# Master Replicas Enterprises?



## PixelMagic (Aug 25, 2004)

Does anyone know if Master Replicas plans to release anymore Enterprise models, say of the A, D, or E? I'd love to have a large scale replica of those.


----------



## John Duncan (Jan 27, 2001)

Hard to say. I've heard nothing about any future releases.

With the beating they are taking over the TOS E release, I'd say no.

Imagine the difficulty of replicating the Refit's paint job if they can't get the TOS E's correct.


----------



## TGel63 (Mar 26, 2004)

I didn't buy the TOS E due to price, and looking at quality, glad I didn't. I'd have to say I would not purchase any of their future ships, if any, for the same reason.


----------



## CessnaDriver (Apr 27, 2005)

The E has been mentioned by a rep as possibility a few years out.
I did buy a ship, had to return for failed lights, waiting on a replacement.
Price is steep sure, but a custom build up of the same thing would cost thousands more. Ain't perfect, but stunning in person. Attention to obscure details is amazing.


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

CessnaDriver said:


> The E has been mentioned by a rep as possibility a few years out.
> I did buy a ship, had to return for failed lights, waiting on a replacement.
> Price is steep sure, but a custom build up of the same thing would cost thousands more. Ain't perfect, but stunning in person. Attention to obscure details is amazing.


I agree. 



John Duncan said:


> Hard to say. I've heard nothing about any future releases.
> 
> With the beating they are taking over the TOS E release, I'd say no.
> 
> Imagine the difficulty of replicating the Refit's paint job if they can't get the TOS E's correct.


I love mine, and I doubt that they are taking a "beating" on the TOS E based on the most recent customer ratings.

You have to see one of these things to fully appreciate it.
And while there are things I would change about her(a couple of very minute things) it's still an incredible build.

Please realize John that early on complaints will always dominate gushing endorsements. I do realize that this thread is a bit old, but have to point out now that the overwhelming majority of customer that have gotten their TOS E's are happy with them.


----------



## John Duncan (Jan 27, 2001)

I was using a gross generalization there. I have my MR TOS E and it's not perfect but *is* a work of art. Most folks are not using micrometers and paint chips to judge how their's looks. But we hardcore Trekkies tend to do that.

It would be a leap of faith that MR could pull off the TMP E or Refit with the complex paint job they had. It's even difficult for most to replicate it on the PL Refits. We tend to idealize our own perception of these fictional ships and after so many years of expectations, it's not hard to be dissatisfied by one company's "idealistic" version as opposed to our own.

When you look at close ups of the Refit (Phase Pistol's especially), you can see that the panels were of differing colors and shapes, put down semi orderly. We as idealistic fans would expect those panels to be perfectly placed to match our perception of the Refit, not necessarily what the actual miniature looked like.

This has been the trouble with the TOS E, when the miniature was shown to have some weathering. Many decried the inclusion of that on the MR ship since they could not *see* it in the sfx of the show. So our perception gets us into trouble.

Eek, I rattled on too much on that....


----------



## toyroy (Jul 17, 2005)

John Duncan said:


> ...We tend to idealize our own perception of these fictional ships and after so many years of expectations, it's not hard to be dissatisfied by one company's "idealistic" version as opposed to our own...
> 
> ...This has been the trouble with the TOS E, when the miniature was shown to have some weathering. Many decried the inclusion of that on the MR ship since they could not *see* it in the sfx of the show. So our perception gets us into trouble...


I have no problem with people who want accurate prop replicas. However, many folks want a model of what's on the screen. That is, after all, what the filmmaker intends to be seen. For those who want such models, their perceptions are the standard by which to judge a model.

MR's website ad copy might be taken to represent either a prop replica, or a screen model, but my interpretation leans toward the latter.


----------



## John Duncan (Jan 27, 2001)

I fully understand wanting a replica of what we all saw on the screen. I was not sure about all that weathering at first either. But the replica is a nice one and I'm happy to have it, given that I would probably never build one on my own.

I'm still fussing over my PL Refit kit!


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

I have been holding off on purchasing this item for the not so great reviews that it seems to have gotten. The reviews I am referring to are the ones at MRs' own site.

I did take into account that the first 30 or so would be questionable, but for now, the only way I can see myself in buying one is by seeing one in person.


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

starmanmm said:


> the only way I can see myself in buying one is by seeing one in person.


Saw one.
Bought one.
Waiting for one.


----------



## Pyxl (Mar 10, 2004)

I hear you StarManmm....I went the other route and bought Cessna's from MR (or a reseller?) at a reduced price..granted the bridge lights don't work...she's still the best item I have in my collection.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

I got a price of 178 plus shipping on a 16x16x36 acrylic case for my MR E.

casesforcollectibles.com

ask for the MR Enterprise case.
tell em Lou sent ya. They won't do anything, but maybe we can start a movement...(alice's restaurant, anone?)


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

Pyxl said:


> I hear you StarManmm....I went the other route and bought Cessna's from MR (or a reseller?) at a reduced price..granted the bridge lights don't work...she's still the best item I have in my collection.


Ummmmm, how did you do that???? And what may I ask was the cost???


----------



## CessnaDriver (Apr 27, 2005)

"AJCollecting" sells MR returned material on eBay. We are not sure exactly how it works, conjecture that it may be MR itself unloading rejects. 

I recognized the one I returned when it went up for auction.


----------



## James B. Elliott (Jan 29, 2001)

As of 1:50pm PST on 9-Mar-07 and 26 votes, the poll (Rate the MR TOS Enterprise on a scale of one (worst) to ten (best)) results are 7.9±0.5 / 10; a C+.


----------



## CessnaDriver (Apr 27, 2005)

My replacement is scheduled for delivery next Tuesday.
I will do a thorough photo assessment as before and post the pics.


----------



## PixelMagic (Aug 25, 2004)

Well, the reason I started this thread, is because I would love to have a MR Refit, or Enterprise-E. That would be so awesome.


----------



## CessnaDriver (Apr 27, 2005)

Me too.
But since there is a refit kit in 1/350th, I would rather they do the E first.


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

C+.

Lets see if time will change this rating?


----------



## James B. Elliott (Jan 29, 2001)

starmanmm said:


> C+.
> 
> Lets see if time will change this rating?


It has:

As of 1:06pm PDT on 12-Mar-07 and 28 votes, the poll (Rate the MR TOS Enterprise on a scale of one (worst) to ten (best)) results are 8.0±0.5 / 10; a B-.

Surf over and take a look at the poll page. I've made posts ever so often showing the average results. The results are pretty stable right around the 8/10 level. Of course, there are only 28 votes. So if you own one of the MR TOS 1701 models, go there and vote.


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

James B. Elliott said:


> It has:
> 
> As of 1:06pm PDT on 12-Mar-07 and 28 votes, the poll (Rate the MR TOS Enterprise on a scale of one (worst) to ten (best)) results are 8.0±0.5 / 10; a B-.


Not at all true.



That is a 1 to 10 poll, not an academic scale.


In a poll where 1 is worst and 10 is best a rating of 5 is average.

Whereas in an academic rating 7-7.9 is considered a little above average, or C.
Your interpretation of the 1-10 poll is TREMENDOUSLY off. 

Only three people rated the ship as below average.
The majority of the people gave the ship a best or 100% rating, the second greatest number of people rated it as a 9 out of 10.

The vast majority of people have given the ship a best to near best rating possible, not a B-.


----------



## James B. Elliott (Jan 29, 2001)

Chuck_P.R. said:


> Not at all true.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The customer service representative at the MR forum sees it your way. I disagree. A 75% percent success rate seems to be "average" and the academic scale reflects that. I suspect that most people know what the grades A, B, C, D, F mean on a "gut level" and would tell you 7.5/10 was a C. This isn't baseball where a 3/10 result gets you into the hall of fame, or any sport where a 75% winning rate is a good season. I'd imagine a company shoots for 100% customer satisfaction, so that three people out of ten who don't like a product isn't great, but it is average and enough to keep the company in business.

It would be nice to see results of similar polls on similar items from which one could construct a "curve" and then assign letter grades. Until then, I'll stick to the time tested standard academic scale.

I give the number of votes, the average, the error on the mean. Those numbers give one all that is needed for an interpretation. I also post a link to the poll so one can see the votes and judge (and vote!) for themselves.


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

Actually I didn't notice Amy's (I assume she's a customer service rep) comments until after I had responded to your post on MR's blog. If I had read her response I probably wouldn't have posted my own there. I was wondering what you meant by B- here and on MR's website.

It still does not make sense.

When you ask people to judge something based on a scale of 1 being worst and 10 being best then numerically 5 is average.

On an academic scale 7-7.9 is average on a scale of 1 to 10.

In one case 5 is average, in another case 7.5 is considered average.

That's a tremendous difference.

Technically, you can't do it, it's inaccurate and unfair to even entertain converting these scales back and forth to your "academic scale", because the scale people were agreeing to rate the product on was 1-10,

and you are talking about a scale of 1-100.

They are two completely different scales.

No one evaluated the product on a scale of 1-100.

You might as well convert it to milileters for that matter, no one agreed to that scale either.


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

My take on it is that you look at the poll, read the comments there and here and that is how I will decide if it is worth the investment.

Right now, my take is which ever way you figure out the rating, for me, the numbers does show that the number of people that rate it a 9 or a 10 is still low. 17 votes find it a 9 or 10 while 12 votes find it bellow 9. That is too close. Almost a split.

For what you are paying, I would expect 27 votes to find it a 9 or 10 with 2 or 3 votes finding it under a 9 in quality. Those sort of numbers would make sense to me.

So, unless I see one on the shelf that I can examine and buy, what the poll shows me is that there is enough of a question as to the quality of the item for the price that they are asking.

Now I'm not in sales, but those numbers would not make me feel comfortable regarding any product that I would be selling.

I'm not being negative on this, just as close to being a smart consumer as possible.  

Right now, those numbers as telling me that right now, it is a crap shoot to get a "decent" version of the ship. To me, I just don't like the odds at the moment.

If you got a great one... that's great! I hope to do the same.

my 2 cents


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

starmanmm said:


> My take on it is that you look at the poll, read the comments there and here and that is how I will decide if it is worth the investment.
> 
> Right now, my take is which ever way you figure out the rating, for me, the numbers does show that the number of people that rate it a 9 or a 10 is still low.


83% of all votes were cast at 7 or above out of 10.

Looking at the two numbers you name specifically as "low,"

Of those voting, 38% of those who voted gave it a perfect 10.
21% of those voting gave it a near perfect 9.

How can 59% of those voting calling it perfect or near perfect be considered a low rating?

I'm way confused by that idea.


----------



## CessnaDriver (Apr 27, 2005)

http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent1.jpg
http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent2.jpg
http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent3.jpg
http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent4.jpg
http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent5.jpg
http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent6.jpg
http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent7.jpg
http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent8.jpg
http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent9.jpg
http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent10.jpg
http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent11.jpg
http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent12.jpg
http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent13.jpg
http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent14.jpg
http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent15.jpg
http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent16.jpg
http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent17.jpg
http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent18.jpg
http://home.san.rr.com/maxxq/ent19.jpg



Received an "Artists Proof" as a replacement. Go figure. 

Came with dual sigs. How bout that? Plaque says artists proof on it. 

All the lights work. Hooray!

Saucer is near perfect. This is VERY important to me. A small nick on the front edge and a little small pencil loop where they screwed up but not very noticable. No light leaks around nav lights. Good job there. Grid lines straight everywhere. Great!
No blotches, no weird reflections. Uniform all over. Nice.
Grids are very light on the bottom. Thank god. 
Standard impulse engine gap.
Red line on spine is not straight. Noticeable when looking at it directly above. I can live with it. 
Left grill on warp engine fell off in the box, the glue they use SUCKS. Just pressed it back on for now. I will rework both, the other is a little loose. 

Upper grill on left warp engine pylon was crooked. I peeled it off gently (glue sucked so it came off stupid easy) and reglued straight. 

Standard light leak above hanger window. 

Left warp engine has the somewaht standard dark streak on it for weathering. 

Light weathering generally in a few places.

No overspray on nacelle domes. That was an important one for me. 

The intercoolers? the ones on the back. I cant remember if that is what they are called. Not very flush, you can see a bit of a gap and the pins that mount them. I think that is pretty much all of them though. 

Standard left motor noise. 

Standard gaps where the pylons meet the hull. Though the left side looks like they tried to fill it a bit. Looks a little rough. 

Paint. a little nit of dust in the clear coat here and there. Nothing you notice without taking a flashlight and looking for shadows though. 

Seems solid. Nothing creaks, nothing loose. No cracks. 

Overall B+

Will keep her.


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

Glad your replacement came in!

Hope you enjoy her as much as I enjoy mine!

Congrats! :thumbsup:


----------



## CessnaDriver (Apr 27, 2005)

Thanks!

Now on to the D-7 Klingon!

I think that one should be a bit easier for them.


----------



## TOS Maniac (Jun 26, 2006)

good deal! i'm particularly gratified to see you finally get your replacement, Cessna, because you've had it hardest of all of us, i think. i'm so glad you got a keeper!
can't wait for mine!


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

I too received a replacement model in very timely fashion, and am pleased to report that after two weeks it continues to function perfectly.

On a scale of one to ten, I'd rate the MR _Enterprise_ a solid nine.


----------



## TOS Maniac (Jun 26, 2006)

great to hear! makes me glad!


----------



## CessnaDriver (Apr 27, 2005)

TOS Maniac said:


> good deal! i'm particularly gratified to see you finally get your replacement, Cessna, because you've had it hardest of all of us, i think. i'm so glad you got a keeper!
> can't wait for mine!



Thanks for that!


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

CessnaDriver said:


> Thanks!
> 
> Now on to the D-7 Klingon!
> 
> I think that one should be a bit easier for them.


And I think they once advertised it at $799.99. A bit cheaper too!

Though you can get an unlit, slightly out of scale 28.5" long(should be 24.3 in 1:350th) version for under $300.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

*Just got the word!*

Great News! The product listed below has arrived at our distribution center here in the U.S. and is ready to start shipping.


Item: U.S.S. Enterprise Studio Scale Limited Edition (ST-110)
Quantity: 1 units

Available to ship week of: immediately (please allow 48 hours to process) 

Happy days! :hat:


----------



## CessnaDriver (Apr 27, 2005)

Little vid, complete with authentic grinding nacelle motor noise 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkZqtfQyI-A


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

Nice!

After leaving it on for about 5 hours one day, my nacelle motor noise went down considerably and is barely audible now.


----------



## CessnaDriver (Apr 27, 2005)

I have heard this about others too. 
I will have to give it a try.


----------



## John Duncan (Jan 27, 2001)

I left mine on overnight and it didn't seem to affect the noise very much. I'll have to try it again.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

I have noticed that several folks have commented that one nacelle motor sounds much louder than the other. Could this be the result of spinning the planetary gear assembly in the opposite direction? Perhaps the gears just don't mesh quite the same way "in reverse."

M.


----------



## CessnaDriver (Apr 27, 2005)

Yep, others have thought this very thing too. 
Sadly without a way to open and access this stuff we may never know.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

*half way home.*

I got my case yesterday from casesforcollectibles.
roled top with glued edges.

It's beeeeautiful, but its leading a sad, empty life at the moment

This space for rent.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

^Just curious; what are the case's dimensions?


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

Carson,
16x16x36. $178.00 plus shipping.

I added a coule of inches to a case I saw over on the RPF board that was a little cramped at 14x16x36


----------



## James B. Elliott (Jan 29, 2001)

As of 12:19pm PST on 21-Mar-07 and 31 votes, the poll (Rate the MR TOS Enterprise on a scale of one (worst) to ten (best)) results are 8.1±0.4 / 10; a B-.


----------



## mactrek (Mar 30, 2004)

I'll be casting my vote some time tomorrow (the _estimated_ delivery date).

Until then ... I'm on pins and needles!!

Lou ... Will the refit and the NX fit in the same sized cases?


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Lou Dalmaso said:


> Carson,
> 16x16x36. $178.00 plus shipping.


Thanks, Lou.

I recently encased my _Proteus_ and _Seaview_ models in a similar fashion (same company, in fact) and I'm very pleased with the results. I plan to do the same thing to my Big E, which is why I asked about the measurements.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

when I spoke to the nice lady, I told her that she may want to keep those dimensions handy. 

I'm sure if you mention the MR Enterprise, she'll know what you are talking about.

Sweet jobs on the kits, BTW.. 
Which Seaview is that? I'm not as fluent in Irwin Allen as I am in Trek


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Lou Dalmaso said:


> Which Seaview is that? I'm not as fluent in Irwin Allen as I am in Trek


It was produced by ************* back in the early 90's. Sadly, he only made a few kits before ceasing production (see My Gallery for more pix).

Thanks again for the case info; I'll be placing my order later this PM.


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

Is that the LM Proteus?


Nice!


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

starmanmm said:


> Is that the LM Proteus?


Yup.

Many of my models are displayed in a large, open workspace at my office. Following a recent near- miss involving an errant football it dawned on me that an extra modicum of protection might not be a bad idea. A plexiglass case won't stave off The Big One (God forbid), but it's better than nuthin.'


----------



## Treadwell (Aug 22, 2002)

Lou Dalmaso said:


> Carson,
> 16x16x36. $178.00 plus shipping.
> 
> I added a coule of inches to a case I saw over on the RPF board that was a little cramped at 14x16x36


What did you pay for shipping?


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

Lou Dalmaso said:


> Carson,
> 16x16x36. $178.00 plus shipping.
> 
> I added a coule of inches to a case I saw over on the RPF board that was a little cramped at 14x16x36


Someone asked if this sizewould also fit the Refit.

I think - The refit saucer is 16in dia.
So perhaps 18x18x36 is in order. If you want the same size to fit both.


----------



## Nektu (Aug 15, 2001)

Carson,
That Proteus is the best!... truly outstanding! I also noticed the Galileo shuttle from Star Trek. Is that the AMT kit, or something else?

Best,
KK


----------



## mactrek (Mar 30, 2004)

I received my Limited Edition about two hours ago. 

A quick look-over reveals the following:



She's # 216 of 1250.
All of the lights that are supposed to work, are functioning normally.
Standard gap issues where the nacelle struts join the secondary hull, and at the top of the Impulse Engine.
The standard nacelle motor noise has been noted (with the port being louder than the starboard).
Standard light leak around the shuttle bay doors (Though I've seen worse on the Internet).
The deflector dish has something on it ... so I'll probably end up repainting it.
Weathering and grid lines are a little heavy in my opinion ... but livable.
I think she's a keeper. I know I'm going to keep her running most of the day and I'll be giving her a very thorough once-over once I've calmed down a bit. 

But for now ... I'm gonna go play!  :thumbsup:


----------



## mactrek (Mar 30, 2004)

ClubTepes ... Thanks for the follow-up on the case size! :thumbsup:

Right now, I have the MR sitting next to my P/L 1:350 refit/A. I think that the wider case (18x18x36) would be better for the refit ... assuming I make a better and more sturdy stand for her that will also raise the refit to the same hight as the MR.


----------



## Joeysaddress (Jun 16, 2006)

She's home...she's plugged up...She's AMAZING!!! I've been studying her for about 20 minutes. My score is an A. Quick review:

Gridlines....lightly done, all match up, center one centered over the round port on top, no crooked lines drawn to match top grids to bottom grids. Only one spot where they drew double...looks like a slip of the hand. Not very noticable.

Paint/Decals....not a single chip or scratch anywhere!! Evenly applied topcoat. I do not detect any decals. All markings appear to be painted on. 

Loose parts...all grills on the nacelles and nacelle supports are on strong and not warped. Fab!!

Weathering...lightly done. The "impact scar" on the right nacelle is very light. I almost didn't notice it. 

Warp "fanblade" effect....Frak me...1,000 times better than that old Unobtainium piece of crap that I had in my possesion for 10 days. There is some noise from the engines, but nothing that I would think is bad. Makes less noise than my VCR in rewind. 

Hanger Bay/Hanger Bay dome light....some light leaks like others mentioned...but nothing I would get upset about. The dome light has a little over spray about the size of a pin head but nothing that I can't fix. 

Lights...all work, no issues.

Impulse drive...just a slight hairline gap. Paint looks good though. No light leak from said gap. 

I think that covers all the known issues. I just can't tell you how pleased that I am with her. They clearly delivered feedback from the first complaints because I just can't find much of anything not to love. She's a keeper!!!!!

Joey in Memphis


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

*Wish I had better news*

Mine arrived today, but I'm afraid t say, she's going back to drydock...


I have no lights on half of the saucer windows.
If only it weren't those iconic windows I might, _might_ have let it slide

now I gotta go call.

bummer...

Hey, On the plus side, the case i had made is the perfect size! 16x16x36


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

*Weekday Update*

OK, here's an update and a dilemma.

I turned on the ship again. No lights in that area. I get the hull a little flick with a knuckle ( ala the Fonz) and the lights came on. Huzzah!

So, barring anything else being wrong with the paintjob or anything else, would you still return it?

Hmmm?


----------



## aridas sofia (Feb 3, 2004)

Mine arrived this morning. I will be getting it out this evening. If it has anything like the problem you describe *Lou*, it goes back. I'm willing to accept a little deviation in the areas of join and paint, but if the electronics are fritzy right off the bat? No way!


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Lou Dalmaso said:


> ...barring anything else being wrong with the paintjob or anything else, would you still return it?


Same thing happened to me, and you better believe I returned it!

The good news is, MR sent out a replacement in short order (within three weeks), and it continues to work like a charm. At this point I have no complaints with the replica whatsoever.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

because I can't bear the prospect of boxing this beauty back up, I'm going to run it at least thru the weekend (monday is my birthday, happy me day)

after the initial thumping,... when the lights came on...similar manuevers cannot make the lights go back off. and everything is ok when I turn it off and back on. 

I am going to let it "cool down" and start it again tomorrow and see if i can replicate the fault. It's a bit like performing maintanence on an AE350 unit.

right now it's just an small dark cloud inside the big thick silver lining that is finally owning a replica of this quality.

cheers,
Lou


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

Arrrrrrrgh.

I missed my MR. Enterprise.

Short story folks..........

I ordered it in Nov. and listed my address as the place to recieve it.

I changed the delivery address to my wife's place of employment a few days later for security reasons.

I've never recieved any e:mails from MR. ...... So I e:mail them two months ago to make sure they have my correct e:mail address. They say they do.

So what happens???.........
No e:mail notification from MR. and the delivery guy shows up at my house insead of my wifes work.

Heres the real kicker......I'm upstairs sanding with a orbital sander and hearing protection so I don't hear the doorbell.

So now, I have business tonight and am trying to figure out how I'm going to get to the distribution center to pick it up before they close.

At this rate, its either going to work perfectly.......or its going to bust into flames when I plug it in. I'm betting the later.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Came in today. It exceeded my expectations. Bravo!

I gave it a 10. My actual rating would have been 9.5 (a perfect 10 being the Enterprise of my imagination), but since that isn't an option I rounded up.

The only nits I would pick (and they are _minor_) would be:

Warmer white LEDs. (The ones used are too blue.)

A little more space between the "fan blades" and the domes. (They should be a little more diffused.)

A slightly faster blink rate for the red/green running lights.

There are just too many things *right* about this model to list! The weathering is a bit heavier than I'd have liked, but the ghost of Miarecki is nowhere to be seen. The grilles are all straight and well installed. Even the gaps and vaunted light leak folks complain of around the hangar doors is much less obvious than I expected.

I finally have the model I've wanted for forty years!

M.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

MGagen said:


> Warmer white LEDs. (The ones used are too blue.)


White LEDs are, IIRC, just "re-tuned" blue LEDs. I wonder if it's possible to get a warmer white LED.  

Congrats on the model being up to expectations. I'm glad you got one since you're one of our local gurus on the 1701. :thumbsup:


----------



## fokkerpilot (Jul 22, 2002)

PerfesserCoffee said:


> White LEDs are, IIRC, just "re-tuned" blue LEDs. I wonder if it's possible to get a warmer white LED.


Superbrightleds.com has the warm white LEDs in stock.
http://www.superbrightleds.com/specs/WW7035_specs.htm


----------



## captain kirock (May 10, 2005)

I just got mine and i think it is pretty good!


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

fokkerpilot said:


> Superbrightleds.com has the warm white LEDs in stock.
> http://www.superbrightleds.com/specs/WW7035_specs.htm


Cool! :thumbsup: Thanks for the info and link.


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

So which is it ClubTepes?


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

MGagen said:


> Came in today. It exceeded my expectations. Bravo!
> 
> I gave it a 10. My actual rating would have been 9.5 (a perfect 10 being the Enterprise of my imagination), but since that isn't an option I rounded up.
> 
> ...


Only been thirty years for me, but I know what you mean!

Told 'ya you would love it!!!!!!!!!

Congratulations!


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

captain kirock said:


> I just got mine and i think it is pretty good!


Congratulations!

Let me get out of this thread. I'm starting to sound like I'm in a maternity ward waiting room... :tongue:


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

Congratulations, Mr. Gagen.

Mine is due to arrive on Wednesday. I sincerely hope that I am as satisfied with my model as you are with yours.

I totally agree with your assessment about the too-blue LEDs used for the internal lighting. I brought this to the attention of the MR rep in San Diego last summer while examining the prototype model, and he just looked at me funny like "What is this old fart ranting about?" He just replied "We're using white LEDs - that's the color they are". When I told him about the availability of warm-white LEDs, I just got another strange look. The only person who seemed to agree was the Roddenberry kid, who was in on the conversation.


----------



## Wally Wingert (Mar 25, 2007)

Hi guys...I'm new here. I just got my MR Enterprise today but I had a few questions. What does the certificate look like? I don't think I got one. Also, did you receive a plaque as well? I got a mount for a plaque, but no plaque. And most importantly...what are those three tiny little clear thingies for and what should I do with them? Thanks!


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

The certificate is a black folder with color background info on the series before going into the certification, if I can remember correctly without digging it out.

The plaque I got was a small piece of gold engraved metal on black wood that I guess is supposed to sit on top of the A shaped stand, but the number 0038 of 1200 was stamped so damn crudely on the plaque it's still sitting in a drawer and I don't plan on displaying it.

The plaque was disappointing. However I wasn't concerned with paying hundreds of extra dollars for autographs muchless a plaque so I guess I'm not as disappointed as I might have been had I paid for an autographed version and got something that looked that crude.

The stand is beautiful, the ship is beautiful, so I'm happy.

However, if you paid extra for one of the signature editions I'd check into it further.


----------



## smercs32118 (May 27, 2006)

Chuck_P.R. said:


> The certificate is a black folder with color background info on the series before going into the certification, if I can remember correctly without digging it out.
> 
> The plaque I got was a small piece of gold engraved metal on black wood that I guess is supposed to sit on top of the A shaped stand, but the number 0038 of 1200 was stamped so damn crudely on the plaque it's still sitting in a drawer and I don't plan on displaying it.
> 
> ...


 Got mine yesterday, no fractures or damage structural-wise. Packing gets very high marks, did a great job on that. Lighting is very cool, but a few flaws like putty not in certain areas leave gaps showing, airbrush overspray here and there, but overall a very decent addition to my ST collection. For a mass produced piece, gets a solid b+ in my book. In comparison to hand-made props, all done by a single artist taking months to do it, it's nowhere near as good. But the price difference makes it an easy choice for the average collector. So I can report that mine arrived without damage, in good working order, and I am quite happy with it considering what I paid for it.

I agree Chuck, the heavy cast metal stand in the insignia emblem shape is very cool!

I ended up with #127, and this is the LE version. I have plenty of autographs from all the cast members, so that wasn't worth the extra hundreds of bucks to me.

When all these TOS 1701's run out, it will become quite desirable, and I'm sure the value will rise over time as the MR Phasers did.

Papa Smurf out.......


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

Wally Wingert said:


> ...what are those three tiny little clear thingies for and what should I do with them? Thanks!


Sorry! Missed that question. They are the clear phaser turrents that were seldom visible onscreen(actually I've only seen it in blown up filmclips, so I doubt it was ever visible on TV), but nonetheless there.

They give you a couple of extras. Don't lose them or sneeze while handling! The chance of finding them if you loose your grip are slim and none...


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

smercs32118 said:


> Got mine yesterday, no fractures or damage structural-wise. Packing gets very high marks, did a great job on that. Lighting is very cool, but a few flaws like putty not in certain areas leave gaps showing, airbrush overspray here and there, but overall a very decent addition to my ST collection. For a mass produced piece, gets a solid b+ in my book. In comparison to hand-made props, all done by a single artist taking months to do it, it's nowhere near as good. But the price difference makes it an easy choice for the average collector. So I can report that mine arrived without damage, in good working order, and I am quite happy with it considering what I paid for it.
> 
> I agree Chuck, the heavy cast metal stand in the insignia emblem shape is very cool!
> 
> ...


I must be really lucky as I don't have any visible light leaks at all that I've been able to find.

My only quibble is that the impulse engine should have been lit, or black.
The way they did it, it looks like they installed two oversize rectangular LED's to light them but never made the proper connections - so they look like lights that have lost power. It's seam where it meets the saucer isn't absolutely perfect either, but there is no light leaking from it.

But again, that's tiny compared to everything else. If I get to bugged about it I'll just paint the engines black.

It's incredible that they got the tiny tiny thin rectangular colored lights under the landing bay clamshells correctly lit then and all the surrounding tiny strobes so perfect, yet didn't do the impulse panels.

Again though, a tiny issue and a ridiculously easy one to fix with a little black paint.

All and all I'm immensely happy. After waiting for a model of this size of the TOS E for 30 years I expected way less then I got.

It's a fantastic model.

If any of you guys have been on the fence about it, buy one while you can still get it for the original manufacturer's price.

Don't wait. Don't hesitate.


----------



## smercs32118 (May 27, 2006)

*Mr*

Yes, the Impulse Engines are a bit bleak, but a lot of other nice touches I didn't expect, compensated. The Dorsal lights, which are rarely noticed or included, were a very welcomed detail. I don't have a single light leak, but right above the Impulse Engine, where the Hull meets, I have a pronounced gap that looks like the putty guy, on the assembly line, just missed completely. Bad putty guy!

Word of warning to everyone that is thinking of altering or retouching this item. Collectibles, in limited numbers, are items that rise in value like antiques. Alter the old "Patina" or finish of an antique and it lowers the value considerably. My advice is that if you bought it as a potential investement, don't mess with it. Changes or repairs to minor flaws, change the originally released piece, flaws and all "are" the piece, and it will affect the value in years to come.

However, if you waited since you were a kid, have no desire to ever part with it, then make it your own!

I agree with Chuck entirely, the piece is impressive, and the few little flaws I found on mine, didn't detract from enjoying it at all.

Well done MR! Just work on that delivery delay a bit...... :thumbsup:


----------



## James B. Elliott (Jan 29, 2001)

There are small light leaks on mine around the "linear accelerator" above the impulse engines along the top of the saucer. The fit there is not that great:










There are also light leaks on the top edge of the saucer at about four o'clock.

The light leaks are not terrible and are only visible in low light at close distance.

The light leaks around the shuttle bay are more visible.

As of 11:35am PST on 26-Mar-07 and 36 votes, the poll (Rate the MR TOS Enterprise on a scale of one (worst) to ten (best)) results are 8.3±0.4 / 10; a B.​


----------



## smercs32118 (May 27, 2006)

How unfortunate, but a few precise paint hits of flat black, with a very fine brush, could solve your problem, with a *very * steady hand. Then you don't alter the paint job. Otherwise, let it be.

I've heard wide ranging problem descriptions on this product, but all very small things.

Hope you get it resolved, one way or another.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

*The verdict is in...*

She STAYS!

I gave myself the weekend to mull it over and after three days of nearly continuous use, the lighting issue has NOT resurfaced. I now tend to agree it was nothing more than a settling in adjustment and that moving the ship around on it's post rectified the problem.

As I posted earlier, the paintjob on this ship (#147, by the way) is better than most of the ones I 've seen posted IMHO. 

the grid is light enough to disappear at a distance, light leaks are next to non-existant and the only seams I notice are where the pylons meet the secondary hull. And even they are not what I would call "gaps"

And if you saw "the Naked Time" this weekend, you know damn well where the weathering streaks on the saucer came from :tongue: 

Cheers,
Lou


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

> The Dorsal lights, which are rarely noticed or included


 
Do we have a photo of this?


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

So I accidentally left the lights on my miniature switched on all night -- and they're still working. Woo-hoo!


----------



## aridas sofia (Feb 3, 2004)

My deflector dish is crooked. 

_Very_ crooked. Not as in "the dish is loose" crooked. As in "the mandrel is wayyyy off, making a secure attachment result in a crooked dish" kind of crooked. 

I'm bummed. It's okay otherwise -- none of the big defects we've heard of -- but I get this new and crappy problem. And I might just have to take a chance that I'll get something worse and send this one back.

Damn. 

BTW, this was number 221.


----------



## TOS Maniac (Jun 26, 2006)

aAAARGH! The wait is killing me! it's on the delivery truck now, and i'm WATCHING the office door, WAITING. DHL guy usually gets here between 11 and 1 PM - It's 10:30now. cue Carly Simon: "anticipayyy yaaayyyy shunnnn!"


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

What're the chances of MR selling the factory defect ones for cheap?


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

Mine arrived on Monday. Two days earlier than the tracking info stated.

It is not what I would call perfect, but it doesn't have any _major_ flaws, either.

Paint and hull graphics appear to be good. No blemishes or chips that I can discern.
The saucer grids leave a little to be desired. The front top and bottom lines both being off center to the bow light and front center ports. The bottom grid being a bit heavy-handed, and the connecting lines around the rim of the saucer not matching up evenly.

There is a very thin gap where the top of the impulse engine meets the rear of the saucer. The ship looks good when viewed from the TV side, with no visible gaps between the dorsal and saucer, or between the engine pylons and hull. On the port side, however, there are some thin gaps in those same areas. These are only visible when viewed very closely and present no problem.

No light leaks in areas that others had problems with. There are a few faint scuff marks on the paint surface here and there, but nothing to be really concerned about. There is a scuff mark on the top front of the right power dome, but that can be removed with a little buffing using an emery cloth.

As for the lighting, as stated in previous posts, the ports are much "cooler" than on the original studio model. This is the result of using stock "white" LEDs, that give off a blue-white light instead of the warm-white of tungsten lighting.

The engine power domes are frosted clear and lack the color of the originals. When I first plugged in the power, the right motor spun at only about 25% of the left one. Bu t, after running for a minute or so, eventually came up to speed with the left side and now rotates at the same rate.

Overall, I would say that this is one is definitely above average compared to others I've seen posted on the internet over the past several months. Any perceptible flaws are minor ones, the most noticeable being with the saucer grids. All of the lighting works, and there is no structural or cosmetic damage. It is _very_ solid. No nacelle sag will ever be a problem with this one.

So, I guess I'll keep it. 

By the way, this one is an LE version #295 of 1250.


----------



## jbond (Aug 29, 2002)

Mine just arrived and seems to be operating perfectly...weathering very subtle, grid lines noticeable but not annoyingly so (I haven't bothered to check every one to see if they line up). The beacon/bubble above the shuttlebay is pale green, thought it was supposed to be white...eh, who'm I kiddin'? It's gorgeous!! I'm keeping it unless something goes seriously wrong with the lights in the next 48 hours...


----------



## CessnaDriver (Apr 27, 2005)

Captain April said:


> What're the chances of MR selling the factory defect ones for cheap?



check ebay for seller "ajcollecting"

All rejects are sold by that seller.


----------



## CessnaDriver (Apr 27, 2005)

Close up pics appreciated folks.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Well, I've had the chance to go over mine with a fine toothed comb and I am still quite pleased. My gridlines could be a little more even in density (lighter overall would have been nice) but they are very straight and aligned on center for all major details. I, too, have the small gap above the impulse engine. A little putty could fix that easily. The only light leak is a minor one -- around the white light above the hangar doors. 

But I have found what I believe is an actual error in the model. It may be that I have a couple of small parts missing, but I've noticed the same problem in some of the other photos folks have posted.










Is this detail the same on everyone else's model? If not, I'll need to contact the Master Replicas folks for the missing parts. The area around the hangar doors seems a little too deep as well. Perhaps they meant to have a couple of pieces of curved recessed trim with a protruding block at the bottom to fill the gaps. If they just missed this detail it should be pretty easy to fix. Don Matthys is probably already pouring resin as we speak...

*TrekAce:* You said the engine domes lack the color of the originals. Were they actually tinted amber, as I have heard elsewhere? What is your opinion of the effect when the domes are lit and running?

M.


----------



## CessnaDriver (Apr 27, 2005)

Good catch!

Mine is the same.

I checked my Smithsonian pics and sure enough MR got it wrong.


----------



## Atemylunch (Jan 16, 2006)

Same problem here. I even checked it against the 66" E. 
Kind of an obvious thing to miss.


----------



## TOS Maniac (Jun 26, 2006)

MGagen said:


> But I have found what I believe is an actual error in the model. It may be that I have a couple of small parts missing, but I've noticed the same problem in some of the other photos folks have posted.
> Is this detail the same on everyone else's model? If not, I'll need to contact the Master Replicas folks for the missing parts. The area around the hangar doors seems a little too deep as well. Perhaps they meant to have a couple of pieces of curved recessed trim with a protruding block at the bottom to fill the gaps. If they just missed this detail it should be pretty easy to fix. Don Matthys is probably already pouring resin as we speak...
> 
> M.


well I'm damned! I didnt notice that, either! good eye, MGAGEN!


----------



## TOS Maniac (Jun 26, 2006)

OK! Here goes:
I took delivery yesterday of the big E and I can only say it's a thing of beauty. On close inspection, I found no light leaks, other than the standard shuttlebay control booth leak. no biggie. no blemishes or cracks/chips.etc. the grid lines .... are overpronounced, but I must say, whoever did them gets an "A" for the job. not one crooked or mismet line, and the intensity, though too strong, is even. I will spend this coming weekend paint matching, then I'll mask off and mist it, using just enough to lighten, not erase, the lines. Wish me luck! also, does anyone agree with me that the deflector dish is just a tad too large? just a bit? I've already repainted it metallic gold, and tonight i'll accentuate it with some darker copper paint. i'll share the results.
the nacelles are awesome, of course.
also.....where's the engine noise? mine's almost totally silent!
overall, a fine piece of workmanship, virtually perfect. A+
For more pics, go to 
http://s152.photobucket.com/albums/s167/richc764/


----------



## Matt houston (Mar 31, 2005)

Mine looks okay from the back...


----------



## CessnaDriver (Apr 27, 2005)

WTF??

Swell. 

At least it is fixable.


----------



## Atemylunch (Jan 16, 2006)

Well, looks like I've got a collectors item. LOL


----------



## CessnaDriver (Apr 27, 2005)

What number and edition are all these?

With and without the problem. 

Maybe we can learn more about it.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Matt houston said:


> Mine looks okay from the back...


 Matt,

Did you fix it or is this the way it came?

Mine (with the apparently missing pieces) is Limited Edition #205 of 1250.

M.


----------



## James B. Elliott (Jan 29, 2001)

Looks like TOS Maniac has the same "gaps" in the shuttle bay area.








​


----------



## schmidtjv (Apr 7, 2004)

Mine is missing that detail as well. LE #42.

John


----------



## CessnaDriver (Apr 27, 2005)

Uh oh, I think that good one is an Unobtainium.

No wait, I take it back.

The unobtainium did not have lit hanger lights no?

BUt the MR has a green window in the back. I dont see that.

That one is an unobtainium isnt it???


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

CessnaDriver said:


> That one (Matt Houston's) is an unobtainium isnt it???


Yes, it is.


----------



## Matt houston (Mar 31, 2005)

*Yes it is!!!*



Carson Dyle said:


> Yes, it is.


I was just waiting to see who could figure it out first!!!



















Matt


----------



## TOS Maniac (Jun 26, 2006)

has anyone else noticed that you can sit this baby down on a tabletop and it's so well balanced that it sits on it's own? sweet!


----------



## Atemylunch (Jan 16, 2006)

The prototype pics on the MR website have the same gaps. 
Can't help but wonder how that got overlooked.


----------



## CessnaDriver (Apr 27, 2005)

Perhaps an ease of assembly issue or a computer aided drafting screw up?

Only MR would know. 

Gotta get a paint match for this ship. A thick strip of styrene fits in there nicely.


----------



## Atemylunch (Jan 16, 2006)

I'm going to leave mine alone. Most people will never notice the problem. 
I like the way Jim Key did his, the sections in question were cast as a separate piece. Avoiding the problem altogether. Looks like they did the entire secondary hull to the shuttlebay(in two parts, less grebbles). The shuttledoor w/base inserted after. So whoever designed the model, assumed those areas would be filled in. Which the Chinese contractor didn't follow through. Or it was a place they could cut costs.


----------



## jbond (Aug 29, 2002)

It's a weird, and quite noticeable error--I'm still keeping mine and I don't think I'll do anything to modify it. I spent so much for this I'd like my wife to get some sellback value out of it once I kick it...


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

If you don't want to alter it permanently, I believe two friction fit parts could be created to slide into the gap. A seam would be visible, but at least it could be removed. For those who want to permanently fix it, the same parts could be puttied and sanded in.

I took careful measurements of the area today and will be drafting up a plan for the pieces. I'll post them here and folks can do with them what they will. I wouldn't even take it amiss if some "enterprising" GK manufacturer used the plan to make accurizing parts...

M.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

MGagen said:


> I I took careful measurements of the area today and will be drafting up a plan for the pieces. I'll post them here and folks can do with them what they will.


That is greatly appreciated.


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

MGagen said:


> If you don't want to alter it permanently, I believe two friction fit parts could be created to slide into the gap. A seam would be visible, but at least it could be removed. For those who want to permanently fix it, the same parts could be puttied and sanded in.
> 
> I took careful measurements of the area today and will be drafting up a plan for the pieces. I'll post them here and folks can do with them what they will. I wouldn't even take it amiss if some "enterprising" GK manufacturer used the plan to make accurizing parts...
> 
> M.


Thanks a ton MGagen!:thumbsup:


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

Has anyone come up with a paint match?


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

I didn't get it drafted yet and business is going to keep me from getting to it for about a week now. I can say I've determined that the back wall around the hangar doors is a little shallower than the original model. They seem to have placed it at the axis point of the hemispherical door sections, not a little further forward as in the 11 footer. It is also not truly flat, but more of a bevel. I suspect that they intended for each "plug" that fills in the gap at the bottom to be attached to a flat, curved piece that arches upward to form the flat bulkhead. That's how I'll be drafting the pieces. 

M.


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

No hurry. We all understand real life taking over when necessary.
Have a great week and thanks for the info/analysis.

Has anybody gotten a colour match?


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

Chuck_P.R. said:


> Has anybody gotten a colour match?


Ooops. Meant to ask, "Has anybody gotten a color match?"

I was watching a Madonna interview in the background and I must have channeled her faux British pretensions without realizing it. :lol:


...either that or I just misstyped.


----------



## TOS Maniac (Jun 26, 2006)

a few beauty shots. note the deflector dish. how does the paint job look?


----------



## Treadwell (Aug 22, 2002)

Thought I'd share my retro pic:


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

Those're nice. Thanks for sharin' the pics, fellas.


----------



## robiwon (Oct 20, 2006)

Treadwell, I like the black line running thru the pic. Makes for a very authentic screen grab.


----------



## TOS Maniac (Jun 26, 2006)

well all i know is i LOVES MY ENTERPRISE!! I LOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOVE IT! do you hear me? I LOVE IT!


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

Regardless, Chuck, you need to take any beef elsewhere to email or PM. That's doubly so if it originated elsewhere. 

Any more continuation of this issue between you and *James B. Elliott* on your part will get you a Time Out. Same goes w/him continuing this issue with you. I don't think I can get any more clear than that.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Just reading all that put me into a hissy fit! :freak:


----------



## 1711rob (Mar 15, 2006)

CessnaDriver said:


> "AJCollecting" sells MR returned material on<a href="http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-1751-2978-71/1?AID=5463217&PID=1606754&mpre=http%3A//www.ebay.com"> eBay!</a>. We are not sure exactly how it works, conjecture that it may be MR itself unloading rejects.
> 
> I recognized the one I returned when it went up for auction.


Well guess i'll find out about the AJCollecting when mine from ebay comes in this week,it may not be BRAND new and may not be perfect BUT it was easier on the budget hey i'm not that picky, besides it is THE ship of ships.
:thumbsup:


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

OK Re-opening this thread at the request of a couple of folks. 

I don't want any more of the same back-and-forth between folks for whatever reason that was going on a bit earlier in this thread. Anyone who continues _any aspect of that publicly_ gets a 7 Day Time Out. 

Got a problem with it? Take it to PM or email.


----------



## 1711rob (Mar 15, 2006)

*S W E E T*



1711rob said:


> Well guess i'll find out about the AJCollecting when mine from<a href="http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-1751-2978-71/1?AID=5463217&PID=1606754&mpre=http%3A//www.ebay.com"> eBay!</a> comes in this week,it may not be BRAND new and may not be perfect BUT it was easier on the budget hey i'm not that picky, besides it is THE ship of ships.
> :thumbsup:


WOW. I AM NOW IN HEAVEN........just got my Mr 1701 in and hooked up...
this is the one i got from ajcollecting from ebay........i think i got lucky...
the only thing wrong is there is no deflector dish but other than that EVERYTHING WORKS GREAT and bot does it look sweet all the pics on the net does no do it justice til you see it. WOW just got to figure out how to get a deflector dish on it..... can't type anymore i'm still in awe !! :wave:


----------



## TOS Maniac (Jun 26, 2006)

rob, i'm relieved to hear that you got a good one! the deflector dish shouldnt be too much of a problem to replicate, and i've heard rumors that there may be an aftermarket metal dish being produced by someone out there! anyone got an extra dish for him? ;-)
welcome to the club!


----------



## 1711rob (Mar 15, 2006)

Needless to say i'm working on a major photobucket update as we speak,I heard or read a similar rumor about the deflector dish. OOH BTW over the weekend i will be putting some spare parts together as well as some leftover decals mostly pl350's and some pl1000's i am needing to clean out some stuff,will post a list on a new thread,just to make anyone aware that might need or is looking for something,btw thanks professor coffee for the spare PL350 part


----------



## 1711rob (Mar 15, 2006)

*pics*

Just a couple of pics


















Photobucket updated with 1 vid and pics + 2 subfolders
http://s77.photobucket.com/albums/j54/1711rob/


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

Excellent news, Rob! Glad to hear it. Hope you find a replacement dish, too!


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

1711rob said:


> . . . thanks professor coffee for the spare PL350 part


Not a prob, Rob!

If you get a chance to take some orthographic shots of the ship (straight from the sides, top, bottom, etc.) that would be very cool. I like the detailing job MR did on it. It'd be nice to have some close-up reference shots. :thumbsup:


----------



## 1711rob (Mar 15, 2006)

PerfesserCoffee said:


> Not a prob, Rob!
> 
> If you get a chance to take some orthographic shots of the ship (straight from the sides, top, bottom, etc.) that would be very cool. I like the detailing job MR did on it. It'd be nice to have some close-up reference shots. :thumbsup:



Hope this helps with the camera i have dont think i can get any closer without getting blurry.

http://s77.photobucket.com/albums/j54/1711rob/MR%20TREK%20Detail%20pics/

:thumbsup:


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Those're great! Thanks! :wave:


----------



## 1711rob (Mar 15, 2006)

*Replacement Deflector Dish*

Got a Replacement Deflector Dish Coming !! can't wait till it's here then she'll be perfect !! here's a shot of the dish that's coming

http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j54/1711rob/MR TREK Detail pics/Dishsized.jpg

Here's a shot of it next to the stock dish 

http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j54/1711rob/MR TREK Detail pics/dishcomp.jpg :thumbsup:


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

^That looks great. Is this a commercially available aftermarket part (yet), or something you commisioned?


----------



## 1711rob (Mar 15, 2006)

Found a member on the RPF thats making them as an upgrade.since that was what i was missing it was perfect. i can get you his info i think he's starting to work on the preorders, $49 shipped. pm if wanted


----------



## James B. Elliott (Jan 29, 2001)

As of 11:11am PST on 9-May-07 and 46 votes, the poll (Rate the MR TOS Enterprise on a scale of one (worst) to ten (best)) results are 8.3±0.3 / 10; grade = B.

As of 11:11m PST on 9-May-07 there have been confirmed 40 models kept and confirmed 11 models returned: a 21.57 percent return rate. All data based solely on reports from the MR forum (see links above).


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

This is an interesting poll.

However, having studied what is required to do accurate polling under Susan Howell at the University of New Orleans; I believe members need to consider what is an important point.

To approach being statistically representative of all customers the poll should include about 800 more participants.


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

Please note: I am aware that James is not claiming that the poll is statistically representative of MR's customers.

It isn't his fault that the poll is not reflective.

For those who may be interested in the subject of polling another reason such polls cannot be said to be indicative of an accurate poll is that they require an action by the participants.

One of the most notoriously errored polls that showed the problem with this was the second Hite Report on Female Sexuality.

It was a poll that required women to mail back responses.

When another telephone poll was taken of the same total group of participants(even those who didn't mail in their responses during the first poll), the results were completely and utterly different.

As it turns out, polls that require people to take an action tremendously skew the results and cannot be said to be a representative sample.

Again, this is not James' fault. 

But it's important to remember that for these two major reasons and others I could go into; these numbers are nothing more then an interesting curiosity and cannot be considered to approach an accurate sample of MR's customers..


----------



## James B. Elliott (Jan 29, 2001)

Great PR Chuck. But you're stating the obvious. Everyone already knows that. By they way, how much is MR paying you? 

Can you show us better numbers?


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

Oh goody, I never get tired of this slice of "who cares"...


In other news...Statistics prove that 50.1% of people are in the majority...
:wave:


----------



## mikephys (Mar 16, 2005)

Wow, that was different...completely and utterly! :freak:


----------



## TOS Maniac (Jun 26, 2006)

FLASH! THIS JUST IN! Polls show the majority of Earth's inhabitatnts to regard the sky as "blue" in cloudless daytime conditions.

Anyone have any other pertinent, timely data to post?

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

James B. Elliott said:


> Great PR Chuck. But you're stating the obvious. Everyone already knows that. By they way, how much is MR paying you?


You admit these polls are meaningless, yet you keep quoting them and ask me for my motives. Fair enough.

Personally I don't know what is obvious or not obvious.

I won't make that assumption.

If everything I have said is on it's face obvious, I'm confused as to why you ask me "how much MR" is paying me?

It's obvious that you don't mean to falsely infer anything negative, yet MR is paying me to point that out?

Actually, MR is not paying me anything.

I will not insult you as you do me, by asking you a reverse variation of that question.

But since you breached the subject I feel compelled to explain.

I majored in both History and political science.

Like most political science majors, once I learned enough about how politics really work I grew to hate politics.

One of my biggest pet peeves was and is Politicians using polls to make inferences that cannot trully be substantiated.

Politicians love to make statements that seem bold or to be taking a stand, yet if you pay close enough attention to what is actually being said you will realize that most politicians are saying absolutely nothing.

Politicians' always leave themselves a way out in case they are called on the facts that surround what they appear to be infering.

When caught they invariably say things like "you are stating the obvious." And that was not what they meant. Which begs the question why most politicians ever bother to open their mouths at all.

That's why polls that might seem to imply something, when in fact they are not representative enough to imply anything at all, are something I like to point out when I see them.

Not that any of those reasons such polls bother me is at all your fault.
No one should imply any of this from my statement.

But since you questioned my scruples, I felt honor bound to answer.

I am not implying you have the same scruples as does the average Politician.

I am in no way calling you a Politician.

I would never imply hidden negative messages and insult politicians like that.


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

Assuming you have no further questions I will consider the matter closed.
Have a great week! :wave:


----------



## toyroy (Jul 17, 2005)

James B. Elliott said:


> ...As of 11:11m PST on 9-May-07 there have been confirmed 40 models kept and confirmed 11 models returned: a 21.57 percent return rate. All data based solely on reports from the MR forum...


The returns are not surprising- given the high price, and high expectations. The real measure of the product's success is only counted _after_ the adjustments to returns are made. Is there any follow-up data regarding satisfaction with warranty replacements, or other adjustments?


----------



## scotthm (Apr 6, 2007)

James B. Elliott said:


> As of 11:11am PST on 9-May-07 and 46 votes, the poll (Rate the MR TOS Enterprise on a scale of one (worst) to ten (best)) results are 8.3±0.3 / 10; grade = B.


I voted in that poll, and gave mine an 8/10, but that score doesn't reflect my satisfaction with the replica very well.

I deducted one point for accuracy, due to the gaps on the rear end on either side of the shuttle bay doors and a couple of misplaced windows on the B/C deck, and I deducted one point for workmanship, which on mine was very good but not perfect. (It actually was very good and I almost didn't deduct for this at all, but the pencil lines were just a _little_ too variable to get a 10 from me.)

However, my MR Enterprise is a very satisfying collectible and I don't regret buying it for a minute.

---------------


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

I guess the best poll is the one made by that person to themselves.

Do I like it or not?

Am I happy with my purchase?

Is it what I expected?

Do I feel complete? Meaning, no need to continue searching for the best representation of the TOS. I have found it.




Hey, what do I know? I need to see one in person before I'll buy it. Most of what I have read here is helpfull, but I need to find one in a shop first.


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

toyroy said:


> The returns are not surprising- given the high price, and high expectations. The real measure of the product's success is only counted _after_ the adjustments to returns are made. Is there any follow-up data regarding satisfaction with warranty replacements, or other adjustments?


This was a poll created by a customer on their forum.
MR has allowed it but just like AMT, Ertl, and countless other companies I don't see them giving us such hard numbers. 

Polar Lights was the most open about relating with their customers, and they too refused to release information about returns etc.

Another big issue, 

aside from such polls having hundreds apon hundreds less respondants then needed to appoach accuracy...

aside from the fact that they require an action to participate which skews the sample...

aside from the fact that not all customers use the forum...

aside from the fact that not everyone who belongs to forums contribute to posting in them on any - muchless this - issue...


... aside from all of those issues one of the biggest problems is that in polls requiring a respondant to participate there is always a higher percentage of negative responses.

Also, the idea that over 20% of the people returned the product, yet the TOS E still had an approval average of above 80%?

The idea that the TOS E's approval rating is higher then the percentage of people who kept the product is about as queer as a 3 dollar bill.

The only way this could begin to make sense is if the alleged "return rate" is not a "return rate" at all, but instead cases where people exchanged a damaged, defective, or unsatisfactory unit and got a satisfactory one in exchange.

Otherwise the approval rate could not possible be higher then the "return rate." 

Methinks I hear someone grinding an axe in the distance...


----------



## Chuck_P.R. (Jun 8, 2003)

starmanmm said:


> I guess the best poll is the one made by that person to themselves.
> 
> Do I like it or not?
> 
> ...


I agree with everything you've said.

I will say though that you shouldn't worry too much about buying one.

A couple of people here have gone through two damaged or unsatisfactory units but I only know of one person who was not satified by what MR does.

They will send you up to 3 working, undamaged units.

If you get three such functioning units and are unsatisfied because of something like weathering, the quality of the paintjob, etc, anything to do with the quality of the workmanship then they will then refund your money.

These things aren't perfect, there is slight gap near the impulse engine on mine and a hairwidth line of paint that got to far up and slightly onto the hangerbay beacon's lower edge, 

but aside from that I love it.

Nothing produced by man is going to be perfect, but three working, functional, non-broken examples before refunding your money should be enough to let you know whether or not you think their TOS E is worth keeping.


_n.b. You don't have to accept three before getting a refund. They let you return the first one and get a refund if you aren't satisfied. The reason the three returns came up is that a member here complained that MR told him he would only get to see three working units and had to make up his mind on the third working sample or take a refund. Maybe the guy thought if he kept returning them he'd eventually get something that in his own mind was perfect._


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

Good to know. :thumbsup:


----------



## Daylinj (Apr 21, 2007)

I took my E to an automotive paint shop and had them color match the paint for me. After the crowd of workers their disipated after oogleing at the site of this model, the tech made an accurate computer match of paint for me to take home. Now I can touch up on the chips my model came with. 
However I am almost ambitous to fix the couple flaws in the original MR design. 
1) the forward top saucer beacon light should never have been lit, 
2) the three most forward windows on the front of the saucer do not match centre with the centre grid line, 
3) the windows below the bridge are lined up (all on the same line) whereas the first and last window should sink down abit about an 1/16th to an 1/8th of an inch. 
Any other window or lighting corrections I am missing??????
Has anyone tried to remove some of the original paint to see if there is a light source behind it. I want to know before I start removing the paint to replace the forward windows.


----------



## razorwyre1 (Jan 28, 2004)

after scrimping and saving for months mine came in yesterday. i am thrilled with it. 
i was pleasantly surprised by how fast it got to me, it arrived only 2 days after ordering it via dhl ground service. (less than 48 hours total transit time!) 
theres some minor flaws, however overall for a mass produced item the workmanship and finish is fantastic. (the impulse engine fit issue seems to have been addressed.) 
if this is an example of master replicas product and service, this wont be my last purchase from them.


----------



## 1711rob (Mar 15, 2006)

I as well did not find alot of things to pick about including the impulse engine,thrilled is 
correct,i don't even mind the nacelle motor noise,i run it daily.it may have been a return that i got from ebay guess i got lucky. MR even came through with a deflector dish plus i'm still waiting on the brass upgrade dish i ordered. Please ? you bet.


----------



## TOS Maniac (Jun 26, 2006)

Hey Razorwyre! welcome to the club!
Rob- can you post the link to whoever is selling those brass dishes? I'd love to have one! It'd be the cherry on top.
I've had my E now for about 3 months and I can tell you not a day goes by that I don't admire and love it. and you want to know the weird thing? I actually prefer to view it unlit. It's less distracting. crazy, huh?


----------



## 1711rob (Mar 15, 2006)

email sent to you


----------



## aridas sofia (Feb 3, 2004)

I've returned mine. 

The crooked -- and unfixable -- deflector was the main reason. That thing seems as if it is solidly locked to the very frame of the model, and there was no straightening it short of cutting it off and bending its post. 

The hangar defect, a poor paint job on the upper saucer, and a few other things were just nagging issues that I could have lived with. But the dish was the straw that broke the camel's back.

Now I'm in the market for one of the defective models -- at a much better price than $1200. I'll do what has to be done to a $500 or $600 ship, but I'll be darned if I'm going to do that to a $1200 three foot model.


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

If it turns out that the defective model has problems with the spinning engine light effects, that would be a good candidate for conversion to a pilot version ship.


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

I think I may wait for that kit to come out.

At least the mistakes will largely be my own.


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

> I think I may wait for that kit to come out.
> 
> At least the mistakes will largely be my own.


Ok, I'm lost here... what kit (I'm assuming something to build) is coming out?


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

*AW Studios- 1/350 TOS Constitution*


----------



## trekman (Apr 2, 2007)

*replacement dish MR tos E*



1711rob said:


> Found a member on the RPF thats making them as an upgrade.since that was what i was missing it was perfect. i can get you his info i think he's starting to work on the preorders, $49 shipped. pm if wanted


I heard the replacement dish is metal. i WOULD LIKE ONE.


----------



## 1711rob (Mar 15, 2006)

It is Brass and i have no idea if they guy who made them is doing them anymore.


----------



## Vaderman (Nov 2, 2002)

I do not believe he is making anymore of them. When I talked to him he said they were a PITA to make. He can be contacted over at the RPF (Rylo).

Scott


----------



## TOS Maniac (Jun 26, 2006)

I'd have liked to have a metal dish as well, but I missed the boat. By the way, for all of you MR dissers out there, I've had mine for nine months now, and I never fail to admire it when I pass it. I light it up at least 4x per week, to keep the gears from freezing up, and I just love it. Best "extraneous expense" I've ever had. I like it even better, I think, when it's unlit. It's just..... the "E" in all her glory.


----------



## 1711rob (Mar 15, 2006)

TOS Maniac said:


> for all of you MR dissers out there, I never fail to admire it when I pass it. I just love it. Best "extraneous expense" I've ever had. I like it even better, I think, when it's unlit. It's just..... the "E" in all her glory.


AMEN Brother !! I light mine nightly leave it on till bedtime(hey why not) it's just a shame i can't put her and my PL350 w/TM's light kit side by side.almost running out of room in this 2 bedroom apartment. :wave: 

I've got a stock dish AND the Brass upgrade either one looks good


----------



## spockboy (Dec 19, 2007)

*Master Replicas Enterprise Paint Color*

Hey guys,
Has anyone figured out the best match for the color of the hull?
As I plan on never parting with it. I intend to fix the sad job they did on the weathering.
The model itself is beautiful, a few minor flaws but nothing a little putty can't fix, which is ANOTHER reason I need to find out the exact color used. I could try and match it up myself but if someone knows what color they used it would save me a lot of bother.
Any thoughts?


----------



## spockboy (Dec 19, 2007)

One more thing.
I seem to be having some problems with the electronics.
I turned it several times and the lights would go off at a certain point. When I lifted it off the stand the spring came off. When I put it back on the lights didn't work.
To add insult to injury, I pulled on the jack (the 1/4 inch jack at the top of the stand) to see if it was loose and it popped off!
Now I'm screwed!
Has anyone figured out how to make it work WITHOUT A STAND?
I heard some people bought some on EBAY without a stand.
If I have to HARD WIRE it I will.
ANY thoughts?


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

spockboy said:


> One more thing.
> I seem to be having some problems with the electronics.
> I turned it several times and the lights would go off at a certain point. When I lifted it off the stand the spring came off. When I put it back on the lights didn't work.
> To add insult to injury, I pulled on the jack (the 1/4 inch jack at the top of the stand) to see if it was loose and it popped off!
> ...


You should be able to take the old power jack into Radio Shack and get another one you could wire up to the power supply that came with the stand Paul. Here's one I found online at All Electronics that looks a lot like the ones I've seen that come from MR:
http://www.allelectronics.com/cgi-bin/item/SPH/190/1_4"#34;_PLASTIC_MONO_PLUG_.html

BTW... did you try calling MR about this ?


----------



## 1711rob (Mar 15, 2006)

Might try their web site i did when they sent me a dish ...there is a forum that their customer service read and answer.


http://masterreplicas.com/index.php


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

Trekkriffic said:


> You should be able to take the old power jack into Radio Shack and get another one you could wire up to the power supply that came with the stand Paul. Here's one I found online at All Electronics that looks a lot like the ones I've seen that come from MR:
> http://www.allelectronics.com/cgi-bin/item/SPH/190/1_4"#34;_PLASTIC_MONO_PLUG_.html
> 
> BTW... did you try calling MR about this ?


Jedi Dade over on Starship modeler suggests resetting the circuit breaker on the power supply or the fuse if it has one.


----------



## 1711rob (Mar 15, 2006)

Trekkriffic said:


> Jedi Dade over on Starship modeler suggests resetting the circuit breaker on the power supply or the fuse if it has one.


Looking at mine there does not appear to be a breker on the power supply or the inline fuse BUT with the power supply in your hand looking at the back side of it ( the side that plugs into the wall) there is a thumb switch that allows the ac prongs to be removed.and easily snapped back in place. Why? i have no idea.


----------



## Proper2 (Dec 8, 2010)

*Deflector Dish*



1711rob said:


> AMEN Brother !! I light mine nightly leave it on till bedtime(hey why not) it's just a shame i can't put her and my PL350 w/TM's light kit side by side.almost running out of room in this 2 bedroom apartment. :wave:
> 
> I've got a stock dish AND the Brass upgrade either one looks good


Hi rob, I'm new here. I purchased my MR E via Ebay recently. My MR Deflector Dish is crooked. Any chance I can purchase your stock one (if it's straight) if you're not using it? 

Please let me know. PM me if you want.

Thanks!


----------



## Proper2 (Dec 8, 2010)

All I hear is crickets.....


----------



## Tiberious (Nov 20, 2001)

I know in my case, I couldn't part with the spare as it's probably the most likely part to break....and then what? I hope yours isn't in too bad a way for your sake.

I recommend using that link provided above to MR's support. It's worth a shot.

Tib


----------



## Proper2 (Dec 8, 2010)

Tiberious said:


> I know in my case, I couldn't part with the spare as it's probably the most likely part to break....and then what? I hope yours isn't in too bad a way for your sake.
> 
> I recommend using that link provided above to MR's support. It's worth a shot.
> 
> Tib


Thanks. I already tried that website. It's now Factory Entertainment, having bought out MR a year or two ago. And they are useless as they have no spare parts whatsoever; so they say.


----------



## Proper2 (Dec 8, 2010)

spockboy said:


> Hey guys,
> Has anyone figured out the best match for the color of the hull?
> As I plan on never parting with it. I intend to fix the sad job they did on the weathering...


I rather like the weathering on my MR E. It's understated and allows one to see the model not the weathering. Anybody else have any issues with it? I think it beats the R2 decal sheet from pics I've seen of that application.


----------



## Tiberious (Nov 20, 2001)

I love my MR and find the paint to be dead-on IMO. I just wish I could trust the lighting/motors for the long haul, I rarely turn it on.

Tib


----------



## Proper2 (Dec 8, 2010)

Tiberious said:


> I love my MR and find the paint to be dead-on IMO. I just wish I could trust the lighting/motors for the long haul, I rarely turn it on.
> 
> Tib


Same here! I rarely turn it on and for only a few seconds. I keep mine under an acrylic display cover. I also cover it with a black cotton bed-sheet each morning before I leave for work in case my wife or kids open the blinds and let the blaring sun in to directly assault my big E. And I remember one time when I came home from work to find the motors and lights running under the sheet! Apparently the housekeepers had turned it on accidentally by hitting the switch to the little wireless remote that powers it on; the remote switch is very sensitive. Who knows how many hours that beastie had been running! I was livid! Ever since then, I hide the remote in my closet on housekeeper day!


----------



## jbond (Aug 29, 2002)

Mine has been in my garage, subject to temps above 100 degrees and down to the mid 30s on rare occasions, for the last five or six years and works fine.


----------



## Proper2 (Dec 8, 2010)

jbond said:


> Mine has been in my garage, subject to temps above 100 degrees and down to the mid 30s on rare occasions, for the last five or six years and works fine.


:freak: Bring that lady in the house with all her fineries! She deserves better.


----------

