Show Your Imperial U-boat Badges

[ebony]

9 90th Light badge

Comparison with one from Detlev Niemann

[Don D.]

Thanks. I take it the one you are comparing it against is not a Meybauer?

[ebony]

10 90th Light badge

Artificial Light Meybauer UB

[ebony]

Thanks. I take it the one you are comparing it against is not a Meybauer?

I do not know who the maker of the comparison one is it has the same obverse details and the same measurments but a bit heavier in weight.

Might be an unmarked Meybauer but has a different pin so hard to say.

Same crown, sub & laurel leaves however

[ebony]

11 90th Light Badge

Natural Light Meybauer UB

[ebony]

12 90th Light Badge

[ebony]

Lucky last 13 90th Light Badge

[Don D.]

I do not know who the maker of the comparison one is it has the same obverse details and the same measurments but a bit heavier in weight.

Might be an unmarked Meybauer but has a different pin so hard to say.

Same crown, sub & laurel leaves however

Are you sure they are the same? Can you do a side by side of the fronts? And straight on, up and down.

[90th Light]

Are you sure they are the same? Can you do a side by side of the fronts? And straight on, up and down.

Hello Don,

when I hold both badges in hand they are the same on the obverse but I will get ebony to take some more pictures as you suggest side by side etc.

I have noticed this concern about soft detail gain more following recently but the challenge is that when they made a badge from solid nickel, brass, tombak they often used the lost wax as a proper method of the time. The key is the size and weight because this will always be consistant on originals. If one wants to see some classic lost wax period cast badges then have a look at an early nickel WW2 Juncker flak badge.

But I will post some more images because the other badge from Detlev has a place here too. It is quite unique an came with a photo of the German sailor wearing it.

Also here are some more meaurements of a WW1 Meybauer U-Boot

"Hi Chris,

were back from vacation,

Here are the details of my own sub badge:

Weight: 23,9 gramms

Height:46,77 mm

Width:47,81 mm

Regards

Carsten "


Regards, Chris

[Don D.]

I have noticed this concern about soft detail gain more following recently but the challenge is that when they made a badge from solid nickel, brass, tombak they often used the lost wax as a proper method of the time. The key is the size and weight because this will always be consistant on originals. If one wants to see some classic lost wax period cast badges then have a look at an early nickel WW2 Juncker flak badge.

Sorry but I don't believe Juncker ever cast a nickle steel badge. They are all die struck imo.

[Marc Garlasco]

"If one wants to see some classic lost wax period cast badges then have a look at an early nickel WW2 Juncker flak badge."


Well - that has piqued my interest! I admit we often see such badges with middling quality but WHY would they do wax castings of originals during the war? Why do you think this is the case in Flaks???

[90th Light]

"If one wants to see some classic lost wax period cast badges then have a look at an early nickel WW2 Juncker flak badge."


Well - that has piqued my interest! I admit we often see such badges with middling quality but WHY would they do wax castings of originals during the war? Why do you think this is the case in Flaks???

Hello Marc,

I have one here which a relative of mine brought back from North Africa which is a classic of when the metal set hard too fast during manufacture and hence the pock type marks on the reverse and soft detail on the front.

Quite happy to post some images of it to show what I mean but I await the ok from a moderator to add such a WW2 Flak badge to this WW1 U-Boat thread.

Chris

p.s. Marc, Carsten has also commented to me how one sometimes sees this cast type technique on original WW1 Meybauer pilot, observer, retired badges etc. I agree with him on this point and also respect very much his ability when it comes to picking good from bad in regard to one of those.

[Don D.]

Post it Chris. It adds to the thread.

[Tim B.]

Sorry to say but, my original concerns still remain. I do not like the abundance of pock marks on the reverse and the weak details overall on the obverse.

Again, I understand we tend to find tiny faults on these badges after blowing up PIC's to the point of looking into the crevices, but this isn't a case where we see a few marks here and there. The pock marks are everywhere and to me, indicative of a cast process. The front is the same, for me anyway. I could see maybe around the cutout areas and small detailed areas where they may have a rough looking finish when the PIC's are enlarged but, you have these rough looking surfaces all over the badge.

Completely different from the other Meybauer Tom posted a couple of pages back which is nicely detailed, shows no pitting and sharp, clearly defined details throughout.

Sorry Chris, I know this isn't what you want to hear but, that's my feeling on this one. It's your badge and if you feel comfortable with it, then I'm happy for you. Just make sure Carsten is willing to take it back anytime down the road if more comes to light on this one, that way you're protected.

I might also recommend you contact Gordon Williamson or post this one over on GMIC for more opinions. Maybe I'm wrong here. Know this, it is never my intent to sh1t on someone's badge or item posted, just to give an honest assessment.

Tim

[90th Light]

Tim I am some what surprised that a collector of your experience has made no mention what so ever about the

- size
- weight
- pin/ hinge / hook
- stamp

I think you should revist these in your analysis because we clearly appear to have

- Meybauer size
- Meybauer weight
- Meybauer pin/ hinge / hook
- Meybauer stamp which is stamped in not cast in and this is a very important point because it is the correct stamp for the time for that badge.

Now if you make a cast copy of any badge then these are the points which are basically impossible to get right and become the dead give aways of a reproduction.

so before I bring this up with Carsten and try to tell him that he has got it wrong could you please discuss these points and explain why they are correct.

I await your reply,

Chris

p.s. also have you looked at GEM606 in the "German Empire" section of the "emedals" site because this example has the same sort of pock marks on the reverse of that badge esp. around the top of the crown but is still retaining its nice guilded gold finish in the same tone as Tom's badge which you like.