152 replies to this topic

[laser]

I’m not very experienced with homemade's or xbow’s/tornado bows, However couldn’t you just cut down a longshot and add a stock attachment then someone can 3d print a crossbow foregrip and stock witch can then be attached (the grip with epoxy or something similar).

Edited by laser, 25 April 2016 - 05:41 AM.

[Kilomona]

Im not very experienced with homemade's or xbows/tornado bows, However couldnt you just cut down a longshot and add a stock attachment then someone can 3d print a crossbow foregrip and stock witch can then be attached (the grip with epoxy or something similar).

You could, but that's not the point of this thread.

[CaptainSlug]

Before I went on hiatus from Nerf entirely one thing I was considering doing was making a rifle stock duplicating router.

The upside is you don't have to do any scanning or printing. The downside is you personally have to have a blaster shell or a master of some kind on hand for duplication. Once setup you could make shell halves out of solid block pairs of wood, then the end customer could hollow out the interior to suit their needs (or a basic interior form could be provided).

 

This involves a much lower expense compared to large-format 3D printing.

Edited by CaptainSlug, 22 June 2016 - 06:27 PM.

[The2ndBluesBro]

Before I went on hiatus from Nerf entirely one thing I was considering doing was making a rifle stock duplicating router.

Do you know how much this would cost? And how does it work? 

[Maniacal Coyote]

That just have me a bad (and expensive) idea.
What if you ran something sturdier than wood through the router? McMaster has thick-assed sheets of polycarb, but they're hella expensive.
Or, could wood withstand the forces associated with NIC-grade internals?

[CaptainSlug]

Do you know how much this would cost? And how does it work? 

It's nothing more than a 1-to-1 scale 2-axis pantograph. The second axis is just linked rotation.

 

The off-sthe-shelf models are $1100, but they're not really that complicated to make and you could probably throw a nice one together for $500. You need a one-axis slide with a pivot to hold the router and a matching stylus to run over the master. You then need two sets of bearings and axles which are linked together at one end via sprockets and chain so that when you rotate the master your rotate the duplicate.

 

Every location where you run the stylus over the master results in the router carving the blank to match.

 

That just have me a bad (and expensive) idea.
What if you ran something sturdier than wood through the router? McMaster has thick-assed sheets of polycarb, but they're hella expensive.
Or, could wood withstand the forces associated with NIC-grade internals?

 

What a router can cut through depends on the quality of the router and the bits used.

And you would probably have an easier time using a router on a nice hardwood like maple, ash, cherry, etc.

[Maniacal Coyote]

Im not very experienced with homemade's or xbows/tornado bows, However couldnt you just cut down a longshot and add a stock attachment then someone can 3d print a crossbow foregrip and stock witch can then be attached (the grip with epoxy or something similar).

In other words, make a Long shot resemble an Xbow?
If I went with this approach, these are my suggestions:
1: The foregrip would have two halves that screwed together over the [I don't know wtf] under the bipod.
2: The stock would also be in two parts. These would be glued to the back of the Longshot where the current stock is.
3: Something similar to the Crossbow's original barrel would need to be glued up top, where the back of the carry handle attaches.
4: E-putty and/or Bondi would probably be used to smooth the joint up.

Of course, the Longshot's internals wouldn't be left stock. At the very least, upgrade the mainspring.
I'm visualizing something even more extreme: OMW reinforced internals, a 10kg spring, brass breech and barrel, and a paint-job reminiscent of the Micro-caliber Tech Target Eliminator.


This wouldn't really be a Crossbow replica, but it would be a salute to the NIC's founding blaster.

Edited by Maniacal Coyote, 22 June 2016 - 08:45 PM.

[The2ndBluesBro]

Every location where you run the stylus over the master results in the router carving the blank to match.

Oh, I get it. So it works like a key copier?

[CaptainSlug]

Oh, I get it. So it works like a key copier?

 

Yep, exact same concept with only the addition of a linked rotation axis.

[Meaker VI]

That just have me a bad (and expensive) idea.
What if you ran something sturdier than wood through the router? McMaster has thick-assed sheets of polycarb, but they're hella expensive.
Or, could wood withstand the forces associated with NIC-grade internals?

 

Polycarb is arguably less strong than 'wood'. Some species of wood, sure, but for full-size stuff like this, wood is actually really strong. Otherwise we'd be making more houses and furniture out of plastic instead of wood.

 

It's nothing more than a 1-to-1 scale 2-axis pantograph. The second axis is just linked rotation.

 

The off-sthe-shelf models are $1100, but they're not really that complicated to make and you could probably throw a nice one together for $500. You need a one-axis slide with a pivot to hold the router and a matching stylus to run over the master. You then need two sets of bearings and axles which are linked together at one end via sprockets and chain so that when you rotate the master your rotate the duplicate.

 

Every location where you run the stylus over the master results in the router carving the blank to match.

 

 

What a router can cut through depends on the quality of the router and the bits used.

And you would probably have an easier time using a router on a nice hardwood like maple, ash, cherry, etc.

 

Plastics are usually easier to machine than woods and usually work with regular wood bits. You're trading melting (and possibly splintering) for just splintering though.

 

Obligitory link to Woodgears' pantograph plans

[CaptainSlug]

 

Plastics are usually easier to machine than woods and usually work with regular wood bits. You're trading melting (and possibly splintering) for just splintering though.

 

True for most things, but not good to assume for all tools or all plastics. The bite angle of a typical router bit is quite flat, and it doesn't play nicely with polycarbonate. I have my router setup for chamfering the edges of polycarbonate and when used for that purpose I make sure to ONLY MOVE THE PIECE I'M WORKING from opposite the direction of rotation of the bit. If I move with the bit it's more likely to get stuck and try to toss the piece I'm working on across the room. This might be less of an issue if I had a router with a higher spindle speed or a bit with more flutes.

 

Every plastic has different impact resistance and will have certain unwanted behaviors if cut with tools not intended to handle them.

Edited by CaptainSlug, 23 June 2016 - 03:22 PM.

[Silly]

I know this is now a pretty dead topic, but recently i came into ownership of a kenner crossbow and some resin casting books. I was wondering if anyone here knows a cost effective silicone mold making material? I watch peter brown, who does castings alot, but i cant find any silicone that is cheap enough to use while keeping a detailed large cast.

[Meaker VI]

I know this is now a pretty dead topic, but recently i came into ownership of a kenner crossbow and some resin casting books. I was wondering if anyone here knows a cost effective silicone mold making material? I watch peter brown, who does castings alot, but i cant find any silicone that is cheap enough to use while keeping a detailed large cast.

 

I don't think any kind of resin casting is a cheap process. It's got a lower entry threshold than an injection mold, but you're still talking $hundreds. Dig through here for some good tips as well.

[Silly]

I don't think any kind of resin casting is a cheap process. It's got a lower entry threshold than an injection mold, but you're still talking $hundreds. Dig through here for some good tips as well.

Right now I'm just looking for silicone to make the mold. Then comes the resin/epoxy.

[Maniacal Coyote]

How about using Plaster of Paris to fill in the spaces that wouldn't be occupied by parts, then casting the shell in metal using greensand, and boring out the holes (and tapping them) afterwards? That could allow for stronger springs (e.g. #8-32) than the itty-bitty screws we know and love.

[Silly]

I am not capable of doing that kinda stuff because I'm only 13. Parents would scream that I'm gonna burn down the house.

[Spud Spudoni]

I am not capable of doing that kinda stuff because I'm only 13. Parents would scream that I'm gonna burn down the house.

Give it your best shot, but know that not only is resin and silicon (which any decent silicon will cost you 150+ for the amount you'll need) very pricey for a thirteen year old, it also requires a high level of skill to achieve a proper mold of the blaster. Notice that Peter Brown makes casts of full objects only. If you were to replicate his process, you'd make a resin crossbow replica, barring everything worked, but it would be a solid mold which wouldn't allow you to put internals inside the mold so keep that in mind. Maybe this is a project for you to do in the future, but definitely get an idea ready and plan the whole thing out before hand if you truly plan on attempting this.

[Silly]

Well currently my plan is to take a shell, fill all holes, make the casting, then carve out the necessary space. I have made small castings using epoxy already, and I have a makerspace near me if I decide I need help.

[Maniacal Coyote]

Well currently my plan is to take a shell, fill all holes, make the casting, then carve out the necessary space. I have made small castings using epoxy already, and I have a makerspace near me if I decide I need help.

Don't you mean resin?
If you can work with resin, how about you try casting the shells of the Tech Target Eliminator? It'd be a cheaper way to test your processes, and give you a dope-ass shell, too.

Maybe this is a project for you to do in the future, but definitely get an idea ready and plan the whole thing out before hand if you truly plan on attempting this.

Yeah, it's a good idea to have a binder full of plans.
I too have plans, but I lack two important materials for this project: a forge and a '95 Xbow. Everybody I've tried to get an Xbow from has asked for enough money to buy my Physics 1A textbook again.

Edited by Maniacal Coyote, 02 December 2016 - 11:46 AM.

[ToadBrews]

Glad somebody else had necro'd this so I can post. I'm just gonna put on my crazy hat for a moment here....

 

 

Has anyone considered contacting the companies and seeing if the original crossbow/tornado molds are extant and if we could just....buy them? Or rent them?

[Spud Spudoni]

 

 

Has anyone considered contacting the companies and seeing if the original crossbow/tornado molds are extant and if we could just....buy them? Or rent them?

No, you actually necro'd this thread.

 

Companies don't just rent out their intellectual property to consumers. If they were to sell

(that's if they still had these molds) the original design to a consumer, it'd have to be for good reason, and very expensive. No company does that to avoid tarnishing their brand.

[ToadBrews]

No, you actually necro'd this thread.

 

Companies don't just rent out their intellectual property to consumers. If they were to sell

(that's if they still had these molds) the original design to a consumer, it'd have to be for good reason, and very expensive. No company does that to avoid tarnishing their brand.

Companies contract out their intellectual property all the time. I don't know about toys, but it's standard practice in the entertainment industry. Most of the time it is very expensive, yes, but I would imagine that production molds for discontinued toys would be much less valuable than, EG, the film rights to the X-men. If spending fifty thousand dollars to reverse engineer the molds is up for discussion, who not discuss spending a similar amount to try and use the originals?

 

I wasn't saying that some random person should just take the initiative to call up and say "Hey I'm Dave can I give you $200 to use your old factory for an hour?" but more along the lines of "Hello, I represent a newly formed LLC that is interested in acquiring licensing and production rights to one of your discontinued product lines, would you be interested in looking at our business plan and discussing the disposition of any tooling or molds you may still have in inventory?"

 

Sorry if this comes off adversarial, I'm just trying to elaborate on my thought processes.

[Maniacal Coyote]

Toadbrews, that sounds like a good idea. A very good idea. For theoretical purposes, let's name it Foam Revolution LLC. If Foam Revolution purchased all rights to old blasters, minus the stickers, we could make minor changes and pre-mod them!

[Meaker VI]

Companies contract out their intellectual property all the time. I don't know about toys, but it's standard practice in the entertainment industry. Most of the time it is very expensive, yes, but I would imagine that production molds for discontinued toys would be much less valuable than, EG, the film rights to the X-men. If spending fifty thousand dollars to reverse engineer the molds is up for discussion, who not discuss spending a similar amount to try and use the originals?

 

I highly doubt that decades-old molds are just kicking around in inventory somewhere. Many of these companies likely never directly possessed the molds as well; Chinese manufacturing was a thing then as now and it's likely a Chinese manufacturer built and operated the tooling. Once the orders for the product stopped coming, the tooling was most likely recycled.

 

It may be possible to recommission the tooling from old files that Hasbro or some autonomous manufacturing company holds; but that's also pretty unlikely as you'd need to get someone who knew what and where they were and then who could update them to modern formats.

[charlie156]

 

I highly doubt that decades-old molds are just kicking around in inventory somewhere. Many of these companies likely never directly possessed the molds as well; Chinese manufacturing was a thing then as now and it's likely a Chinese manufacturer built and operated the tooling. Once the orders for the product stopped coming, the tooling was most likely recycled.

 

It may be possible to recommission the tooling from old files that Hasbro or some autonomous manufacturing company holds; but that's also pretty unlikely as you'd need to get someone who knew what and where they were and then who could update them to modern formats.

You must all remember that the 1995 KENNER nerf crossbow was NOT a hasbro patent. It was a Kenner patent, which was a branch company of Tonka which was a subcompany of hasbro. Not only would hasbro/"nerf" NOT have the design files of an over 2 decade, but the blaster itself was manufactured IN mexico, not china so similar to what meaker said, its unlikely the files or molds would still exists. That's also one of the reason why replicating this blaster wouldn't cause any legal issues, the issues are simply cost efficiency and actual strength of shell after production.