sdesember Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 (edited) A type II, variation vii, hopefully a good one (my first purchase) has worn out obverse side (not sure if natural or otherwise?), s/n not found either in the soviet-screwbacks.com or soviet-ordersforum. S/N is 776,898 (award batch range of 10/8/44 - according to Rick's list). Feedback on originality & info of s/n are so much appreciated. (PS: if larger/high-res.photos needed, will oblige later, must get chow NOW...) Some photos below: Edited March 9, 2009 by sdesember Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul R Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 The reverse looks funny to me... perhaps it is the lighting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedMaestro Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 I agree, the reverse does look a little strange. I don't actually have an ORS of this variation to compare, but below is a picture from Soviet-screwbacks.com. The serial number is not in the same style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdesember Posted March 9, 2009 Author Share Posted March 9, 2009 The reverse looks funny to me... perhaps it is the lighting?Yes, it does...on second look. That's just bad photography! Here's a new second look w/depth: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
censlenov Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 I have this variety in my collection at home i'll take a photo of it tonight to compare. I don't want to say anything yet as i'd just be working from memory.CheersChris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdesember Posted March 9, 2009 Author Share Posted March 9, 2009 (edited) I agree, the reverse does look a little strange. I don't actually have an ORS of this variation to compare, but below is a picture from Soviet-screwbacks.com. The serial number is not in the same style.Do agree the seven in particular is not the same. I'd have thought they would all be the same (?) considering issued from the same year-awarding batch (?). The Monetny Dvor mint marking also is not as defined as the RedMaestro's example. Although, compared to the example here (http://www.soviet-awards.com/digest/redstar/RedStar3.htm), Figure 10, the mint markings, they look the same. Should I start panicking now...perhaps? Edited March 9, 2009 by sdesember Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdesember Posted March 9, 2009 Author Share Posted March 9, 2009 Here's the obverse: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdesember Posted March 9, 2009 Author Share Posted March 9, 2009 Close-up of the almost defaced CCCP (hopefully from natural wear, not someone's buffing-wheel):...the inscription:...another:last one: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferdinand Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 I can't see the last four pictures. If you want, you can upload them here on GMIC so you won't have to worry about expiring links and the like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdesember Posted March 10, 2009 Author Share Posted March 10, 2009 (edited) I can't see the last four pictures. If you want, you can upload them here on GMIC so you won't have to worry about expiring links and the like.ok, I was linking the images to my google's Picasa urls which obviously now expired...terribly sorry for the mess guys. Would not mind if the mod re-insert the following links to replace the above missing photos (post # 8, hopefully now they will show): Edited March 10, 2009 by sdesember Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdesember Posted March 10, 2009 Author Share Posted March 10, 2009 This is to replace post #4: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdesember Posted March 10, 2009 Author Share Posted March 10, 2009 (edited) ...for post #6 Edited March 10, 2009 by sdesember Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdesember Posted March 10, 2009 Author Share Posted March 10, 2009 ...for post #7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Garvy Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Here is #777803, a mere 905 numbers away from yours, for purposes of comparison. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Garvy Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Reverse. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdesember Posted March 10, 2009 Author Share Posted March 10, 2009 I'm on a tiny cell phone comparing the sevens & the eights, they look similar, don't they? Something 'bout the metal alloy of this batch that is softer and thus easily worn out than the other batches. Many thanks to Bill Garvy for posting your speciman, much appreciated! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfred Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 The Red Star looks okay to me, just bad pictures and a eavyly worn piece.regardsAndreas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdesember Posted March 11, 2009 Author Share Posted March 11, 2009 Thanks to all for the feedback! Glad to know it's a good one... now on the hunt for the face behind that s/n... 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