Jump to content

RUBBER E-11 Blaster: Hellhounds PHOTO REVIEW [vs. Hyperfirm & Praetorian]

Recommended Posts

If a picture paints 1,000 words then this photo review of @Hellhounds' rubber E-11 blaster will be an EU-expanse worth of information for any Trooper seeking a product comparable to the old Hyperfirms and the newer Praetorian blasters. The inspiration for this thread came from the fantastic comparison (thread) of a Hyperfirm (HFx) B-Grade rubber blaster verses that from Praetorian Blasters (PB), by @kman. In fact, the angles of my photographs are intended to replicate those used by kman, to provide the opportunity for close comparison of the three models. Essentially, these two threads should compliment each other.


The Hellhounds Props (HHP) E-11s (among other blasters) are new as of October, 2019, and are currently available from Daniel directly, as well as from @TK-4510 on Trooperbay. As I understand it, this purchase is from the first run of a dozen blasters, and thus far there appear to be no user photos of these Hellhounds rubber E-11s on FISD. Daniel from HHP currently has threads mentioning his E-11 product here and here.


Regarding Rubber Blasters

For those of you unaware, these "rubber" blasters are actually constructed of a combination of foam and rubber, and may have some form of armature (solid framework) serving as the skeleton. The benefits of rubber blasters are primarily weight, durability, and safety. These rubbers are heavier than standard Hasbro and Rubies conversions, as well as most resin builds—providing a slightly more realistic helf—while still remaining light enough for hours of trooping. Fully metal E-11s can start to feel really heavy really quickly. As you'll see below, the HHP weighed in at 35.03 oz, or 2.19 lbs. Rubber blasters are also less likely to break if dropped, and if a component does come off, it will likely just need to be re-adhered, rather than reconstructed (resin or plastic may have cracked or shattered). Finally, rubbers are safer when trooping in close proximity to children who may wander outside the line-of-sight of a Trooper with a bucket on. A swing and impact of a rubber E-11 is less likely to injure innocent bystanders. The most obvious disadvantage of rubber props is that they are generally not as detailed and refined as their resin counterparts, but advancements in molding techniques are changing that.


Now, to be clear, I am in no way associated with or being compensated by Hellhounds or any other blaster maker for this review; I am simply seeking to provide Troopers with data on a new product. Note, too, that throughout this post I will link to parts of the official FISD E-11 Blaster Reference thread, to provide additional insight and imagery. So, without further ado, open kman's thread below, split-screen your device, and feast your eyes on three types of rubber E-11s from this (US) side of the pond!




The Hellhounds Props (HHP) magazine appears to be closer in length to a Praetorian Blaster (PB), rather than the notoriously-shortened Hyperfirm (HFx). HHP appears to be just a hair shorter than PB, but I've also seen longer magazines on some images posted by Daniel on social media. Perhaps HHP magazine length is still being fine-tuned, but I may try to see if I can acquire a longer one. Additional, note that the HHP Hengstler counter includes the two soldering pins, while the PB and HFx do not. Finally, there is a HFx-quality seam on the HHP between the rail and top T-track, but the HHP T-tracks' quality and installation into the venting holes matches those of PB.






Immediately obvious from this view is that the HHP has a static (non-movable) aluminum D-ring installed, similar to that from PB, but the PB version is rubber cast directly to the end cap. This HHP is similar to HFx in that it does not have a faux recoil spring behind the charging handle and bolt, like that provided by PB. Notice a slight tinge of brass on the scope, and a pretty minimal and clean seam line on top (much like PB).






This is where further distinctions are easily identifiable between the three blasters. In general, the HHP has cleaner lines than a B-Grade HFx, but PB comes out on top with the crispest lines and no visible seams. One of the HHP front scews is excellently made (PB quality level), and the other is adequate. The front sight is also correctly thin, matching that of PB and differing from HFx's thick block, and the HHP barrel bore dept on the HHP is 0.5" (1.27 cm). Note that, with blaster in-hand, the tip of the HHP appears cleaner than this close-up photo presents. Macro photography tends to reveal blemishes which would otherwise be indistinguishable to the naked eye from normal real-life use distances.






As previously mentioned, the HHP includes an aluminum D-ring (woohoo level 3), while the PB included a molded rubber one, and HFx none at all. Once again, PB came out ahead with the most detailed knurling on the rear sight, followed by HHP, with HFx at the bottom of the pile. The rear end of the scope appears to be of similar quality on all three E-11s, and notice the more visible brass color on the rim of the scope (also present on the front, seen later).


49186321401_bb8f735a3c_o.jpg          49186359366_34bc52e54e_o.jpg




Stormtroopers and Femtroopers, I present to you, a METAL SCOPE RAIL, with open space underneath! You read that right. HHP finally provides us with an OT E-11 without a solid rubber rail, which was and still is the standard with HFx and PB. This was actually one of the two major factors in my decision to go with HHP (price was the other). Of course, doing so sacrifices the recoil spring and the clearing strip and extractor detail on the ejection port. Make note, too, that this HHP scope does not have the round knob on the right side.






An iconic angle of the E-11. The trigger guard appears to be of similar thickness to than on an HFx, which may be just a hair thicker than a PB. The guard feels very sturdy and I'd have no concerns holding my index finger on it during a long troop. The trigger itself is cut out in the same fashion as an HFx, with more open space below and behind it than that provided on a PB, and the HHP trigger feels a bit flexible, which leads me to believe it is cast in solid rubber. Additionally, aluminum appearance is present beneath the selector switch on the HHP, a detail left out by HFx but included by PB.






This perspective highlights the metal scope rail, though take note that the rail is thicker than it appears in this image (due to camera lighting). I spoke with HHP about the strength of the rail prior to purchasing, and Daniel assured me that it is solid—which I agree with. That scope isn't going anywhere, and I do not foresee any sag in the long-term. Notice the screw head on the underside of the rail, which secures the scope (a second is obscured from view by the counter). Additionally, this angle, once again, shows the magazine length, which is significantly longer than the HFx but perhaps just a hair shorter than the PB. And finally, two notes regarding the rear sight area. First, the horizontal retaining pin area has been molded as a recessed space on the HHP, as opposed to raised and textured (faux) pin on both the HFx and PB. Second, though not easily discernible in any of these images, there is a locking notch band at the end of the receiver tube on the HHP.






Another major differing point of this HHP blaster with PB (unsure of HFx), is that Hellhounds hollowed-out and split the arms of the folding stock. On the Praetorian the two arms are actually a solid piece molded with and surrounding the trigger guard. The second photo below shows this up-close. AWESOME! The only other distinguishing feature from this angle is the length of the magazine, and the already-discussed aluminum appearance beneath the selector switch.


49186510442_936b7e52f9_o.jpg          49185790333_d9711828fc_o.jpg




This angle shows several features which are missing from the HHP blaster but were included by PB and HFx. The ejector knob is missing on the HHP, as are some greeblies on the magazine which are present on the PB (but also not included on the shortened HFx mag). These omissions, and perhaps also some missing details on the front and rear of the power cylinders are perhaps the greatest shortcomings of this Hellhounds blaster. It's possible that the ejector knob fell off in-transit, so I will be reaching out to Daniel to inquire about a replacement/addition. On the plus side, the casting of the Hengstler counter appears very nice.






The images from this point on are all from new angles not included on kman's Hyperfirm vs. Praetorian thread. They are intended to highlight the fine detailing present on these Hellhounds blasters, and will so provide a better view of the of the differences in the three rubber E-11 blasters. These first two images provide alternate angles of the mag well area, showing the lack of the ejector knob. The two soldering pins on the Hengstler counter are also visible.


49185812133_884721fb84_o.jpg      49186305381_99312df95c_o.jpg



Notice the detailed inscriptions and oval inlay on the bottom of the magazine well, shown below. Very nice, as is the texture on the magazine itself.


49185785028_dd64b08344_o.jpg      49186286236_da3666d650_o.jpg



The two images below highlight the T-tracks, venting holes and folding stock. As previously mentioned, the T-tracks are smooth and straight. While I am not certain that the original Sterlings had such a texture on the stock metal, I definitely like the presence of the it as it adds to the weathering and could even be considered to be carbon scoring. "You boys have seen a lot of action..."


49185810298_be84445581_o.jpg      49186307191_8e1d52a30a_o.jpg



The image below shows a close-up profile view of the muzzle screw, front sight, flash guard, and folding stock butt. Notice that, in the same fashion implemented by HFx and PB, and clearly for the purpose of providing structural support, the front sight is not hollowed out on the HHP.





The two images below are intended to highlight the charging handle, ejection port and guard, and texture on the folding stock and grip. Note that, as already established, there is no recoil spring, clearing strip, and extractor on the HHP. However, the grip detail is fantastic. Additionally, other than the rubber trigger, the grip is the only other place on the blaster where flex can be found—on the smooth front and back. I suspect this may be intentional to provide comfort in-hand, and I like it.


49186301301_80c460764a_o.jpg      49185779553_f620790196_o.jpg



Below: End cap and D-ring from both sides. Also shows the end cap clip, scope rail, and rear sight again.


49186516682_1f3dea776b_o.jpg      49186484742_7dffe3a720_o.jpg



The textured and inscription details on the back of the scope can be seen on the photos below. While there is some brass weathering, a little more would be nice.


49186495177_b20dbc902e_o.jpg      49185792763_0d53de2f03_o.jpg



These two photos below highlight area around the front of the scope, showing the molded screws, metal rail, power cylinders, and the soldering pins on the Hengstler counter. Notice more brass color on the scope rim.


49185796523_7505712db9_o.jpg      49186490762_7507be5790_o.jpg




The HHP weighed in at 35.03 oz (2.19 lbs or 0.99 kilos), comfortable for long troops.




By my assessment, the Hellhounds Props blaster situates itself right between the HFx Hyperfirm line and the Praetorian blaster. Overall the mold/seam lines are of better quality and more minimal than those on Hyperfirms, and approach or in some cases match those of Praetorian. A few details are missing on the Hellhounds, such as the recoil spring, magazine ejection knob, and greeblies on the magazine and power cylinders, but conversely, HHP has included details not currently seen on OT blasters from Praetorian or Hyperfirm—a real metal scope rail and split arms on the folding stock! While this may not be the case forever, it is also worth noting that the Hellhounds E-11 is currently less costly than one from Praetorian. For me, this blaster was an EXCELLENT choice, and I would not hesitate purchasing from Hellhounds again.


And there we have it. Hopefully this photo review can serve, in conjunction with kman's thread, as a valuable guide for any Trooper in the US considering purchasing a rubber E-11. Perhaps in the future I'll have the pleasure of owning more rubber blasters (DLT-19!) and be able to create additional comparison guides. I'd be happy to serve as a weaponry photographer/reviewer Amazon Vine Program style here on FISD. ;)


In case any of you missed the link near the top of this post, here is the FISD's official E-11 Reference Guide:




Move along, move along...




Edited by MaskedVengeance
Optimization for Tapatalk and smaller monitors: white font color removed and images resized; typo errors corrected.
  • Like 3

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for putting this together, Caleb. :duim:


Your photos will help troopers to now compare 3 types of rubber blasters. I never had one of these in hands, but thanks to all the photos, I already know which I would go for, if I ever had to choose.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent job on this comparison review, Caleb.  Well done!!!!  :salute:

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in the process of my first build and am going for Centurion, any idea if these will make level 3? By reading the requirements it looks like it should. Any input? Thanks :)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, TK 213 said:

I am in the process of my first build and am going for Centurion, any idea if these will make level 3? By reading the requirements it looks like it should. Any input? Thanks :)

As per CRL, I would say these are okay for level 3.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, TK 213 said:

I am in the process of my first build and am going for Centurion, any idea if these will make level 3? By reading the requirements it looks like it should. Any input? Thanks 

As T-Jay (one of, if not the FISD's leading resident experts on E-11s) said, the @Hellhounds E-11 should be good to go for level 3. That is the conclusion I came to myself, based on my research, as I am also building towards level 3. Below is a link to what the ANH Stunt CRL has to say about E-11s. Click the blaster photo to be redirected to the 501st CRL page, at which you'll need to scroll down to the "Optional Accessories" section. Here is a link to the FISD E-11 Blaster Reference, which can also be found in T-Jay's forum signature.



  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, TK 213 said:

I am in the process of my first build and am going for Centurion, any idea if these will make level 3? By reading the requirements it looks like it should. Any input? Thanks :)


3 hours ago, T-Jay said:

As per CRL, I would say these are okay for level 3.

The Deployment Office concur:salute:

  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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


  • Create New...