Luftschutz medal

[Ian Hulley]

Guys, there medals WERE cast.

Neither of mine show a single imperfection as the subject medal does, also the weight issue hasn't been properly addressed.

I don't wish to be seen pushing to prove someone else's medal is a fake and so will leave it at that. IF however I can be of assistance with detailed close-ups of my examples please feel free to ask

Cheers, Ian.

[VonPeter]

Guys, there medals WERE cast.

Not that poor, it looks like a bad cast job. And even if you accept that you still have the 134-ring and the material to consider. Everything can be explained by late war bad material and replaced ring, replaced ribbon etc but to me (anal, remember?) its to much red flags.

Again, this is my personal opinion and I have to say that these luft medals sometimes are hard to tell.

/peter

[SKAND]

This medal is not zinc, it is made in alu (or this is what I can understand from pictures...).

Antonio, but for alu it`s too heavy... Weight 28 gr. Size 39 mm, thickness 6 mm.
Perhaps zinc anyway...?

[Ian Hulley]

Good evening 'Skand'

Personally I work on the principal that the greater the number of excuses you have to make for an item the less the number of people you are fooling ..... at the end of the day you're fooling no-one but yourself.

These awards are not rare and if you have the option of sending it back personally I would do just that and wait for a textbook example ... this on only my opinion and there are a great many vastly more experienced collectors than myself. As someone with a limited budget and being nearly 50 years old I have to be a consensus collector on behalf of my daughters

Cheers and good luck. Ian.

[SKAND]

Good evening 'Skand'

Personally I work on the principal that the greater the number of excuses you have to make for an item the less the number of people you are fooling ..... at the end of the day you're fooling no-one but yourself.

These awards are not rare and if you have the option of sending it back personally I would do just that and wait for a textbook example ... this on only my opinion and there are a great many vastly more experienced collectors than myself. As someone with a limited budget and being nearly 50 years old I have to be a consensus collector on behalf of my daughters

Cheers and good luck. Ian.

Ian, I want to know the truth, and very grateful to everyone who gives his opinion!
Many thanks for your opinion too!
Alex.

[SKAND]

I inspected very thoroughly with a magnifying glass. Few places silver resolved and under it is clear zinc. Silver coating very good and thick on this medal. Quality real very good! See the attached photo. So medal can not be copy, this is a zinc variant.
Regarding Otto Klein ... if anyone has a similar medal, same design, please add photo for comparison.
It appears that the ring has always been on this medal and not replaced, no signs of use of tools, no marks, deformation, bending.
I tested ribbon with UV, so it's probably good. Firing test consisted too.

[VonPeter]

Are you sure that your "zinkspots" aren't dirtstains? There are dark spots on many places, look at the letters were dirt is often found.

The ribbon ring is easy to replace without leaving marks when it is a open ring (I know, I´ve done it myself).

The ribbon is not "probably good", it IS bad.

You ask for opinions but claims "So medal can not be copy" so this is my last reply. If you are comfortable with the medal then good for you. Congrats to your new medal.

/peter

[Seigfried]

The ribbon is not "probably good", it IS bad.

How do you know? You are the only person to dismiss the ribbon throughout the thread, despite the owner stating that it passed the UV and 'burn' test. Is it the colour, the weave, how can you tell without it in hand?

[VonPeter]

How do you know? You are the only person to dismiss the ribbon throughout the thread, despite the owner stating that it passed the UV and 'burn' test. Is it the colour, the weave, how can you tell without it in hand?

Weave.

[Tom Yanacek]

Good discussion, guys.

The medal that started this thread is a bit puzzling to me. I am not convinced that it is original, but I am not convinced that it is fake either. Based on the pictures, my first impression was that it looked like aluminum, but the weight alone eliminates that possibility. It is sometimes hard to differentiate between zinc and aluminum based on pictures alone, especially when we are looking at Feinzink, which is of much better quality than the later Kriegsmetall zinc alloys. So the medal in question appears to fall within the acceptable weight range of a zinc/zinc alloy type.

I tend to agree that the medal in question does seem to be a bit sub-par, quality-wise. But the tooling striations on the edges and the surface imperfections I see do not necessarily make it a fake IMO.

I am really wondering about that marked suspension ring. '134' would indicate production by Otto Klein of Hanau. Typically, they produced quality products and this medal seems to fall short of that IMO. Then again, it would be reasonable to think that some of their quality standards may have dwindled during wartime production. I am troubled about the marking because, as far as I know, Otto Klein has never been established as a known maker of Luftschutz Decorations. But does that mean that they didn't? No! It only means that no sure evidence has surfaced up to this point. And, as Peter mentioned, it is important to remember how easily a split suspension ring can be removed from one medal and stuck on another. Part of the problem too, I think, is that collectors have never studied these more common medals enough over the years and therefore much evidence may have been over-looked. I for one can say that, until more recently, I never made a zealous effort to look for maker markings on the suspension rings of the more common items. Iron Crosses, Luftwaffe badges, etc. have been intensively studied, not so much these lesser medals.

And that is why I feel these discussions involving the more common medals are great.

Best regards,
Tom

[Tom Yanacek]

Ribbon is still a modern fake/replacement.

As far as the ribbon issue is concerned, I agree 100% with Peter on this. Here is my explanation:

Third Reich ribbons were woven using a simple/basic weave. They used an alternating under/over weave of the length-wise threads (known as warps) and the width-wise threads (known as wefts). The edges of the ribbon loop around to form a non-fraying edge called a selvage. Original ribbons will have very visible looped ends, giving the edges a scalloped look. (See diagram & picture below.)

The majority of modern ribbons use an interlocking whip-stitch that reinforces the selvage by locking up the looped ends and therefore the modern ribbons will lack the open loops and scalloped edges that are so evident on original period ribbons. So, in most cases, it is easy to tell an original ribbon from a modern one.

However, there are modern ribbons being made that use natural fibers and the proper basic weave that was used during the Third Reich Period. Obviously, those are the ones that we need to be more concerned about.

IMO, the ribbon in question is one of these modern types. It actually appears to have the proper weave pattern (as far as I can tell from the photos) and it also looks like it has open-looped/scalloped edges, characteristic of original ribbons. It passes the burn and ultraviolet tests too. A very convincing ribbon at first glance.

But there are two things that bother me about this ribbon:

1. This ribbon just looks "too new". The colors are too vibrant, the white is too white, and there is not even the most subtlest sign of age. Yes, some products can remain in remarkable condition over the years. But be extremely careful when 75 year old textiles and dyes magically look new.

But most importantly...

2. If you look at the edges of the ribbon in question you will see that it has white, looped ends. This means that the width-wise thread fibers (wefts) are white. For me this is a sure sign of modern production. Ribbons during the Third Reich were made to exacting standards. May I dare say that all original Luftschutz ribbons were woven using black wefts and will therefore have black looped edges? And I do not say that lightly. I have owned many Luftschutz Decorations; some in boxes, some in paper packets, some with unmounted, full-length ribbons, some with cut, unmounted ribbons, and most with brooch mounted ribbons. In addition, I have had them on parade medal bars and ribbon bars. Never have I seen an original Luftschutz Decoration ribbon with white wefts.

Best regards,
Tom

[Tom Yanacek]

You guys got me so interested in Luftschutz Medals that I went and dug out a few to add to the data pool.

Both of these are marked to Katz & Deyhle of Pforzheim (marked '60' on the suspension ring and a prolific manufacturer of Luftschutz decorations).

The one on the left is in aluminum while the one on the right is in Feinzink.

The aluminum example is 13.2 grams (without ribbon) and the Feinzink example is 26.0 grams (without ribbon).

[Tom Yanacek]

reverse:

Aluminum (left) and Feinzink (right):

[VonPeter]

I said I would not post anymore here since I have already given my opinion but since Tom took the time to post such long and informative posts I can explain how I could be so sure about the ribbon.

I didnt even reflect on the white thread since a quick look at the loops gave the ribbon away directly. Like you say, original ribbon dont both come up and go down the same way.



The other side that we have not seen, and dont need to, is most likely stiched as these fake ribbons normaly are.

/peter

[Ian Hulley]

To add to the ribbon discussion : personally unless it's a fixed ribbon (civil long service or Ostvolk for example) or they have an embroidered device (Police, Customs or SS long service) I don't really put too much weight by them when assessing a medal. They are easily split by the passage of time and the ravages of time, veteran's children and fussy collectors and most are readily available as old stock or passable replacements.

I thought the subject ribbon was a strange colour compared to all 3 of mine and now Tom's as well. In my opinion if Peter says a ribbon is fake I'd take his word for it.

My 3 ribbons ..



Cheers, Ian.