Long_M CholM

[bnz. 42]

What is your opinion about this shield? (Please make No comparisons to "short_M" version, we are talking straight long_m here)

http://www.reichsbunker.com/bnz.asp?o0C=EJ

[pantherv]

.....

Lovely shield......A good one IMO

Peter

[Pascal H.]

I have no problems with this shield.
IMO a rare original of variant with the long "M".

KR
Pascal

Ps. nice site

[Gene]

Details are way too soft for a known original; a nice copy IMO

[pantherv]

......

Details are way too soft for a known original; a nice copy IMO

Gene....What original are you comparing it with?

Peter

[Gene]

The two that I have

[pantherv]

The two that I have

But you're comparing your normal 'M' type to this one...almost certainly a different maker ???

Peter

[Gene]

Doesn't matter, it's construction of these shields is what I'm talking about. These details are not sharp and crisp like you NEED to find on the Cholmschild, which is reknowned for having razor sharp details. Two of mine are here, listed as "G. Collection": http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/camp...escription.htm

[pantherv]

......

Gene using that logic, if the fakers produced a Cholm Shield with Razor Sharp details, you'd accept that as original??

In your opinion....how many firms made this shield ?

Peter

[Gene]

If I encountered a shield with razor sharp detail I would subject it to the same scrutiny as any other piece. I don't know how many makers there were; I had three Cholmschilds and all had these same characteristics. All I can say is that if the presented shield appeals to you, swell. It is not one that I would have in my collection.

[pantherv]

.....

There was certainly more than one firm producing the Cholm shield so you'd expect to see more than one type. ie: another firm producing there own style of shield. The only shield that stands up to any scrutiny is the type shown on this thread.

The styles between the two types are different enough, then what shield did the Long 'M' copy....certainly not the normal 'M' type.

Below is a copy of the Long 'M' type. It's the shield that started this thread that stood model for this fake.

Peter.

[bnz. 42]

I've made some research on "Long-M" Cholm shields and here is what I found out:

1. For certainty, "Long-M" variant did exist before 1945. Here is a link to a vet-buy with two "Long-M" Cholms:

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...=232985&page=3

Here is a close-up image of one of these "vet-find" shields that he posted in another thread:

[bnz. 42]

Pretty much all "Long-M" Cholm shields that reside in our collections exhibit same characteristics: rough surface and no "razor-sharp" details. I found interesting that almost all of them have the same flaw on the right swaz wing. On the picture below I combined six "Long-M" Cholm shields.
1. is mine (that started this thread)
2. belongs to a member Pitomnik and his shield has been accepted as original:
http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=214741
3. belongs to Mike H and his shield has also been accepted as original:
http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...ad.php?t=53157
5. is from Detlev Niemanns catalogue:
http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...=157429&page=3
4. and 6. is one shield (accidentally included it twice) belongs to Pascal Huysmans:
http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=310251

They all have three prongs but metal that pongs made of differ (some have yellow prongs and some gray)

[bnz. 42]

One more Long-M shield with flaw (from Detlev).
http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=294830

It is hard to see this flaw because of the rust but I believe it has the same flaw.

[bnz. 42]

But there are also "Long-M" shields that have No flaw on the swaz:

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=281177

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=280482

Interesting that one of these shields were not accepted as original.