genoa41

I remember these being discussed a few years back and Frank Heukemes being "on the fence" about them until he actually saw one then condemned it as fake. The was partly because of the strange base material (not being Zinc but some other alloy) and the final killing blow being that the hinge and hook were integral to the badge, not separately applied, in other words the entire thing was a cleverly done casting.

However, this example clearly IS Zinc, and has separately applied fittings (the hinge and hook are rusted so cannot be one-piece with the Zinc body of the badge.) so there must be more than one version of this badge in existence.

This one certainly has the look of age, but given the controversy around them, they certainly aren't unquestioned as a genuine variant.

Many thanks . For the present we remain in a state of uncertainty .

PS I have come across a type very clear

A wellknown English dealer is selling this ACB mm V. Wilhelm . Is this firm universally unquestionable as war time maker or still subject for discussion ?

Many thanks

Giorgio,

My tilt to Zimmerman was on the assumption that all 4 arms of the swaz were cutout. I am not sure looking at your image if it is 4 or 3. Still, even if it is 3, they might have not cutout the 4th (top) leg for support due to the new material.

No mater what it is a guess on this particular example.

There seems to be no reason, if I am reading your question correctly, that the same die could not be used for the tombak and zinc although the reverse setups would have to be different.

John

John

The badge is very intriguing .

The sw is not completely segmented but the deck gun remind Zimmermann .

IMO the possible attribution to a specific maker comes only from guesses ; we have not a definite interpretation .

As usual Gordon tackles the problem in a way very interesting, of course the findings comes from the premises . The chosen methodology detects the solution more probable .

Just now I don't see other way out

giorgio

Dear Gordon

I wellcome your explanations

The possible attributions shrink to one . However the employment of an existing die to produce zinc badges doesn't rule out Zimmermann . According to your book Zimmermann produced zinc badges (I have never seen a specimen).

But is possible to make use of the same die for two materials (bronze and zinc) ? The two materials have different metallurgic property . Was the technology of the time in working order to die indifferently the two materials ? If that's the case I don't explaine myself the reason why Mayer has replaced the dies.

I have not a ready answer

yours sincerely

giorgio

Hi Gordon

I am puzzled about this badge . F&B , Mayer , .... . Can you help me ?

many thanks

giorgio

Hi Gordon

I am puzzled about this badge . F&B , Mayer , .... . Can you help me ?

many thanks

giorgio

Yes, there are maker marked examples known by Boerger, and this unmarked one is a match.

Thanks so much for clearing up your point . I hope I am not trying your patience if I ask you to tell me where I could examine a marked badge in order to have at my disposal a well-grounded standard .

best regards

Nice original by Boerger & Co.

What you say sounds interesting .Actually I have never heard of Ubadges produced by B&Co. I wonder whether your attibution is due to the existence of mm badges or to the presence of details , as for instance , the head of the eagle , that are distintive of B&Co firm

All the best

I should like to hear your opinino on this badge , made in tombac , unmarked

many thanks

Opinions on this badge ?

many thanks

giorgio

This badge , tombac , fire gilding, looks like a K&Q type but the pin system is very uncommon for this maker . I am puzzled . Opinions ?

All the best

giorgio

Speaking of the hollow badges , I should like to hear your opinion about this badge

Many thanks

giorgio

I've seen this type openly offered as fake at shows in the UK, for around ?30.

The only hollow back types I would accept as original are the Hymmen type and the Zimmermann type.

Perfect . And the Schickle type showed at TH site sometime ago ?

Hi !

Very difficult to judge from these pics .

But I have to say I dont like that catch .

Jan Arne

Hi

the same badge solid back

giorgio

This type of badge in the pattern solid back is generally accepted as a wartime piece (detlev, weitze) . The pattern hollow back is uncommon . Can we recognised it original ?

regards

giorgio

the same pin setup

..

A guy offers me this badge . I would like to hear your opinion

Many thanks

giorgio

Could well be. Pity the swastika is censored as the area around the eagles claws is distinctive on Cave Creek pieces.

The badge without cover

regards

giorgio

I have come across this badge . Maybe another Cave Creek production

regards

giorgio

Hi Giorgio !

Badge looks like a F&B like Gordon said .

Could You do a better shot of the maker mark ?

Jan Arne

Hi Jan

Sorry . I have not the badge .

giorgio

Several things wrong with it but you need look no further than the eagle's head. Totally unlike any known original.

Many thanks . I agree , the badge looks like the fake helmet type

I woul like to hear your opinion on this badge

Many thanks

giorgio

Very strange. Looks like a Funcke & Bruninghaus. If it was unmarked I'd think it was Ok, but that mark looks strange. Is it "5" , which would be Wernstein?

The obverse looks like F&B segmented swastika (uncommon pattern) , the pin system is unusual for F&B. The number is a "4" .

Type 4 that appears in the S&L catalogue comes under the Schwerin category .

Along time back J. Arne has shown an UBoot badge . tombac, mm 4 on the pin ,similar in shape to the Juncker type .

I am really at a loss.

Last but not least some fixed points have recently been questioned : see the Deumer affair , not yet settled . That's the reason why , in this case, I don't feel I should give my opinion either favourable or adverse on the matter .

Many thanks for your advice

Best regards

giorgio

I am very uncertain about this badge . What do you think ?

All the best

giorgio