Kriegsmarine 1930s Maybauer u-boat badge

[paul w]

Hello guys,could you take a look at this badge please.I like the look of this badge,it has the Maybauer logo and typical hardware on the back but I'm not sure of the die characteristics on the front.I've not seen many badges by this maker so I could do with some opinions on originality,many thanks,

Paul

[paul w]

Back.

[paul w]

MM.

[paul w]

Pin and hinge.

[paul w]

Catch.

[Gordon Williamson]

The hardware and maker mark look convincing but I have never seen these heavy striations (which are a must for original Walter Schott badges) on a Meybauer. There are also several differences in die characteristics from known genuine Meybauers the most obvious of which is the cross in the centre of the crown. On Meybauers the horizontal crossbar should sit visibly above centre whereas this one seems to be just about bang in the middle.

[paul w]

Thanks for the reply Gordon,the front of the badge was causing some concern and the back looked kind of 'machined' so I think I'll pass on this one.Anyone out there with an original they'ed like to part with drop me a line,all the best,

Paul

[Gordon Williamson]

Paul,

Like I said, don't be put off by these striations or machining marks on the back when you are looking at a Schott badge. Good ( in fact essential) to find these on a Schott.

For a Schott smooth back is bad, machined is good. For a Meybauer machined is bad, smooth is good.

If the Meybauer had a machined back with perfect die characteristics on the front, a case could be made for it just being poorly finished, but adding the coarsely machined back with front die characteristics that don't match known originals is, for me, a death sentence on this one.

[paul w]

Cheers again Gordon,while we're on the subject of striations,does this Schott look ok to you?

[paul w]

Back.

[paul w]

MM

[John Burchell]

I was pleased to see Paul W.'s WW1 Meybauer U-Boot badge in this thread, as I have been meaning to post mine for opinions, as well, so now seems to be an appropriate time.

With consideration to the points kindly mentioned by Gordon W., I am encouraged by the fact that my badge has a smoothly finished reverse. The "fish tail" pin on mine is slightly shorter than that shown by Paul, but the hinge assembly appears to be the same, as does the Meybauer crest.

With respect to the die characteristics of known genuine Meybauers, specifically the cross in the centre of the crown referenced by Gordon, I have measured the position of the horizontal cross bar on my badge and find that it does sit higher, ie. the top portion being 1.4mm and the lower portion being 1.8mm.

Your opinion and comments on my badge would be greatly appreciated, Gordon and others. Thanks in advance.

John

[Gordon Williamson]

Cheers again Gordon,while we're on the subject of striations,does this Schott look ok to you?

Could do with sharper images but I like what I see. The pin looks wider and flatter than the norm, but this is a known nd accepted pin variant for Schott.

The maker mark, which none of the fakes have got quite right yet, is spot on. Note the first letter "W" and how the first stroke of the letter is very wide. Exactly right, compare the mark with one of mine below.

[Gordon Williamson]

I was pleased to see Paul W.'s WW1 Meybauer U-Boot badge in this thread, as I have been meaning to post mine for opinions, as well, so now seems to be an appropriate time.

With consideration to the points kindly mentioned by Gordon W., I am encouraged by the fact that my badge has a smoothly finished reverse. The "fish tail" pin on mine is slightly shorter than that shown by Paul, but the hinge assembly appears to be the same, as does the Meybauer crest.

With respect to the die characteristics of known genuine Meybauers, specifically the cross in the centre of the crown referenced by Gordon, I have measured the position of the horizontal cross bar on my badge and find that it does sit higher, ie. the top portion being 1.4mm and the lower portion being 1.8mm.

Your opinion and comments on my badge would be greatly appreciated, Gordon and others. Thanks in advance.

John

John,

Comparing yours with images I have of a 100% original piece that Michel owns, I see several small but definite obverse differences in die characteristics with yours, mostly around the crown and the ribbon which lies along the top of the wreath.

I believe Michel has been at Kassel, hopefully when he gets back he will see this and give an opinion comparing with the real thing "in hand" rather than images as I am doing, but I'd have to say that the differences could't be explained away by camera angles etc.

[paul w]

Thanks Gordon for the comments on the Schott badge,I've had it a while and am glad its a good 'un.There are a few other characteristics in the maker mark that match as well which is pleasing.Cheers,

Paul

[John Burchell]

Gordon, thank you for the quick response which is appreciated. As a further judgement and as you have suggested, I shall await possible further comments from Michel.

Edited November 28, 2006 by John Burchell

[Michel]

Hello John,

I have never seen an U-Boot KA with deep striations, and yours is definitively not the same than mine.

Now, it is always delicate to give a definitive opinion (fake), but except the pin many things seems to be different of mine.

Regards,

Michel

[John Burchell]

Merci, Michel. I appreciate your responding, but I feel that you have my badge mistaken with the one shown by Paul W. above, whereas mine is shown in posting #12. Mine does not have the striations, rather it has a smoothly-finished reverse. Gordon W. mentioned concerns he had with obverse differences. Perhaps you would kindly comment on that, as well, and perhaps show the obverse of your badge. I will post another set of pictures here for your further review, please.

Regards, John

Edited November 23, 2006 by John Burchell

[Michel]

Hello John,

Exact, between the two badges I done a mistake, holidays will be welcome...

More pictures are welcome to have a better opinion.

Regards,

Michel

[John Burchell]

Merci, Michel. Please have a look at the pictures immediately above in my posting (#18), and these posted here below. Thank you for your opinion and comments. John

[Gordon Williamson]

Here is a shot of an original Meybauer. Compare the areas ringed. Whilst the other one is close, the differences are definitely there and not just due to the angle of the photo etc.

[John Burchell]

Gordon, thanks very much for your comments and for posting the obverse picture of an original, period Meybauer indicating the variances, which are now clear to me. I have been anxiously trying to get some knowledgeable and experienced opinion on my badge since I acquired it about one year ago, hoping it to be an original. I am sure that you can understand my trepidation.

This discussion will prove valuable to other forum members and collectors over the course of time, to be sure. In that vein and to settle my concern, I would pose one final question for your consideration and response please, before I consign this one to the realm of fake/reproduction badges.

Since I understand that these badges continued to be made after the Imperial period and early 1920s, on into the 1930s & early 1940s, is there any chance that the subtle differences noted with respect to my badge could possibly be pre-1945 variations?

Edited November 28, 2006 by John Burchell

[Gordon Williamson]

John,

With high volume production stuff there is always the possibility of dies being replaced/repaired/reworked etc. With a "between the wars" Imperial U-Boat Badge, already made by several manufacturers, I think the demand would have been low enough that the thought of different variants within one firm has to be pretty remote.

For me, the type shown here ( its actually the obverse of Michel's example) is the only Meybauer I would personally accept as good.

[John Burchell]

Understood. That makes good sense and I would have to agree. Thank you, once again.

Edited November 28, 2006 by John Burchell