Dkig

[Bruce Jarrett]

I just received this. It is a Zimmerman light but the odd thing is the back is copper instead of the usual white color metal. You can see traces of the white metal around the rivets but the rest of the back is copper color and tarnish. How usual is it that 99% of the white metal would be worn off the back or do you think this has been highly cleaned on the back and tarnish has reappeared. The side shot shows the cupal metal of copper and white metal. I have a front shot that shows that it hasn't been cleaned on the front. Thanks

[Bruce Jarrett]

Front

Front

[streptile]

I'd say it's been very heavily cleaned and abraded. Maybe a while ago, as you suspect, and the tarnish has returned.

[TP Alexander]

Wear from being on a tunic???
Looks like a good Zimmermann, with the flaw.
Of course, I'm prejudiced. I know where it came from.
Tim

[Antonio Scapini]

Cleaned yes, but it remains a good original DKiG.

[Bruce Jarrett]

I also think its an original but it seemed odd that almost all of the white metal is gone from the back. Doesn't seem like normal wear. No white metal around the edges but traces down the center. I searched the wire and couldn't find another with wear like it . Seems strange that the back would be cleaned like that but not the front.

[panzer1432]

Looks like a good one. Strange wear, surely cleaned.

mike

[Bruce Jarrett]

It does have a lot of scratches like from scrubbing but I think they may have been removing tarnish instead of the white metal because of the white metal down the center . Could the white metal on this one have been very thin and actually wore off from wear . It then became heavily tarnished and then someone tried removing some tarnish , probably with tooth paste, causing the copper color to come back in some areas.

[John Henderson]

Hi,
nice original, but weird how the back is like that.
Maybe just someone being over zealous on the cleaning front. Scratches could be down to something like a brillo pad.

r John

[AndyC]

Cleaned original IMO


Andy

[Bruce Jarrett]

I have no doubt that the badge is real but I'm trying to understand the lack of frosting on the back. Hard to believe someone would be dumb enough to take a silver item and make it copper. I haven't seen one in my search of the wire or net of another one with this much frosting gone but if someone has one I would like to see it. I looked close to see if someone was trying to remove an inscription but could not find a trace of one. Is it possible from wear ? Thanks

[TP Alexander]

One thing that was mentioned to me that may not have been mentioned to you....because it seems unimportant....is that the DK was attached to a piece of leather for 60 years. I know that doesn't account for the scratches, but could tannin from the leather have affected the white metal coating?
Tim

[Bruce Jarrett]

When I received the badge it was attached to a piece of black leather. I just looked at the leather and there is no ghost image of the badge on it (that I would expect from a chemical process )and this leather is not 60 years old. It still has a new chemical smell and looks like recent dying style.

[Bruce Jarrett]

You can see in the photo that the scratches are on top of some dark tarnish. I think the scratches are from someone trying to clean the tarnish off from a badge that was heavily tarnish from lack of frosting protection. But then was the frosting removed a long time ago from wear or unwise person ? If I found other badges that have excessive wear on the back it would help. Unfortunately most pictures only show the pristine examples. This one wasn't touched on the front so that makes me hope it is from wear.

[Ralph Arndt]

Nice original here.