Non-magnetic Cholm shield opinion

[Pitomnik]

This is - "hand-cut"& file trace.

[Pascal H.]

So what do you think this shield is made of?
It looks like there is are two different materials on top of each other.
Also, could this be die struck shield or more like a casting?

Kr
Pascal

[Pitomnik]

This - no casting.
I think, this shield was made "semi-factory" , may be via hot-stamping, but without "cut-press".

[Pascal H.]

This - no casting.
I think, this shield was made "semi-factory" , may be via hot-stamping, but without "cut-press".

Thanks Pitomnik.
I also thought that this couldn't be a casting.
I am not familiar with the hot stamping process so I can't tell. I just couldn't explain the excess material on the top right. Not something you would expect with a traditional die struck. The lack of material on the top left could indeed be the result of hand cutting and filing.

What would you say about the authenticity?
I have never seen a shield like this before.

Kr
Pascal

[Pitomnik]

Only version ...
1. If this war-time production - was made via "hand-made" in field work-shop, or any "home-worker" , who made matrix from original shield. (We was found In Stalingrad - Panzerkampfabzeichen "semi-factory" made).
2. Some one use original matrix (stamps), and all other parts was made "by hand".

[no1canuck]

Possible that it is a die trial part that was found later and finished personally. The quality of the shield is unquestionable and the evidence of hand work is obvious. Makes for a very interesting discussion and it is an item worth keeping in the collection. Once again I like it and it grabs my interest. Maybe because I have spent the last 38 years tool making and stamping!

Steve

[Pascal H.]

Thank you very much guys.

I think that I do know my way around the Campaign shields but I never came across a shield like this.
When my opinion was asked on this shield I replied that this shield was unlike the known magnetic shield and that this shield would always be reason for discussion. When I was later on in position to buy this shield, my interest to examine this shield in hand and the high level of detail (which I never seen before in a copy) was reason enough for me to buy this shield for a fair amount. It was very clear to me that this could well be a fake in which case I lost a reasonable amount of money. Not the first time this happened to me but at least I have prevented fellow collectors from buying fakes in the past.
After examining this shield in hand I am still very open minded about this shield and that is why I really appreciate your opinion on this shield.
Needles to mention that this shield now found a spot in my collection (without backing ofcourse).

Kr
Pascal

[Gene]

Might the shield be aluminum

[Pascal H.]

Might the shield be aluminum

That is a good suggestion Gene but I think the shield is too heavy to be aluminum.

Kr
Pascal

[Pascal H.]

The 2 layers on this shield reminded me of the type 1 Narvik shield. Some of these shields have also clearly a second layer.

On close examination of the rim these shields show also the same characteristics as the Cholm shield.

Kr
Pascal

[Thomas Durante]

Hi guys, very interesting shield Pascal. Your last picture of the side shows a sandwich of material, so possibly cupal?

Also, have you measured the dimensions of this shield versus typical steel wartime shields?

Remember, Staegemeir is making good fakes that copy every nook and cranny of an original badge or shield. So two shields can have all the same finite details, but still be a fake. The construction of the badge is where you can tell the differences (i.e., base metal, different finishes, different hardware setup, etc.).

His fakes aren't cast so they aren't like older cast fakes where they have smaller dimensions. On the contrary, his fakes tend to be bigger than originals, so that is a red flag we can look for here so curious to see what the dimenions are compared with an original shield.

Tom

[Pascal H.]

Hi guys, very interesting shield Pascal. Your last picture of the side shows a sandwich of material, so possibly cupal?

Also, have you measured the dimensions of this shield versus typical steel wartime shields?

Remember, Staegemeir is making good fakes that copy every nook and cranny of an original badge or shield. So two shields can have all the same finite details, but still be a fake. The construction of the badge is where you can tell the differences (i.e., base metal, different finishes, different hardware setup, etc.).

His fakes aren't cast so they aren't like older cast fakes where they have smaller dimensions. On the contrary, his fakes tend to be bigger than originals, so that is a red flag we can look for here so curious to see what the dimenions are compared with an original shield.

Tom

Thank Tom for your input.
I have measured an 100% original (magnetic) Cholm shield and compared it with the shield in this thread. The results are;

- Wartime original Width 39.60mm Length 64.95mm
- Shield in thread Width 38.60mm Length 64.30mm

So the length is as good as the same, definitely not bigger.
The width is smaller but this could be explained by the fact the the shield in this thread is slightly more convex than the measured wartime example.

Kr
Pascal

[Zheleznyi]

What is the weight? Not like that?

[Pascal H.]

What is the weight? Not like that?

The weight of the shield is 20.63 gr.
It is unlike the shield you posted which is IMO (although the picture is not that clear) a known fake.

Kr
Pascal

[Pascal H.]

Hi guys, very interesting shield Pascal. Your last picture of the side shows a sandwich of material, so possibly cupal?

Tom

Tom, I misread your message. I thought you were talking about the picture of the Narvik shield but you meant the Cholm shield! I just examined the Cholm shield again and you are 100% right. The Cholm shield is indeed made of Cupal!!

Kr
Pascal