Unknown CCC maker unmasked?

[Thomas Durante]

Hi guys,

Along with the known makers of the CCC, I have been trying to identify some of the unknown makers for my article. It has been a pretty hard thing to do until recently, with all the good discoveries in the past several months as well as Frank's awesome book hitting the shelves. I think I made a discovery this morning that I feel real confident about, but what do you guys think??

The following pics are of an unmarked bronze Nahkampfspange. I have always loved this design and it is by far one of the most detailed and crisp clasp ever produced. Next to AGMuK, these beat all other clasps hands down, and I think I found the maker.

The first 2 pics are the obverse and reverse. The 3rd picture is the key to this discovery, the catch. The 4th pic is the hinge and actually contains another 2 clues to the maker.

Can you guess the maker that I am thinking of??????

Tom D.

[Thomas Durante]

Reverse

r

[Thomas Durante]

Catch

C

[Thomas Durante]

Hinge & pin

h

[Philippe DB]

Morning Tom,

Would love to help you out here but that catch in combination with the round base plate for me doesn't ring a bell.

Any hints about the direction we should be searching?

KR
Philippe

[Graeme]

Hi Tom

Well the distinct shape of the catch looks like Steinhauer & Luck. Page 171 in Franks book?

Can't see a pic of that catch on the baseplate, but S&L do use those baseplates and similar hinges.

cheers

Graeme

[Thomas Durante]

Hi guys,

Good job Graeme, S&L is exactly what I am thinking .

The catch is what first got me thinking about the connection, it is the exact same one as on page 170-171 of Frank's GAB book. The catches on S&L EK1s and GABs do not have a catchplate combined with them because they are soldered directly to tombak badges, which do not require a catchplate. But, S&L is known to have used round catchplates with other catches, i.e. their first pattern zink E-boat badges, zink PABs, and their zink GABs as shown by Frank on page 166 & 167.

The 2nd clue is the barrel hinge. This is the same barrel hinge as on the PABs that are attributed to S&L as well as the GABs that Frank attributes to them as well. No doubt that this barrel hinge was widely used by a bunch of makers, but its another piece of the puzzle.

The 3rd clue is the pin, a few mm before it makes the bend at the hinge. Notice the oval flat spot. There is a similar flat spot on the pin of their PAB in Frank's book on page 179. This is NOT where the hinge lands when it is opened and thus was NOT created by the pin being opened for the past 60 years. When opened, the pin rests on the back of the badge in a different location on the pin, between the flat spot and the bend. Rather, this flat spot was probably created by the tool that created the bend in the pin before it was soldered to the hinge cylinder.

Next to AGMuK, this CCC design beats all others hands down when it comes to fine detail and just speaks "quality". These CCCs are also quite common, but people pay little attention to them because they are unmarked. I think this fits well with S&L, who was a prolific maker of 3rd reich awards and were also known for their quality and attention to detail when it comes to their designs.

With those 3 clues as well as the quaility and quantity of these CCCs, I think there is strong evidence to connect these clasps to Steinhauer and Luck.

Ok, what do you guys think? Put the stones down and be nice .

Tom D.

[Graeme]

Tom

I think the flat spot on the pin is interesting. Can you post a close up pic?

cheers

Graeme

[Thomas Durante]

Here you go Graeme.

Tom D.

[Thomas Durante]

Anyone want to contradict my little discovery?? Do you guys agree with me that this maker is most likely S&L? Man, I thought it was a great little discovery and couldn't wait to post it in here, but maybe not eh? I thought there would be a lot more interest in this thread .

Good thing is that it seems like there are a bunch of unmarked CCCs floating around, but in fact, once you really study them, all of the unmarked ones are made by only 3 firms. One I believe to be S&L, so 1 down 2 to go. The other 2 firms have extremely similar if not the same obverse as Rudolf Souval and even 1 of them has pins and hinges that are know to be RS. Its possible that that unknown maker is a 2nd pattern souval, or that all 3 makers (the 2 unknown and RS) were part of a group of "vienna makers" that shared their tools and hardware. Sound familar? I'll be posting both of those makers soon to try and figure out a little more of the mystery here in a few days.

Thanks

Tom D.

[skip]

All good points Tom but I think the flat spot on the pin is reaching it a little.
heres the same thing on the Schwerin Minesweeper I sold recently.

Agree on the hook connection though

Skip

[Thomas Durante]

Hey Skip, thanks for the reply.

I agree, the flat spot on the pin is not foolproof, but just one piece of evidence. Since most pins like this have a bend in them, there couldn't have been too big an array of tools to make it, so chances are good that other pins would have a flat spot on them from some other makers. I have also seen the flat spot on other maker's pins, but not very often. Again, I just think its another piece of evidence, to be taken with everything else stated above. The catch is the big connection.

Tom D.

[Frank Heukemes]

Dear Tom,

I think it is a good observation and a plausible one. For me the catch and the relative availability of this type speak for a bigger company in general and S&L in particular. Hinge and dimple are not super unique for S&L, but actually SUPPORT the theory, because S&L has badges with these features.

I can see you are disappointed with the reaction to a thread like that and can fully understand you. One might think these things would gain more interest, would be contradicted with other theories, everything would be revised by more people with more CCCs at hand which would lead to a more conclusive and stable theory.

It should be realized that if the collecting community wants to make progress, it can only be through these means. If a theory is good and can be proven by some puzzle pieces, it should be good enough until more evidence appears (and there will always be more) to:
a) support it even more
b) contradict it

[münster]

Looks like the S&L hook in franks book,,Welcome Back Frank,,cold enough for you??

[Thomas Durante]

Hi Frank,

Thanks for your input, I was hoping you would stop by. I agree, that the dimple is not super watertight, but no one piece of evidence really is and must be taken in context with the other evidence presented.

I am a little disappointed in the responses (either for or contradictory), but chalk that up to not many people buying/owning these unmarked clasps. Hopefully my article will change that and create some more interest in the Close Combat Clasp in general, bringing them up to speed along with the PABs, GABs and IABs.

Thanks

Tom D.

p.s., I sent you an email about using your L/53 clasp in the article and need some dimensions to go along with it. Or, you could always just sell her to me and I will be more than happy to get that info myself .

Tom D.