My new IAB

[Philippe DB]

Posted my reply after only seeing the hollow badges. I agree that the zinkers are both F&R's

KR
Philippe

[Andreas Klein]

3. maker marked eagle

[Andreas Klein]

Imo all the 4 eagles features the same design and can be linkend to the maker marked F&R IAB. That's why i attribute the whole design to F&R.

Now the classic B.H. Mayer eagle for compare (on which i can't find the marked areas from the F&R IAB):

[Philippe DB]

Imo all the 4 eagles features the same design and can be linkend to the maker marked F&R IAB. That's why i attribute the whole design to F&R.

Hi Ak,

Well that is a little to convinient only looking at what links them together but disregarding what clearly seperates them, the lower right Oakleave.

The points you highlight can also be found on the badge I posted in posts 13 and 14 but this badge copies the buntmetall badges to perfection unlike the known F&R's

You also disregard the fact that the only mm ever found on the hollow BM badges was L/18 as it is the case on the buntmetal GAB's and PAB's sharing that set-up.

IMO we have two possibilities here:

1. besides BH Mayer and F&R there is was a third player active here. The first one that comes to mind would be Schickle because this company featured BH Mayer design IAB's, GAB's and PAB's in their sales cataloque.

2. The hollow IAB's with variant set-ups were produced on a second die operated by BH Mayer. This die served as a basis on which the later F&R dies for producing massive zinkers was based, explaining the small differences. This IMO is highly unlikely because it doesn't explain why BH Mayer all of a sudden would start to use other hardware on there hollow BM badges.

KR
Philippe

[Andreas Klein]

Well that is a little to convinient only looking at what links them together but disregarding what clearly seperates them, the lower right Oakleave.

The points you highlight can also be found on the badge I posted in posts 13 and 14 but this badge copies the buntmetall badges to perfection unlike the known F&R's

Hello Philippe,

i have no problem to call the badges in post #13 and #14 another F&R variant and it wasn't convenient to search 4 different badges for exactly the same features. The oak leaf is a point but you can explain it with different dies because die stamping and die casting uses different dies.

In the past we called those little differences "evolution" from the stamped high quality hollow buntmetall badges to the later minor quality casted badges.

If we have a look on our hollow buntmetall OM IAB than there is no oak leaf beside the rifle butt, but on the later massive zinc OM there is an oak leaf ---- and it's still an OM IAB. The same goes with our steel hollow SHuCo IAB and his upper right oak leaf (5 steamer) which we can't find in the same detail on the massive SHuCo and the hollow zink SHuCo.

And what is with the Ernst M******252;ller IAB wreath? Some months ago Hans N. showed us that we can find more than 5 different wreaths ---- but we call all those badges Ernst M******252;ller IAB because of the noticeable eagle design.

You also disregard the fact that the only mm ever found on the hollow BM badges was L/18 as it is the case on the buntmetal GAB's and PAB's sharing that set-up.

We call several GABs, PABs and IABs a "Steinhauer & L******252;ck" production, because of the finish, the used set up but only one 4 mm combat badge (the IAB from Mr. Tucker) is known until know .... (by the way i've the same badge marked L/50 "Godet&Co."). So where is the problem to call several IAB with the same details a F&R design?

1. besides BH Mayer and F&R there is was a third player active here. The first one that comes to mind would be Schickle because this company featured BH Mayer design IAB's, GAB's and PAB's in their sales cataloque.

I agree and Imo more firms produced combat awards with dies from other makers. The best example ist the SHuCo Design which can be found in packets from "Gottlieb & Wagner" and "Eduard Hahn". But imo the unique design between unmarked and maker marked badges is the better way to link them togehter than a sales cataloque for example. Such cataloques only proof that the firm sold those badges but it's no proof that they produced them. I know photos from the Godet Store in Berlin with everything in it you can get for money (IABs, KC and so on).

[Philippe DB]

Hi Ak,

Well as far as I'm concerned OM or Shuco IAB's can't be used here for the simple reason that we can't be sure which IAB OM produced, if they ever produced one. By now we also all agree that the Shuco design was used by several companies.

S&L also isn't a good example to compare what we see here. Take Any S&L IAB GAB or PAB and they will all look the same only the set-ups evolves but not the design.

Why do you call the badge in post 13 & 14 an F&R variant an not a BH Mayer variant. This badge was produced in the same way as the massive F&R's you posted. So the use of different dies could hardly have effected the design. We know of may badges that were first die stamped and later on die forged without this having the slightest influence on the obverse design of the badge.

I also don't know the answer here but I'm simply not willing to accept these holow buntmetall IAB's to be F&R badges. I'm trying for years now to distinguish between F&R and BH Mayer and we simply did not yet find the means to do so.

When it comes to this IAB thanks to the slightly different second patttern IAB we have some room for speculation but try the exercise you are doing on the PAB's and GAB's of these makers and I can assure you that you won't have a leg to stand on simply because there isn't the slightest difference in design.

KR
Philippe

[Andreas Klein]

Well as far as I'm concerned OM or Shuco IAB's can't be used here for the simple reason that we can't be sure which IAB OM produced, if they ever produced one. By now we also all agree that the Shuco design was used by several companies.

S&L also isn't a good example to compare what we see here. Take Any S&L IAB GAB or PAB and they will all look the same only the set-ups evolves but not the design.<o =""></o>

Hello Philippe,

I can do the same with an Ernst M******252;ller IAB:<o =""></o>

[Andreas Klein]

2

[Andreas Klein]

I think we both agree that Badge A is an Ernst M******252;ller IAB. Why? Because the maker mark is clearly visible on the badge itself. That fact gives us a high chance that the badge was made/designed by the firm “Ernst M******252;ller”. <o =""></o>
<o =""></o>
Now to badge B. We link this badge to Ernst M******252;ller too, because of the same obverse design (eagle, rifle, bayonet). But if we look closer at the wreath than we can see, that they have different details:

<o ="">
</o>

[Andreas Klein]

b1

[Andreas Klein]

a2

[Andreas Klein]

b2

[Andreas Klein]

Should we now stop to call this badge a hollow Ernst Müller IAB, because of some missing steams in the oak leafs? I think not, because we still have the Ernst Müller corporate design with the unique eagle.<o =""></o>
<o =""></o>
I look at the B.H. Mayer and F&R IAB by the same way and therefore a marked F&R IAB is for me the base to look at the unmarked badges and identify them if i can find the same corporate design on the unmarked ones. If a firm produces a new die there is a possibility that they change some nonrelevant details but imo they will keep their corporate design which gives a badge the identity (eagle, rifle). Therefore the chance that the badge in post #13 is an F&R IAB is bigger than the chance that it shows a B.H. Mayer variation.<o =""></o>
<o =""></o>
Another point is the fact that we know to less about B.H. Mayer and their real production. I’ve never seen an IAB, GAB or PAB which holds the maker mark from B.H. Mayer on the badge itself. I only knew the hard to find and seldom seen L/18 pin marked combat badges. But we both agree that there a badge marked PABs and GABs from Frank & Reif. <o =""></o>
<o =""></o>
By the way a little question mark on the GAB sector: on top of page 143 of Frank’s great book i can see a GAB with “the typical Mayer hinge with it sides” and on page 145 for my eyes the same hinge is now the F&R sheet metal hinge.<o =""></o>
<o =""></o>
I agree that B.H. Mayer sold/produced GABs and PABs with dies from F&R but the design from the L/18 pin marked IABs doesn’t speak for F&R because it is totally different from the badge marked F&R design. Perhaps B.H. Mayer didn’t produce their tools for the combat badges themselves. Perhaps the GAB and PAB die was bought from F&R and the IAB from another firm – perhaps from Paul Wißmann, Pforzheim:<st1:city w:st="on"><st1 =""></st1></st1:city><o ="">
</o>

[Andreas Klein]

... but try the exercise you are doing on the PAB's and GAB's of these makers and I can assure you that you won't have a leg to stand on simply because there isn't the slightest difference in design.<o =""></o>

To come to an end: i agree with the sentence above when the first GAB, PAB or IAB is shown which clearly shows the B.H. Mayer maker mark on the badge itself and not only on the pin.<o =""></o>


All the best for 2006

[Philippe DB]

Hi AK?

Your E. Müller compare just doesn't make sense to me these are indeed the same badges with the hollow one being the earlier badge. On the solid one their are just some oakleave vains worn out but if you look closely the remains are still visible so both badges came out of one and the same obverse die. The oakleave differences on the BH-Mayer/F&R design can hardly be explained by wear.

You have no problem accepting hollow BM F&R made badges that were never ever found marked but somehow the fact that BH Mayer marked badges only have a stamped in mark on the pin is enough for you to doubt them.

Also think about this. What did F&R ever made? An IAB a PAB and a GAB, compare this with the production of BH Mayer. If these companies worked together wouldn't it be logical that the small one worked for the big one and not the other way arround?

KR
Philippe