Phil Steele

I thought the image would not be of much use and that mark you have circled is in my opinion a scratch or mark on the surface of the shield. Its funny but when Peter pointed out that little die fault it becomes so obvious when you are looking for it and even though I have only looked at two flat headed type shields I have yet to see that fault whereas every round headed one that I have looked at has it. Amazing really. Those pics are a tad blurry but I can see by the spanner shaped area to the right of the shield that it is a Duemer but cant say which one of the two. I dont for a second believe those labels were put on at the time of manufacture. Phil

I have tried to enlarge the area in question but I am not good at this and can only enlarge it in paint. I cannot see the die fault in this flat headed design .and I have looked at about a dozen today with the die fault and it sticks out when you know what to look for. All the shields with the die fault were the round headed variety. Ok in anser to your questions. Yes I do believe these flat headed shields are Duemers. No idea which order they come in but my gut tells me they were a second run. Nothing I can say to back that though. No the shield is not mine but I can tell you on a PM where to get it if you want. As for the round wire flat wire debate..sorry my friend but I have no idea. I didnt even know round wire was used until I started studying up on the Krims with Webers book. Here is that enlargement but dont think it is much use. Phil

Forgot to mention I have magnified the flat head pic I just posted and I cannot see that die defect on that shield whereas I downloaded 4 round head eagles from various dealers and all have the die fault as small as it is. How the hell two dies could be made so identical I have no idea but I do believe these flat head eagles are from a different die. Is that what you guys are leaning towards? Phil

And just to make things a bit interesting the circled close up possible fault on shield #14 is in a different position to the fault identified originally by Peter. I know the pic is not the best but I will post another pic of a flat headed eagle and the round headed eagle with the round wire pins on Weitze's site. Phil

Geez you two have been at it whilst I was away. Now just to avoid confusion on my part are we agreeing that Duemer did in fact use two dies???? The first being the round head eagle and the second being the flat headed eagle. I will await comment on that before saying anything further. Phil

Well spotted Peter. So that makes the two pictured side x side in #18 identical and as such from the same die. I never doubted that as you can see the difference in the eagles head lies with deterioration of the fine detail and not the overall shape. Now the shield pictured on #14 with the flat head is different and from the photo shown I cannot see on that shield the die fault you pointed out Peter. I also had a look at the three pictured in Webers book under a loop and all three show the same die fault. So that confirms to me now that the shields shown in Webers book are all Duemer and all from the same die. It would appear the measuring process must have been out or it has been misprinted because there simply could not be that much difference in size. However, in respect to the shield shown in picture #14 I am still dubious as to that shield being a Duemer. Or if it is then from the same die as the others. If you look at all the shields posted with the die fault that Peter found they all have rounded heads to some degree. The shield on #14 is dead flat. I have two theories here. 1. The shield is not a Deumer. 2. The shield is a second die made by Duemer. If you look at all the round headed eagles the detail is quite bold on the ones made from stamped brass then look at the zinc ones which obviously come later and you can see deterioration in the detail probably due to die wear. My theory is that the second die was made because the first wore out and that zinc flat head eagle pictured in #14 is the result. Only a theory and in truth I am leaning to No. 1. Tim I will see what I can do about posting pics and will scan the websites later (got to go to work now) but dont expect much as I dont have the means to do anything fancy nor the knowledge how. Also my Duemer that arrived has the die fault This is good stuff....... KR Phil

Oh yeah. Thanks for that info about where the Deumer ownership came from. I kinda figured that was what it was and fully accepted.

To be honest I dont really pay a lot of attention to weights and measurements. I have a very good set of scales (ex police for drug use) but as said some shields have steel back plates others have zinc and of the course the metal used in the shield itself will alter weights a tad here and there. You are correct in that I used the dimensions as listed in Webers book. No idea how he came about them but I would assume if you are going to the trouble of penning a book about a particular shield you would have means to measure and weight them but who knows maybe he was supplied these dimensions by various sources. I agree with you 100% that precis measurement taking is a painstaking proceedure and to be honest Tim I wouldnt be at all concerned over point so and so of a mm or even 1mm difference but when two shields made supposedly by the same manufacturer (and I have no reason to doubt they were) then I can only assume different dies were used. No amount of deterioration on the part of the die would account for such a size variation. IMHO. I have collected badges with obvious signs of die wear and in that I mean softening of the detail and out right fuzziness for want of a better word. In some cases fine detail is completely gone when a die has been overused. The two T Rex Krims that I have are a good example. One has pretty good detail whilst the other is completely missing detail in some areas but both still measure pretty much the same in size. So Tim it is going to take a bit of convincing to win me over on the point of Deumer using the same die for all his Krims but in response to your point concerning the exact same detail on all Duemer's shields apart from the Eagles head being different then I cant help with that one. I have no idea how detail can match precisely on all but a very small portion of the shield and in this case the head. It certainly makes my logic of more than one die fall flat on its face but the size thing is still big with me. I do note however that the large Duemer shield the one that is 64mm wide has an eagle with a fairly flat head whilst the smaller Duemer 60.05mm has a more rounded head. From my experience with combat badges the hard detail of any given badge softens as the die is used and a completely worn out die would be devoid of fine detail altogether. This would account for there being no detail on the eagles head such as lack of eyes but would not account for a complete change to the shape of the eagles head. I guess Tim I am not helping at all just compounding the problem really. Surely there must be others out there who would share their thoughts. I would love to be proven wrong here. Phil:beer:

Really nice Krim that Tim and I look forward to your comments concerning the Orth connection...I too find it a bit unrealistic but we will see. Love the Demjansk Peter....really nice one. As I said to Tim I was going to spend this year attempting to put together a well represented collection of Krim Shields and related documents etc. Next year maybe I will search out treasures like that Demjansk. Nice find. Phil

Tim, My shield arrived today and I havent yet had much chance to look closely at it but it is magnetic with a lot of patina. The Eagles head is identical with the shield shown on pic #6. Cant give you exact sizes as I dont have anything to measure that accuratly. One thing that puzzles me and maybe you can shed some light on this........How do we know these shields shown are made by Deumer..... I can appreciate the Orth shields as some have a maker mark on the back the same as the Wurster shields but I have yet to see anybody shown me a Deumer MM on any of these shields so where did this info come from. Curious thats all. Back soon. Phil

Hi Tim, Great idea this especially for guys like me. I will try to add my twopence worth but dont know if I am going to be much use to you. What you say about die wear makes a lot of sense to me and could indeed account for some minor detail changes. However, I note in my edition of Webers book he lists three Krims and all three are different sizes. I am not going to go on weights as materials vary and of course these things have backing plates etc etc but I doubt if die wear would account for size variations. Webers first Deumer in my book 1.01 he lists as made from zinc with the round pins...width 62.05mm x 43.90mm. The second, that being 1.02 he says is the same but made from bronzed metal (bear in mind my edition is in German). My argument here is if this shield was from the same die and it certainly looks like it then how come it is width 64.00mm x 43.90mm. Same height but nearly 2mm wider is a bit of a difference. Then the third numbered 1.03 also made from zinc but with flat pins and very much looks like the shield you posted on #6 is width 60.05mm x 44.20mm. Thus the difference between the three is as much as 4mm in width (Shield 1.01 as opposed to shield 1.03) Thats a lot. With that in mind I can only assume that Deumer did in fact use different dies or am I completely off the rails with this. Mate I will most certainly continue with this but for now its bed time. So will continue this tomorrow. In the meantime here is a pic of the one I have on order. By the way I tried you suggestion re the scanner with dark cloth but no joy...will have to try a camera. Talk later and I am sure others will join in.

Hell of a nice collection there Tim...one day I hope to emulate. Thanks for sharing the picture Phil

Thanks for the tips Tim and I will certainly try that....as for the other would you believe collecting this stuff has already cost me one marriage. Yes I am not lying but what can I say..thank god for collecting TR items, best thing that has ever happened to me. Cheers Phil

Thankyou to you both for comments and that scanner of yours Pete really does a great job...will have to look into one. Mine will only focus on whatever is touching the glass. In otherwords the item must be flat like a piece of paper or photo. Maybe I should read the manual and see if I can adjust something or rather to do a better job. Cheers guys.

Just remembered I have managed to get hold of a Krim which Weber refers to as the Souval type. Only just ordered it but here are the pictures captured from the dealer (I hope they dont mind but I have paid for it). I was very pleased to find this beauty now all I have to do is somehow think of a way of hiding the credit card statement before the wife sees it but then I am sure all us collectors have had to do this on occasions. Here are the pics/

Hey Tim, Will do but I really must learn how to take such wonderful photos. You and Peter have it down pat. All the best mate.

Jus thought I would post a picture of my latest Krim Shield. After returning two reproduction Krims this marked JFS 42 is the first replacement to arrive with a second Deumer still en route. Unlike previous purchases this time I did my homework through the workings of Sascha Webers great book on the Krim shield and hopefully my efforts paid off. I cant fault it which is why I am posting it for others with more knowledge than me to adjudicate. Sorry about the quality of the pictures as I am using a scanner and no its not an epsom. Look forward to seeing a few responses. Phil Reverse

Never seen that before but I agree it looks ok. I had one some years back where the top of the mast near the swastika and the corresponding crossbars (I am not into Navy so dont know what they would be called) were very misformed and this was a genuine Schwerin badge. From this picture I cant say that the eagle looks like what I would expect on a Schwerin badge. Maybe the angle

Happy New Year to you as well Tim and thanks for that reply. Yes it does answer a couple of questions and you actually jumped ahead of me as I was going to ask about that Maedicke. Im not sure which issue of Webers book I have (it is hard backed and just over 140 pages. I do believe it is available now in English but at quite an expense. Even though I have the German version I can generally work out a few things and it is quite good as I have already identified several fakes for sale on a couple of respected dealers web sites so in essence the book is worth every cent. This year I intend trying to build up a good collection of Krims and Krim award documents with maybe the odd Kuban thrown in as this is my favourite shield. After searching a few web sites of late I have noticed there are quite a few T Rex type Krims about...they actually seem to be the most widespread at the moment. I have no doubt they are the real McCoy although if that Panzer backed Krim was my first and only example of this type then I would maybe think otherwise due to its rather new appearance but my other Heer backed one shows all the wear and tear of one that has been on a uniform. Take care my friend and I will post new additions as I get them. Phil

Hi guys, Just a bit further with this thread. After much searching through WAF I come across a thread saying the Krim shield I have posted with the dealers logo on it is identical to one which is called a T Rex or flat chested Krim. Is this correct or are my eyes playing tricks on me. I dont doubt the backing and paper are supplemented but I am trying to establish 100% if that shield itself is ok. If it is then I have two of them as the other shield posted with the group of four is identical except it is on heer cloth with the remains of black paper backing. The detail on the heer one is better than the one on the repro black backing but I put this down to the die wearing out but in essence they are one and the same. I have also gone over every shield listed in Webers book and whilst a few have similar features this shield does not feature there. Tim I think you know Weber or have spoken to him do you know why this shield is not in his book? Just trying to nail down a few loose ends that is all. Thanks guys.

Hi Tom, Bit late but just saw this thread...really nice group. I have the same style Demjansk shield document from a chap with the 7./A.R.30 with the same facsimile signature of the General and the same Oberleutnant signature. I would dare say he as an adjutant or something similar. Sorry cant make out the name though. Phil

Very nice grouping and I particularly like the Kubanschild..... Phil :cheers:

Thanks Peter for those words of advice and yes Tim and I have had a nice little chat on a PM so I am now a bit more up to speed on the current situation. Thats a very nice Krim and I think I will take your advice in regards to not concerning myself with colored backing cloths as that seems a recipe for disaster when you are just starting out. As I said I have Webers reference book on the Krim's and you guys to confer with so I think I will just settle back and buy a few Krim's and Kuban's as the funds dictate. As I have already said to Tim I will prior to purchasing in the future send you guys a PM seeking opinions as I am sure this forum (and this is not a criticism) frowns on people posting intended purchases prior to buying. Take care and all the best for the new year to you both and everyone else for that matter. Phil