastic widths. The rear buckle closure is not in any pics I know of, and the only pics we see so far is the velcro closure.

 

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I definitely agree that the chest armor connection webbing is narrower. As a matter of fact, it looks (to me) to be the same fabric as the 1 1/2" webbing for the drop boxes.

 

I think I'm going to go as close to screen-accurate as I can, and simply hope for the best for Lancer inclusion. Even if I'm denied Lancer status, at least I'll know I'm right. :)

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just discuss it with Marcel and the rest of the head-shed.

 

There are some who like to push for better detail and higher standards, and there are those who would prefer to keep it as is, or loosen the reins even further.

 

Everything is purely down to discussion. Some will agree with you, some won't. That's the nature of discussion.

 

The release of the Blu-Ray and even harsher scrutiny has thrown up plenty of new ideas and discoveries. The increase in the base standard considerably narrowed the gap between the two, so maybe it is time for a review?

 

The forum is here for you guys, we're merely here to keep it running on the rails and help you chaps on the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seeing as this is coming up again, the only change that I'd like to see to the Lancer specs is the bottom chest strap.

 

Every screenshot that I've seen seems to indicate that it's 1.5", not the 2" that's currently in the spec. In fact, it stands to reason that it's not elastic, but the same cotton webbing that was used for the hip boxes. Put yourself in the costume designer's shoes: Would it make sense to just buy 1 big roll of 1.5" webbing and use it as much as possible? How easy would it have been to find the same texture webbing, just in two slightly different sizes?

 

To be honest, it's really the only bit of the Lancer spec that I disagree with. Hopefully, that can be changed and we can all move on. :D

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the same reason, I've always wondered about the 1 3/8" inch elastic for the shoulder and biceps. This is not a standard elastic width. It seems to me that they would've used more economical approach instead of deconstructing suspenders made in China. I don't know; is 35mm a standard width for elastic in Europe/Asia?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the same reason, I've always wondered about the 1 3/8" inch elastic for the shoulder and biceps. This is not a standard elastic width. It seems to me that they would've used more economical approach instead of deconstructing suspenders made in China. I don't know; is 35mm a standard width for elastic in Europe/Asia?

 

It would be way easier for a wardrobe person to buy a giant roll of elastic, than to source suspenders and trim them. I think the costumes were made in the USA, in California if I'm not mistaken. According to costume designer Aggie Guerard Rodgers, she has worked in California for her whole career. I recall photos from the FL archives with them testing the scout costumes.

 

What i am getting at is that if the costumes were made in the USA, shouldn't the common measurements be standard / imperial versus metric measurements? Cuz you're right, it's often tough to find odd sizes.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I definitely agree that the chest armor connection webbing is narrower. As a matter of fact, it looks (to me) to be the same fabric as the 1 1/2" webbing for the drop boxes.

 

I think I'm going to go as close to screen-accurate as I can, and simply hope for the best for Lancer inclusion. Even if I'm denied Lancer status, at least I'll know I'm right. :)

 

I'm going the 1 1/2 route as well. There's no way that is 2 inches wide.

 

And 1 3/8 elastic just doesnt exist here, so every where that's called for I'm going with 1 1/2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did the 1 1/2 width for the bicep and shoulder armor, until I found a source for the 1 3/8". Search eBay for "35mm black elastic". You'll see sets of suspenders in that width. They're all overseas, so there will be a wait, but at least it's accessible.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did the 1 1/2 width for the bicep and shoulder armor, until I found a source for the 1 3/8". Search eBay for "35mm black elastic". You'll see sets of suspenders in that width. They're all overseas, so there will be a wait, but at least it's accessible.

 

Yeah, I'm of the mind that the original scout costumes were made in the US with Imperial measurements.... if I don't get Lancer because of 1/8 of an inch... so be it ;) .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I did find some by-the-meter, on-the-roll on ebay as well. Multiple sizes, including 35 mm. Again, overseas, but there's no way around that with this strap width. (Looks like they might be out of stock soon, though... But given how much they have sold in the past, they might have more in the future. I went ahead and got myself some.)

 

As for the discussion, I have to agree that it looks like the 1.5" cotton webbing used on the thigh boxes, between the front and back pieces of the armor. The 45 mm might be a good compromise between that and the current 2" standard, but it's even harder to find than the 35 mm. To that end, I'll throw my proverbial bucket into the same ring as Pandatrooper and batninja; it would seem more logical to assume imperial widths on the original costumes since they were mostly likely made in the US. Then again, assumptions can be dangerous. Lol.

 

Don't you guys wish we could just hop in a DeLorean and go back in time, measuring tape in-hand? :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've used that company before... They should ship worldwide.

 

IF people are wanting to upgrade, it might be worth one of you ordering a roll and then distributing it locally when it gets your side of the pond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've used that company before... They should ship worldwide.

 

IF people are wanting to upgrade, it might be worth one of you ordering a roll and then distributing it locally when it gets your side of the pond.

 

I ordered 5 meters of the stuff with the same thought in mind. There probably aren't many people in my garrison who want to upgrade, but I figured I'd get my hands on a good chunk of it and see if anyone on this side is interested in the inevitable extra.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just starting my build, so if anyone has extra 35MM I can buy I'm definitely interested.

 

It doesn't seem that there has been closure on this subject, so I'm assuming that the current Lancer info and guide that Panda posted on a different thread are still accurate. And Velcro is acceptable to close the belt in back.

 

Does it matter what width elastic is used for the chin cup?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going the 1 1/2 route as well. There's no way that is 2 inches wide.

 

I know I'm new, but I agree. The side chest strapping just looks way too close to the drop box webbing in size.

 

Here is the MOM photo:

momc.jpg

 

And I know there is nothing that says the MC armor is proper scale, but here is 1.5 webbing through my MC armor. I think 1.75 woulld look off and too wide for the MC armor so IMO, for overall effect, I think if someone owns MC armor the 1.5 webbing is most suited to it.

 

c1.jpg

c2.jpg

 

I'd be curious to see what 1.75 looks like in some of the other armor people own (like SC) to see how it looks scale wise compared next to the MOM images.

 

I could see saying, depending on your armor make, either 1.5" or 1.75" is appropriate.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...