Thanks Stef, great pics!   

And thanks to both of you Alex and Stef for your input on the chest depression and also the sprue break!   

Seems we have just one feature that distinguishes the two families, the two bump patterns on the feet that only appear on family II (LL).

As for the sprue break, I think it's not a distinguishing feature. Maybe family II has it more often and mostly of larger sizes than family I but we've seen now quite a lot of family I figures that show this feature. Therefore I will remove it from my description.   

As for the depression on the chest ... I think you're right it's a casting error and not a mould characteristic but has anyone seen it on a family I figure yet? And is it a widespread feature on Ledy Squids? We have already heard of one figure (Steve's) that has no depression on the chest. Maybe we could include this feature in the description like this: "Family II often has a depression on the chest -family I has no depression on the chest. NOTE: This is not a mould characteristic but a casting error!" Or should I remove it too? :scratch:

Yes Patrick, just do like you said and put 'note' as it does appear so far to happen quite often on the LL Squids.

Stef gave me the permission to use his pics, so I can add the second bump pattern to the Squid Head sheet.   Thanks, Stef!

Also I will add the note to the chest depression feature and remove the sprue break pics. I will do the modifications asap.  

Just updated the Squid Head sheet  

That's the new pic:

Added this pic to the sheet to show the different bump pattern types better:

Thanks for the Prune Face contribution, Patrick.

The differences between mould families I and II are mostly reflecting (only) the degree of details (less or more pronounced). Might this be due to differences in the used plastic, so we are actually not looking at mould differences per se.

About the gun: agree.

A long time ago, some dude wrote:

RIFLE:
Prune Face came with a Western style V1 mould rifle. The mould is not unique for Ledy as it was also used by Kenner. The main difference is the colour of the used plastic: reddish brown (Lili Ledy) vs brown (Kenner).





REMARK: In TIG’s reference guide the V3 mould (see below) has been uniquely linked to Lili Ledy. This is wrong IMO, and should be updated.
EDIT: Confirmed by OZIO.

V3 mould rifle. Having mould circles on the opposite site compared to the V1 mould.
Source: http://www.imperialgunnery.com/theriflessection.htm

Dr Dengar wrote:

Thanks for the Prune Face contribution, Patrick.  

The differences between mould families I and II are mostly reflecting (only) the degree of details (less or more pronounced). Might this be due to differences in the used plastic, so we are actually not looking at mould differences per se.

About the gun: agree.
...

Hey Marco, I have to disagree with your appraisal. I really do think it's a mould difference. If you look close enough to the right legs you can see remnants of the COOs which were erased before production started. These COO remnants differ IMO. And when you compare Prune Face MOCs you will find two different factory codes HG and HN.

As for the rifles I have to admit that I didn't looked up your Prune Face entry in the Lili ledy Guide ... sorry .

But I think there is a small mistake. It's rifle V2 that is identical to V3.

pattejan wrote:

Hey Marco, I have to disagree with your appraisal. I really do think it's a mould difference. If you look close enough to the right legs you can see remnants of the COOs which were erased before production started. These COO remnants differ IMO. And when you compare Prune Face MOCs you will find two different factory codes HG and HN.

Just challenging the concept of having two mould families. Fair enough, two factory codes mean two different factories, and thus likely two different (pairs of) steel moulds. That makes sense.  

pattejan wrote:

As for the rifles I have to admit that I didn't looked up your Prune Face entry in the Lili ledy Guide ... sorry .

No worries, that's not what I implied, just posted the old quote to back up and support what you said about the rifles.

pattejan wrote:

But i think there is a small mistake. It's rifle V2 that is identical to V3.

Hmmm. looking at the entry on the main site, it is not all too clear.

http://www.imperialgunnery.com/riflessection.htm

Trying to summarize :

So we have V2 which seems to be V3 with only the EPMs facing the other side. Assuming these guns were oriented mirror wise they could be from the same steel mould.

And then we have V1. Which was also used by Ledy.  

Good work Patrick,

Might want to remove the eye colour bit, I have both eye colours and both appear to be from the same family.

Excellent work Patrick.

Thanks Alex and Clint, glad you like it!

Alex, are you really sure you have both eye colours on one family? Couldn't it be the case that the colour of the eyes has faded on one of your figs and therefore looks different? Which family is it? Could you please post pics or email them to me? I've found pics of 8 family I MOCs and the eyes of all the figures appear yellow. On the other hand I've found 5 family II MOCs and their eyes appear orange!? :scratch: However I've modified my remark concerning eye colours and changed the pic.

Marco, no offence taken and no offence intended!    I'm just trying to defend my observations. The family I MOCs (HG factory code) I found are 77 and 79 backs, the family II MOCs (HN factory code) are 77 backs and a 65 Back from Kenner Canada. I've also found pics of 4 Trilogos, the figs on that cards all have orange eyes but I can't see the leg colour nor the sculpt details because of the figures robe. Also Trilogos have no factory code on them, so I'm just guessing they're family II ones. But who knows if the eye colour maybe isn't a distinctive feature ... so the different factories must have produced Prune Face figures simultaneously and therefore must have had their own different steel moulds.

I've also added a comparison pic of the removed COO areas of the figures to show they are completely different which indicates they're from different steel moulds:



I remnants of "HONG KONG" - II larger remnants (probably of "MADE IN HONG KONG" IMO)


As for the rifle moulds I'm completely confused now!   It makes no sense to me that LL used both moulds unless they did not use both figure moulds ... but why should they do that???      

Here are my two Patrick, both from the same family with orange and yellow eye. I have had a look and I would not consider this to be discoloured.



Sorry that the [pics aren't great, the weather is beak out here this week

Thanks for your pics, Alex!  

I agree that it's two different colours within family I it seems and most likely not discoloured.

Prune Face link added, thank you Patrick for the sheet

New

Droid Factory R2-D2 - Special Report

Follow the link in the POTF & Other Chracters section on page 1

Nice to see that Palitoy R2 droids factory addition! (as well as everything else of course ) 
Very cool! 

cheers!

Thank you for sharing your great research, Patrick!

Well guys, I think it's time to revise the C-3PO removable limbs entry!  


I've found this COO on a C-3PO removable limbs figure, which is completely new to me. Maybe some of you might know it already but I have never seen it before. Here it is:




Some of you probably know that I think I've made a mistake on the C-3PO removable limbs sheet in the Mould Guide.  

I'm convinced there are three not just two Mould families for this figure. At first I mistakenly thought the large copyright No COO figure (new family III) is related to the large copyright HK figure (old family II) because of the similar (if not identical) mould features on these figures which differ from the traits of the small copyright family (old family I).

These are some pics of my old C-3PO removable limbs sheet (the traits of the new family III are the same as on family II):






But when I compared the COO areas again I saw that the No COO version is not derived from the HK one because those areas differ very much.

And I'm also convinced I've found a distinguishing feature between the old family II and new family III: The thickness of the figures' toes.



Although I would need confirmation from other collectors on that!  

Could you please check your family III figures (Ledy or Kenner) if the toes are always like they are on my figs? Thanks!


The new COO and the No COO figure match up regarding the COO area.

And therefore I'm even more sure it's a third family!

Here's a comparison pic:



In the upper row you can see the three different HK families and underneath the corresponding No COO versions.


Any thoughts on this?

Cheers
Patrick

P.S. Some of the pics aren't as clear as they could be but I think you can see what I wanted to say.

I had these out recently- noticed again the two different backpack nets. Will need to check for this third mould.