Announcement

**LuckyLuudje** · 08-10-2010, 10:00 PM

Although it is interesting, I am also not convinced about the theory as presented.
I will throw in a few of my early 1957 S&L's that haven't got the "scratch" charactristics, but have more some kind of a dent.
The one thing I am sure about is that these badges didn't leaave the factory during the war

Attached Files

**Flemming** · 08-10-2010, 11:57 PM

Did the different manufacture buy their pins/needle from a subcontracor, or did they make them them self ?

/Flemming

**Andreas Klein** · 08-11-2010, 12:05 AM

Originally posted by Flemming View Post

Did the different manufacture buy their pins/needle from a subcontracor, or did they make them them self ?

/Flemming

The makers were supported by subcontractors. There were several firms in the third reich which were specialized in making setups for awards.

I think at the end of the war there was alot of wartime stuff left. Here are pictures from the firm of carl Wild and what they had in one drawer (the plastic bags were ofcourse added later).

Attached Files

**Leroy** · 08-11-2010, 07:32 AM

Perhaps I am misunderstanding something, but (and I thought the '57 collectors had confirmed this already) isn't the pin with the "wartime dimple" found only on some early '57 pieces from S&L, with most of those early S&L pieces instead having pins with the "scrape" mark Tom is talking about, and then later '57 pieces from S&L having either only the pin with the "scrape" or the flatter, shaped, pin?

Hi, Andreas!- Is it known if factories, once they received pins, hinges, etc., from outside suppliers, actually cut the pins to the correct length themselves and also bent the ends before soldering, or was all that already done by the time they received them?

(Note: I've made this same post on GCA, where this discussion is also ongoing.)

**Jeff V** · 08-11-2010, 09:35 AM

I used to own some early S&L 57 pieces. It was ludicrous to even look at the mark on their pins. The whole badges were so completely different from anything thought to be made during the war. The alloys they were constucted of, the finishes, everything, all totally different. This is like staring at one tree from two feet away and making hard fast conclusions while a whole forest lays around us.
Still waiting to hear if Thomas' anti partisan badges are now postwar manufacture, and what about the flying clasp with paperwork. I don't own that piece but did talk to Winkler years ago when it was for sale and he said the whole thing was from the family of the recipient. I would have bought it had the condition been better. No scrape mark on a pin will ever convince me that these pieces are postwar.
best wishes,
jeff

**Leroy** · 08-11-2010, 11:07 AM

Assuming (which I believe is correct) that companies out-sourced pins and hardware in most cases, it seems to me that there are really 2 issues here which would be dangerous to confuse:

1.) Is it possible to establish a "pattern of use" by S&L, at certain times, of pins with certain marks?; and
2.) Is it possible to link the use of certain pins ONLY to certain companies?

Number "2" is an entire separate discussion from Number "1". So, far, it seems to me that Tom IS showing (and this appears to be confirmed by '57 collectors) a "pattern of use", in definite time frames, of certain identifiable types of pins on known S&L pieces. Taking this discussion into Number "2" is where the disagreements would flourish.

**Jeff V** · 08-11-2010, 11:35 AM

Originally posted by Leroy View Post

Assuming (which I believe is correct) that companies out-sourced pins and hardware in most cases, it seems to me that there are really 2 issues here which would be dangerous to confuse:

1.) Is it possible to establish a "pattern of use" by S&L, at certain times, of pins with certain marks?; and
2.) Is it possible to link the use of certain pins ONLY to certain companies?

Number "2" is an entire separate discussion from Number "1". So, far, it seems to me that Tom IS showing (and this appears to be confirmed by '57 collectors) a "pattern of use", in definite time frames, of certain identifiable types of pins on known S&L pieces. Taking this discussion into Number "2" is where the disagreements would flourish.

Totally false Leroy. Did you look at my pictures? Where does the airman's clasp fit into your "definite time frames" statement?
best wishes,
jeff

**Leroy** · 08-11-2010, 01:28 PM

Jeff- the Recon clasp uses a wide pin. My understanding is that Tom is talking only about the needle pins. Additionally, although it is assumed that S&L made the pictured clasp, and made it during the war, that has not been yet definitively established. I have seen a CCC marked to F&BL with a wide pin with "scratches" in this same location.

**Jeff V** · 08-11-2010, 02:01 PM

Originally posted by Leroy View Post

Jeff- the Recon clasp uses a wide pin. My understanding is that Tom is talking only about the needle pins. Additionally, although it is assumed that S&L made the pictured clasp, and made it during the war, that has not been yet definitively established. I have seen a CCC marked to F&BL with a wide pin with "scratches" in this same location.

Wide pin or needle pin makes no difference. The same machine makes those marks. My point is this discussion of pin marks is of very little usefulness. I believe the evidence shows that these scratch pins exist wartime just as much as any evidence shows they were used postwar. The whole idea that S&L manufactured a complete range of Kriegsmarine, Luftwaffe, and Heer awards to supply dealer demand in the 60s and 70s is absurd. How many years did it take Bob Hritz to sell the shields he bought from Souval at around one or two dollars each during this time frame? If the dealer demand was so great why aren't S&L making a full range of awards right now to deceive collectors, after all demand has never been so high.
There is no magic way of determining whether some awards were made before the end of the war or after when it comes to S&L, or even that S&L made all of these pieces. We as collectors want so bad to have everything so neat and explained perfectly, when in fact, there is much we will never know.
best wishes,
jeff

**Thomas Bendixen** · 08-11-2010, 02:22 PM

Hi Jeff

Please don't mix the antipartisan badges into this, they have suffered from controversy and lack of study all to long and are now enjoying their retirement as Juncker badges with the striped tool traits of Juncker banjo pins.

None of the banjopinned ST&L CCC's in Tom's book has the scratched pin.

Cheers Thomas

**Leroy** · 08-11-2010, 02:25 PM

Jeff - I'm sure marks like that did exist during the war. To me, the question right now is: did S&L use needle pins with these marks during the war? Seems a very limited inquiry.

**Jeff V** · 08-11-2010, 02:34 PM

Originally posted by Leroy View Post

Jeff - I'm sure marks like that did exist during the war. To me, the question right now is: did S&L use needle pins with these marks during the war? Seems a very limited inquiry.

I am sure they did, but how would we know. Any badge produced with those marks could be said to be made postwar with this theory, which is why focusing on such an limited thing as a pin mark, as the tell all of wartime or not, is what I am against. Why not look at finish, which I believe is far more relevant than a mark on a pin. Tom still has not explained what happened to his theory that the way to tell the postwar S&L was by the width of the hinge.
best wishes,
jeff

**Jeff V** · 08-11-2010, 02:47 PM

Is this one postwar Leroy? Looks like a classic wartime solid zinc S&L PAB in every respect to me.
best wishes,
jeff

Attached Files

**Jeff V** · 08-11-2010, 02:53 PM

What about the PABs in Philippe's book on page 138 and 139 and pages 142 and 143. Looks like scratches on the pins to me. S&L monster PAB on pages 144 and 145 looks to possibly have the scratches as well on the pin, or perhaps all of these variations were made for dealers and collectors in the 60's and 70's.

best wishes,
jeff

**Jeff V** · 08-11-2010, 02:56 PM

Originally posted by Jeff V View Post

Is this one postwar Leroy? Looks like a classic wartime solid zinc S&L PAB in every respect to me.
best wishes,
jeff

In fact it looks to me that the small size of the die flaw on the reverse of this badge points to a rather early zinc PAB by S&L, referring to Philippes text on page 140 of his book.
best wishes,
jeff

Attached Files

2425(5).jpg (79.9 KB, 300 views)

Announcement

Difference between Wartime & 1957 S&L badges

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread