I know about the article that splitting the ostfront medal up in a tombak version and the zinkers but is their solid proof of that? It confused my for a long time now. I agree that I have seen plenty good conditioned medals without the typical bubbling. I have two examples in good, but not mint, condition without bubbling or greyeshing. details are exeptional and they are mm. I have one (mint) mm zinker with the zapon finish intact but with bubbling underneath.
Due to this facts; There are collctors who are saying that it's just the quality of the zink alloy was that maked the different? Some makers used I very good alloy, others one of lesser quality.
I know about the article that splitting the ostfront medal up in a tombak version and the zinkers but is their solid proof of that? It confused my for a long time now. I agree that I have seen plenty good conditioned medals without the typical bubbling. I have two examples in good, but not mint, condition without bubbling or greyeshing. details are exeptional and they are mm. I have one (mint) mm zinker with the zapon finish intact but with bubbling underneath.
Due to this facts; There are collctors who are saying that it's just the quality of the zink alloy was that maked the different? Some makers used I very good alloy, others one of lesser quality.
Does these two types different in weight?
Regards, Theo
Theo,
Given two examples, one tombak and one zinc, by the same maker I would say you would find your answer regarding weight. I have many Ostmedailles, but none by the same maker. From maker to maker weights differ considerably because of overall diminsions (thickness, width, etc.). I look for the brassy exposure of the base metal before making a judgment on whether it is zinc or tombak, not on appearance. I just don't have the experience yet to make these conclusions from appearance alone. The example I posted has these areas od brassy-colored metal where minimal wear is evident. Overall, I would say that a tombak piece would certainly weigh more than a zinc piece by the same maker. Isn't this true in the Luft. qual. badges? Why not here as well?
Could anyone tell me if this is zinc or tombak?
There is some minor bubbling?
Thanks
Filip
Filip,
From the photo I would say it is zinc. The worn areas, and especially the lack of silver wash on the helmet show a dark gray metal, not a brass-colored metal.
I just picked up this mint mm '63' tombak Ostmedaille with ribbon and original tissue wrap. It's the second of my tombak examples of this award. It really has a smooth surface and great detailing compared to other Ostmedailles I have seen. Just wanted to show off an early mint tombak piece.
Robert
Robert-
That is a beautiful example of a tombak Ostmedaille you have there! I think it would be extremely hard to upgrade this little gem. Wow!
Lovely example Robert
Must be something in the air as i picked one up yesterday, missed the last 2 on the e-stand, then picked one up at a militaria fair for just a little bit less but with a packet.
Can anyone answer these questions for me as i am a beginner. The maker stamp on the packet is shown below, is this packet right for this maker of the medal?
Also, on the swastika on the front of the medal you can see there is some dirt. At first i thought it might be tarnishing to the medal but i worked some lose & it's just something sticky (yuk). How should i go about cleaning it off?
Thanks, Ant.
[QUOTE=robert pierce;1771450]An early Narvik is especially nice. That'll make up for the smaller purchase of the Ost. I hope you post it for all to see. I just bought a Silver CCC today. It's a beauty
There you go Robert.......picked this up from the e-stand last week. Lovely shield....... not sure whether it's faded army cloth or Luft.
Comment