Clasp to the iron cross 23mm for the medal bar

[ben bijker]

Of course it is my opinion.
And my opinion is just as valid as your opinion.
Neither opinion is proof.

Even if I had the opportunity to buy one I would pass, because I don't believe it to be original.

If you buy based on your last sentence you will have a nice collection of fishing weights in the end.
But : your money, your collection.

I go on collecting my way, based on my 40 years of experience, you go on in your way.
This is my last reply, since you won't even consider the clasp may be fake.

Good luck!

[Edward 1970]

Of course it is my opinion.
And my opinion is just as valid of your opinion.
Neither opinion is proof.

Even if I had the opportunity to buy one I would pass, because I don't belief it to be original.

If you buy based on your last sentence you will have a nice collection of fishing weights in the end.
But : your money, your collection.

I go on collecting my way, based on my 40 years of experience, you go on in your way.
This is my last reply, since you won't even consider the clasp may be fake.

Good luck!

Prove that the clasp is a fake and I will believe!

[rbminis]

Please show us an example in wear.
When claiming something is original, it is the responsibility of that person to prove it is original.
You have not done this.
Not one I would buy.
Ralph.

[Edward 1970]

Please show us an example in wear.
When claiming something is original, it is the responsibility of that person to prove it is original.
You have not done this.
Not one I would buy.
Ralph.

evidence here

[Edward 1970]

Please show us an example in wear.
When claiming something is original, it is the responsibility of that person to prove it is original.
You have not done this.
Not one I would buy.
Ralph.

Demonstration of the medal bar in this thread: https://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/for...-bar?t=1042205

[rbminis]

Demonstration of the medal bar in this thread: https://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/for...-bar?t=1042205

No, a period photo of it in wear.
Anybody could have put that on the bar, at any time.
Ralph.

[Edward 1970]

No, a period photo of it in wear.
Anybody could have put that on the bar, at any time.
Ralph.

prove that it is so.

[rbminis]

prove that it is so.

I don't need to, you need to prove it is original.
Ralph.

[ben bijker]

Edward, back up your claims.
It is your item, prove it's original and that it was put on the ribbon during the war.

You can't, so we have to prove you're wrong.
You really need therapy

[Dietrich Maerz]

Our dialogue is meaningless. Your claims are unfounded. The examples you showed are irrelevant to the topic. You cannot show me a zinc sample for comparison. You cannot prove that S&L Prinzen made of zinc does not exist. You can only assert this unfoundedly. I tend to trust the opinion of a more qualified specialist, such as Philippe de Bock.

At least he is well versed in the technology of production of such items and can distinguish the original from a fake. Otherwise, he would not have written his two-volume book on tank signs. I don't like the top of the fastener myself, but that doesn't make the fastener any less original!
Good luck to you!. Study the materials deeper and never say never.

Nobody likes a spirited discussion more than I do, but this is too much. Philippe DeBock might have a decent knowledge about PABs, but he certainly is not a qualified specialist nor well versed in technology of production of items outside his small area of expertise. He is good at censorship, we give him that! His determination of originality outside of his expertise is this: if it is a fake at WAF, it must be part of the GCA database. Pure opposition and his advise to Ben to "crawl back to WAF" speaks volumes.

What I have to write about the Spange, I did already. Just another comment regarding DeBock's latest statement "What I do know is that EK II Spanges (sic) were awarded till the last day's of the war so again, why would the Prinzen production have escaped the switch to zinc?" Of course, he only thinks he knows that because it is not true. But to know that, one would need to dive deeper into the topic which he has not by own admission. The purpose of a 25 mm Spange was to be attached to the ribbon of the Iron Cross 2. Class at the Grosse Ordensspange. It takes a lot of phantasy to imagine that there were people that had these medal bars made during "the last days of the war". Furthermore, the 25 mm had no connection to any awarding, it was a purely privately purchased item and as such subject to visual inspection and acceptance of the buyer. A zinc item had always the need to compete with a Tombak made one and we know of no 25 mm Spangen made of zinc. I just finished my book about the 2. Class Spange and I have no zink 25 mm miniature included.
"And why would the Prinzen (a completely wrong naming of the 25 mm Spange, showing a deep lack of understanding of the philosophy of the time) production have escaped the switch to zinc? This is a pure rhetorical question and can be answered with "Maybe because there were enough made in Tombak and the demand was really very, very low! How many Grosse Ordenspangen do you know with a 25 mm miniature?"

What can be said is this: Nobody knows by the piece itself whether it is original of the time or not. One cannot create originality by majority of opinion of selective weighing of positive comments. In such a case one has to look at other surrounding evidence, like use of the item, time of possible production, regulations, selling points, has it been seen before, ... If you do that study on your own, you get a better picture and can make up your mind. If you then think it is a good piece, fine. But not because DeBock said so.

[Edward 1970]

Dear Gentlemen! Leading the discussion, I have the right to count on the fact that my opponents have sufficient knowledge of the subject of discussion and are able to think analytically. If you are only capable of making unfounded statements, then please leave this discussion, because we have nothing to talk to you about.
Further.
According to the presumption of innocence, the accused is considered innocent until proven guilty.
In this case, the same rule applies. The item is genuine until proven otherwise.
This product is original until proven otherwise.
At the GCA forum, I provided photographic evidence in favor of its originality, which suggests the following:
1. The sign is made of zinc, under the layers of coatings there is a gray metal, the sign is not magnetic.
2. The object is not homogeneous in composition; under the final coating there is a metal layer with a copper content, which testifies to the complex technological process of manufacturing the object.
3. On the obverse of the object, there are traces of swelling. This defect occurs as a result of a violation of the technological process in the manufacture of zinc awards. This defect is present on many other zinc products, which in turn are genuine.
4. On the outside and inside of the object there are traces of a noble temporary patina, which also testifies to the correspondence of the object to its time of manufacture.
5. The shape of the clamping mustache matches the shape of the original ones. The method of attaching the clamping mustache to the frame also corresponds to the technological process of that period.
6. The dimensions of the product completely coincide with the dimensions of a similar product made of Buntmetal, both in height and in width, the thickness of the product is within the normal range for similar products made of zinc.
(it is not possible to find out the weight of the item, since the item is attached to the medal bar)
7. On the ends of the product, traces from the cutting knife are clearly visible, the grooves are strictly perpendicular to the plane of the front side of the product. The furrows are also parallel to each other.
8. The product has traces of manual processing, which was carried out before coating.
9. The details of the drawing are clear, the edges are not rounded, the corners are sharp.
And finally, the cherry on the cake:
10. The design of the fastener pattern is completely the same as the design of the buckle pattern made of Buntmetal. Everything matches: shagreen pattern, paws, feathers, wreath, swastika, numbers, and even watermarks! They match both visually and in size! This testifies to leash that both products came out from under the same matrix. (Photos attached)
And now, dear colleagues, I ask you to state your arguments regarding the fact that the discussed product is not original. I also ask you to provide photos of fakes so that we can compare them with the product under discussion.

[Edward 1970]

[QUOTE=Dietrich Maerz;n11739918]

... Furthermore, the 25 mm had no connection to any awarding, it was a purely privately purchased item and as such subject to visual inspection and acceptance of the buyer. .........How many Grosse Ordenspangen do you know with a 25 mm miniature?"


Not many, but seen! and even those whose owners are known by name. So your argument is not accepted.
As for what the buyer had to check for the quality of the product. But what if the salesman offered an impressive discount on marriage? Or was the buyer blind and the seller cheating? Sorry, but these arguments are not arguments.

[Edward 1970]

And more ..

[Edward 1970]

And oh god! What I just discovered! Cherry on the cake !! Doesn't it look like anything?

[ben bijker]

Bar 2 has a Schickle full-size
Bar 5 has a full size FAKE, but you probably missed that.

How many S&L Prinzen have you found ??

What are you truing to prove with these pics??
I didn't see Dietrich write that there are no medal bars with a Prinzen clasp on it.

Accept the fact that there are people that seriously doubt the authenticity of your calsp.
If you can't handle that (it looks like that very much) don't post your stuff here for vetting.

Just write: "here's my medalbar with zin S&L clasp and it is authentic"

There is no need for discussion because you are deaf to every argument posted.