Avitas Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 Here is my Jucker Close Combat Clasp in Silver. Appears good to me but I would appreciate any opinions. Has quite a bit of dust/grime build up in crevices. Thanks,Pat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avitas Posted April 27, 2006 Author Share Posted April 27, 2006 Here is the back, with maker marks C.F. Juncker. (well known error on original items). Again, I think it's good but I have only been collecting for 4 years, so any advice is appreciated.Thanks, Pat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dond Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 I have my doubts about this one also. Again, better pics are required showing details, markings etc...Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul R Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 I have my doubts about this one also. Again, better pics are required showing details, markings etc...DonI am sorry Pat, I agree with Don. I have never seen that construction techinque used on ANY original. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan Arne S Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 I also have to argee witht he others here !Here is a original Juncker CCC in Silver . Jan Arne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan Arne S Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 Back of Juncker CCC . Jan Arne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Temple-West Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 I have my doubts about this one also. Again, better pics are required showing details, markings etc...DonI am sorry Pat, I agree with Don. I have never seen that construction techinque used on ANY original.I agree?. Better photos are needed. As far as judging the badge on ?construction techniques??? We have the hinge recess, solder covering up the catch area and the pin has been pushed through to the obverse, which would suggest, if this badge is original, a field repair has been made after the loss of the reverse setup, not that this badge was originally made this way?. I?ve come across far worse field repairs. As to the badge, the crimping for the backing plate looks good, the overall obverse detail is sharp, but the only way to be sure that it?s not a casting is to have those larger pictures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avitas Posted April 27, 2006 Author Share Posted April 27, 2006 Hi people, thanks for your ideas. here is a larger picture with lower jpg quality (I'm having trouble fitting a decent pic in 60K of space). Anybody know a good pic resoloution and size? Anyways, the maker's mark and most details do match the originals, I will try to get another pic of the back as well (I'm off to work soon) and it should be up in a day or two. Here is a larger pic of the front,Thanks,Pat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avitas Posted April 27, 2006 Author Share Posted April 27, 2006 Here is the back, I had a pic lying around that wasn't resized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avitas Posted May 15, 2006 Author Share Posted May 15, 2006 Hi again,I have some new, high quality scans for this CCC in Silver. It looks better detailed than my PAB and GAB's that were doubtful. Any opinions are appreciated.Pat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avitas Posted May 15, 2006 Author Share Posted May 15, 2006 the back with Juncker mm. The blob on the front is from when these replacement pins were soddered on afterwards. Perhaps early post-war souvenir made from leftover original plates and just had cheap pins added. Any opinion on this is welcome.Pat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avitas Posted May 15, 2006 Author Share Posted May 15, 2006 and the close-up of the Juncker mm, with correct anomalies of the "NCK" section. Any ideas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest WAR LORD Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 This is a copy. The definition is very poor. The pins are not corect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Hunter Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 Here is are some close ups of a good 'un. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Hunter Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 another view Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Hunter Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 next Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Hunter Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Hunter Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 next Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Hunter Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 next Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Hunter Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Hunter Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Hunter Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Hunter Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Hunter Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now