sparkysx wrote:If these are repro, then why did the 'maker' who is obviously an expert at this according to the comments from Steve at UKG, make the mould identical? why make it different? if he had made an identical mould then I don't think these ever would of been discovered.
I think it's a relatively straightforward explanation: attention to detail. Even someone skilled at making molds may miss a detail or get it incorrect. Perhaps it was initially cut square and he meant to remove the corners to make it identical to the real deal and, quite simply, forgot to do so. It really could be that simple.
At the end of the day, it is the irregularities that identify fakes. If there were perfect fakes we would not know about them. I've seen some fakes that are amazing, simply made out of the wrong material so fail the old drop and float tests. But even if they had passed those tests there were other tiny, tiny details (far less obvious than these large square backs) that would have ID'd them as fake.
The real concern here is that this is so, so close. The overall chubiness and the square back give it away, but should the dick that had these made go back and invest in a new mold with these details changed then we would probably not know about it and the only tell would be the increase in availability and the drop in price of these blasters.