The Deumer oval crimp PAB... missing link finally found!

[Norm F]

Here's a "Grossmann marked by Deumer" that actually came in an L/11 LDO envelope. Same striations on the reverse.

[Norm F]

Here's a so-called "unmarked Grossmann" with the same striations on the reverse. Could just as well be an "unmarked Deumer with berries".

[Panzercracker]

Hans N clearly said there was a way to distinguish the Grossmann WBs from the Deumers, and, he clearly said they are the ones with berries on them, TO INCLUDE, the ones with the berries and the L/11 mark. So, to my understanding, and the way it was written, the berries on the flanking swords, are, a sign of a Grossmann WB, marked, or not. Stimpson also seemed to be in agreement in the 2nd thread, on the gold WB, so I'm not going to re-read or re-interpret what was said, simply because I already did. That said, I'd like to hear from one of the wound badge experts too. Maybe they can shed some light on items they found in packets, and so forth, to make bold statements, such as the ones in those threads. Good night gents, and, if someone could please PM me on "wrapping quotes", I'd appreciate a refresher. Thank you.

--Ken

[Norm F]

Mind you, there does seem to be a legitimate difference (albeit subtle) between the "L/11 with berries" and the "11" marked badges. The "11" badges don't have as prominent striations on the reverse. And the "11" mark is different from the corresponding "11" within the "L/11" mark in that the two "1"s are closer together so it's not just a matter of forgetting the "L". Of course they could have started with an "11" stamp, eventually realized the error and made a new "L/11" stamp for the next round. (All just speculation of course.)

[Panzercracker]

If that's the case Norm, then Hans N may well be correct. And, it becomes a "die" issue, that needs clarification from one of the WB experts, or another savvy member. Yes, the berries look slightly out, and I haven't handled these "in hand" to know...

--Ken

[Andreas Klein]

Here's a so-called "unmarked Grossmann" with the same striations on the reverse. Could just as well be an "unmarked Deumer with berries".

Indeed ... or it is another maker which was supplied with the same tools as Grossmann and Deumer.

I'm still surprised how many efforts are made to ignore our knowledge about shared tools based on wartime documents from Wissmann and Hauptmünzamt Wien.

Is it that hard to accept that Grossmann/Deumer or Godet/Zimmermann were working with the same tools and were using the same third party supplied setups so that we are not able distinguish betwen them.

I'd be inclined to just call that wound badge "Deumer Type 1" and the one without berries "Deumer Type 2" (or vice versa depending on which one the Wound Badge Guys think came first).

Well, i would call the "11" marked ones Grossmann, the "L/11" marked ones "Deumer" and the unmarked ones "unknown maker in design of Grossmann/Deumer" because everything else is pure speculation.

[Thomas Durante]

is it that hard to accept that Grossmann/Deumer or Godet/Zimmermann were working with the same tools and were using the same third party supplied setups so that we are not able distinguish betwen them.

Hi Andreas,

Yes, this is hard to accept because until now I have seen no evidence that two different makers used an identical die. In the case of Godet/Zimmermann, there is a lot of evidence that Godet didn't make many of their awards, but rather purchased them directly from Zimmermann, BH Mayer and others. If these Grossmann/Deumer WBs share an identical die, then I think we can have a similar case here; i.e. that Deumer produced and sold to Grossmann. The fact that the numerals in the "11" mark are the same shape and size as the "L/11" mark support this speculation. And ofcourse we have the added confusion of a possible mistake by Deumer. If the mark was anything other than 11, then I think this wouldn't be a factor at all, but unfortunately it is and therefore we must consider the possibility of a mistake.

Have any packets been found marked for Grossmann? Do we have a wartime catalog by Grossmann by chance?

Tom

p.s., one final thought about the "Daisy 2"s; if we are to believe that some of the Daisy 2 IABs were made by Grossmann, then we would have to accept that notion of a "drastic design change" since we know that Grossmann produced solid-backed zinc IABs with a completely different design than the Daisy 2s.

[Andreas Klein]

Yes, this is hard to accept because until now I have seen no evidence that two different makers used an identical die.

You have seen it several times ... may i remind you of the Wissmann letters or do you think that Steinhauer was the only customer of Wissmann?

May i remind you of the letters between FLL and Hauptmünzamt Wien with the order by Mr. Doehle that FLL had to buy the die from Hauptmünzamt Wien?

In the case of Godet/Zimmermann, there is a lot of evidence that Godet didn't make many of their awards, but rather purchased them directly from Zimmermann, BH Mayer and others.

Do you have any evidence to support your speculation ? ... and i mean a real evidence - not pictures showing me that the badges look similiar to each other.

The fact that the numerals in the "11" mark are the same shape and size as the "L/11" mark support this speculation.

I don't know which badge you have studied but on my badges the "L/11" and the "11" are not of the same shape and size ... the "11" features another digit design and the "L/11" stamp is from overall smaller size.

And ofcourse we have the added confusion of a possible mistake by Deumer. If the mark was anything other than 11, then I think this wouldn't be a factor at all, but unfortunately it is and therefore we must consider the possibility of a mistake.

As you probably know Mr. Conze from Wilhelm Deumer was one of the founding members of the LDO and thererfore i think he knew enough to teach his workers how and with which number they had to mark a Deumer product.

Have any packets been found marked for Grossmann? Do we have a wartime catalog by Grossmann by chance?

I haven't one in my collection but that doesn't say that the don't exists ...

p.s., one final thought about the "Daisy 2"s; if we are to believe that some of the Daisy 2 IABs were made by Grossmann, then we would have to accept that notion of a "drastic design change" since we know that Grossmann produced solid-backed zinc IABs with a completely different design than the Daisy 2s.

Accepting a massive design change should be no big problem for you. You already accepted a massive design change with the slim stalk IAB to Juncker and that Daisy and the crimped in are both from Deumer.

[Thomas Durante]

a massive design change should be no big problem for you. You already accepted a massive design change with the slim stalk IAB to Juncker and that Daisy and the crimped in are both from Deumer.

Its not for me, I have been arguing it for years. Hope PKAliebhaber will see it and now understand.

Thanks Andreas.

Tom

[PKAliebhaber]

Its not for me, I have been arguing it for years. Hope PKAliebhaber will see it and now understand.

Thanks Andreas.

Tom

read it again Tom


FOR YOU NO PROBLEM TO BELIEVE

[Andreas Klein]

Its not for me, I have been arguing it for years. Hope PKAliebhaber will see it and now understand.

I don't think so because arguing and proving are different thnigs.

[Thomas Durante]

If someone wants to believe that the Daisy 2 IABs might have been made by Grossmann, then I just proved a major design change. Until now, that has been deemed "unlikely", so I think we are making progress here.

Tom

[Andreas Klein]

No at all Tom .... as you might have overlocked this thread is so far about "Deumer" hardware which you would like to push into the market as simple test to link a badge to Deumer.

Grossmann was only one out of four examples proving that different makers were using the same tools and setups. If you would like we can start to speak a little bit about Gustav Brehmer and Deumer ...

Btw have you read Frank's book about the iron cross ??? There is an interesting document in it about your "retail seller" Gebrüder Godet.

[PKAliebhaber]

If someone wants to believe that the Daisy 2 IABs might have been made by Grossmann, then I just proved a major design change. Until now, that has been deemed "unlikely", so I think we are making progress here.

Tom

Nobody said this!!! i said nothing like this

I even DONT believe the Daisy 2 is made by Deumer, because its stupid ****, i doesent make any sence!

remember this?

"Zinc daisys are quite common, so they likely produced many badges. I think if the design was not pleasing, they would have changed it well before producing so many, and they had the opportunity to change the design while they were making hollow zincers. The likelihood is that if Deumer is the daisy maker and changed the design so radically, I would have expected to see a change of design in the hollow zincer."

so look at all hollow daisys, is this a badge you would expect in the way of quality before the "Massiv zink Deumer IABs" so you want to tell us?? NO they look like badges you would expect till end of war

[Thomas Durante]

No at all Tom .... as you might have overlocked this thread is so far about "Deumer" hardware which you would like to push into the market as simple test to link a badge to Deumer.

The thread is about much more than that Andreas. That is why it is important to look at the entire range of badges, not just an IAB or a PAB. When we do this we can see more pieces of the puzzle and get a better idea of how they fit together.

Trevor has a very good thread in the Crosses forum where he goes into the evidence why Godet didn't produce much themselves, but rather purchased from other makers. Quite impressive bit of forensic work.

Tom