307 bataillon

[Freiwilliger]

Hi!

What are you think tag is real?
To me looks are good.

Regards and thanks!

[hucks216]

I know absolutely zilch about dogtags but shouldn't the unit designation be the other way round, i.e. Pol.Btl 307 instead of 307 Pol.Btl?

[naxos]

fake

[Battlerelic]

Not good.

[Freiwilliger]

thanks!

any other thoughts?

[Freiwilliger]

any other opinions?

[fox-terier]

I don't like this one.
Regards,
Piotr

[Frontalschaden]

Hello

IMO agood one !

I have no problem with this dogtag.

Best regards, Fronti.

[Lee Luke]

I have seen a 310 POL BATL tag with a grouping that looks good.

I know on documents it is almost always Pol Batl first then the number.

The font on this tag doesn't seem 100% to me though.

[Freiwilliger]

I know absolutely zilch about dogtags but shouldn't the unit designation be the other way round, i.e. Pol.Btl 307 instead of 307 Pol.Btl?

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...IZEI+BATAILLON

At your pass number of nataillon is firast

[hucks216]

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...IZEI+BATAILLON

At your pass number of nataillon is firast

Well spotted with the Dogtag entry.

[Frontalschaden]

The font on this tag doesn't seem 100% to me though.

The font looks well, and the aging of the dogtag matches 100% to a grounddug.

Again: No problem with that tag.
Nice original one.


Best regards, Fronti


P.S.: Some Pol.Btl. used the number in front of Pol.Btl on their dogtags. It is no mistake.