Announcement

**PKAliebhaber** · 08-20-2014, 03:46 AM

The point 2 is for me complitly wrong

"2 - Hollow zinc badges are generally higher quality than solid zinc examples."

The solid zinc badges are in higher quality! Better finishes, better Hardware-systems, higher / better contours - solid is always a sign for a better quality itself

How can you dont see it?

Yes, you see much more massiv zinc badges on the market today as hollow zinc, and 1942 for solid zinc are ok , but this also just shows, that it is much more logic, that they came after the hollow Buntmetall ones. The hollow zinc badges was maybe produced in the last or the last 1,5 years of war. This would fit perfectly. The amount of them are much too high/ i mean you just see too much of them, that all of this was just produced in a very short time between the hollow BM - orderd to zinc - solid Zinc badge

So point 1 and 3 are correct

**Thomas Durante** · 08-20-2014, 05:33 AM

Hi guys,

Thanks for the contributions, attached is the revised figures.

Andreas, regarding G&W, I already had them on the list. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the only ones found in marked packets were solid zink version.

I did indeed lump the Eduard Hahn examples in the "SHuCo" category but revised the sheet to separate them (ShuCo Design-4 Stem). As in the case with G&W, the only IABs found in the Eduard Hahn packets are solid zinkers as far as I know. Perhaps these could be further separated from the other ShuCo Desing-4 stems, but that would only further skew the numbers more in favor of the "solid-zinc being more common" category. So I think my numbers are being conservative.

Andreas, the total number of makers I have on the list so far is 53 (top, right of the page). Within several of the solid zinc makers we can find several different variants based on reverse hardware setups so a case could be made that more makers were involved and probably so! But this would only skew the number further in favor of the "solid zinc being more common" category.

So even with this conservative approach, we still find that solid-zinc badges outnumber hollow by a ratio of 3:1.

Tom

Attached Files

IABs.jpg (125.5 KB, 77 views)

**PKAliebhaber** · 08-20-2014, 09:01 AM

In which timeline are all the hollow zinc IABs produced?

**PKAliebhaber** · 08-20-2014, 02:34 PM

Originally posted by PKAliebhaber View Post

In which timeline are all the hollow zinc IABs produced?

???

Nice list by the way, but maybe with much wrong ones - because of the unproven design change dilemas and the naming of makers, who maybe never poduced the badges you Tom and some other think. The proof is missing. Is the Deumer Design Change still up to date?

interesting now you Tom say "Juncker attributed" or "Schickel attributed" but you NEVER say it, if somebody is asking for a maker

then its MADE BY Schickel, MADE BY Juncker

**Thomas Durante** · 08-21-2014, 06:57 AM

Originally posted by Andreas Klein View Post

i think the so called S&L case you are showing is of no help. The design of the attached IAB can only be found as hollow tombak, solid cupal, full-solid zinc and half-solid zinc version. There is no full-hollow zinc version known of it.

Andreas, this is true when we talk about IABs made by S&L, however its well known that several of the souvenier boards are filled with badges made by several different makers, mostly from the Ludenscheid area. These boards are filled with badges from Assmann, FLL, F&BL and even Meybauer so I think Norm makes a good point in that it gives us a good glimpse of what was being produced at the end of the war or what was being made early postwar.

Looking specifically at the Heer badges, here you can see that the IAB looks to indeed be an S&L, but the GAB is a "4-rivet" (maker currently unknown). We know that S&L had their own GAB design, so it stands to reason that the 4-rivet GAB was not made by S&L (one has been found in a Biedermann marked packet). The 4-rivet GAB was never made in a hollow version, so even without seeing the reverse we know this must be a solid or semi-solid zinc badge.

Tom

Attached Files

Sample Board-2e-Weitze May 2010.jpg (93.2 KB, 67 views)

**Thomas Durante** · 08-21-2014, 07:06 AM

Here is another typical S&L souvenier board. Looking around at all the different badges we can see several different makers, not just S&L. The PAB is a "daisy", maker currently unknown. Its possible that S&L made these, but it would then be another clear example of a "design change" since it is very different than the typical S&L PABs. The important thing is that the reverse of this badge is solid, not hollow.

Same with the IAB, it has a solid reverse. Note that its marked L/56 for F&BL, so no question that it wasn't made by S&L.

Norm's point about these souvenier boards is a good one; almost everything on these boards are solid, even the flight clasps, etc., suggesting that was how badges were being made at the end of the war (or very early postwar). Again, I don't discount that some makers might have brushed off their old hollow dies to try to save material very late in the war, but I think this was the exception to the rule.

Tom

Attached Files

**fischer** · 08-21-2014, 11:32 AM

Hi Tom

I think your listing of the ShuCo - ShuCo Design examples is still not correct.

For the ShuCo (4 & 5 stem) you have "No" marked for hollows.
There is a ShuCo (5) vein hollow zinc example.

For ShuCo Design (4 stem) you have "No" marked for hollows.
There is a ShuCo Design (4) vein hollow zinc example.

Best Regards, fischer

Attached Files

1.jpg (20.7 KB, 59 views)

**fischer** · 08-21-2014, 11:35 AM

Hi Guys

My opinion is each manufacturer was different and one evolutionary scale does not work.

The nickel silver and zinc Juncker attributed hollow examples...I would say "yes", the zinc hollow did transition directly from the NS hollow.

But, looking at Friedrich Linden we see the crimped in "L" pattern catch (specifically design for a solid example) soldered to the reverse of a hollow zinc IAB.
In this case the argument can be made that the solid pattern badge was in place before this particular hollow example.

If we look at the three "H" design examples, we find two are of a hollow design and one a solid...all made from zinc.
Here the lines are blurred further on which one came into production first and which one was the final design.

Richard Simm is another...My opinion is the solid came into production before the hollow based on the hardware used and the material savings from a manufacturing standpoint.

Multiple assertions with logical arguments can be made either way; I think each maker has to be addressed individually.

Best regards, fischer

**PKAliebhaber** · 08-21-2014, 12:47 PM

Very good post fischer, thanks

this is exactly the main problem. We have some makers who fit perfectly in the theory of - first solid zinc IAB and then hollow zinc - and others like the Porsche IAB - or Juncker att. IAB which dont fit (the hollow NS Porsche IAB is/ seems to be the same die like the hollow zinc --- if the solid zinc badge which some att. to Juncker too are in this line i dont know)

Maybe not every Maker was active in the IAB Production from the beginning till the end or just from the middle till the end. Maybe some dont get orders in mid war but in the early and/ or late war time.

Maybe for the hollow zinc many makers used the same design/ master die?

Maybe some used for the hollow zinc production at end of war its old Tombak/ NS dies - if this was possble.

Maybe the way every makers has to produce the IAB in zinc (hollow or solid) was dependent to the amount he could produce?

I think everybody can agree that material was less to end of war, so its just logically you would let the makers produce hollow zinc badges

**Thomas Durante** · 08-21-2014, 12:57 PM

Thanks Don, I will check tonight and update the list. I must be missing some of the SHuco hollow variants in my files because I had doubled checked after Jordi's first comment a few days ago. Is the SHuCo 5 vein marked? I only have marked 4-veiners in my files.

I completely agree with the comments about FLL, there is evidence they switched to hollow production late in the war. I actually mentioned them earlier in this thread as an example of late-war hollow production and we can base that on the fact that the custom-made catch made for their solid examples can be found on the hollows, so the hollow must have come later. But to me they don't appear to produced as an attempt to save materials but rather out of necessity because of apparent problems with the crimping tool for the hardware. Also, they appear to have pulled out their old hollow die rather than create a new one. If they had created a new die, I think it would have been a solid one or semi-hollow at this late stage in the war, but that is only an assumption on my part.

That is a good point on the Richard Simm badges and their catches, maybe you are right and the hollow came after. But was it done to save material, or out of necessity because the crimping tool failed? I know of some RSS examples where the catch is not crimped, but rather soldered on top of the crimp. Same with their Luftwaffe Fighter and Bomber clasps; it appears the crimping tool started to fail requiring the catch and hinge to be soldered right on top. So like what we see with FLL badges, it may have been out of necessity to switch back to new die rather than an attempt to create a new (hollow) die late in the war simply to save some zinc base metal.

Tom

**jordi** · 08-21-2014, 01:15 PM

Hi Tom,

Here you go one of each.

First a hollow ShuCo design 4 veins.

Best regards.
jordi

Attached Files

**jordi** · 08-21-2014, 01:16 PM

And the hollow maker marked ShuCo with 5 veins.

Best regards.
jordi

Attached Files

**Andreas Klein** · 08-21-2014, 01:33 PM

... and the hollow unmarked 5 Vein ShuCo.

Having a look at the quality, the finish, the details and the overall looking of the hollow ShuCo family the statement:

2 - Hollow zinc badges are generally higher quality than solid zinc examples.

is not correct imo. No one can make me believe that those SHuCo badges are the ones of the early days.

Attached Files

**Andreas Klein** · 08-21-2014, 01:34 PM

@Don

Perfect summary in your post and i underline everything you wrote

**fischer** · 08-21-2014, 01:49 PM

Originally posted by Thomas Durante View Post

Thanks Don, I will check tonight and update the list. I must be missing some of the SHuco hollow variants in my files because I had doubled checked after your first comment a few days ago. Is the SHuCo 5 vein marked? I only have marked 4-veiners in my files.

Hi Tom

Yes, all of my ShuCo-O marked hollows are (5) vein examples. Please post one of your marked (4) vein IAB's you have on file when you have an opportunity; I have not seen one before.

Best regards, fischer

Attached Files

Announcement

2 x IAB what maker?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread