Schwerin Tombak Destroyer Badge

[janvs]

How can you have that much wear to the eagle/swaz without losing the gilding?

This is what bothers me.


Perhaps it was regilt? Perhaps die flaws?

janvs

[Yuri D.]

Looks like "pressure" wear and not "scraping" wear. The gilt looks fairly uniform.

Yuri

[Brian S]

Two more to observe

I'm not sure about the one on the left. It is not from the same die as the one on the right. If it's a copy I'm amazed at the finishing to the guns and the flag. Thoughts please?

[Brian S]

and the back

...back of the same two. Look at the hinge. It seems to me to be the same. Leftover stock on a copy?

[Mike Kenny]

Hi,

Sorry, but I believe the badge on the left is a Cave Creek Special. The maker's mark is incorrect, the hinge and main pin are incorrect and the door above the main deck is missing (1/2 way between the lower/forward gun and the X-hatched bracing - this is one of the best giveaways if you know to look for it). The finish does not look like fire-gilding to me either. The badge on the right is a genuine but very worn example - a nice honest example though.

I personally have seen no evidence for Schwerin having two sets of dies for their Destroyer's Badge - the later production zinc badges have basically the same features as the earlier tombak examples.

Regards
Mike K

[Frank Heukemes]

Hi Brians,

I absolutely agree with Mike. Left badge is no good.

Cheers, Frank

[Brian S]

I didn't like it either...

[Yuri D.]

The badge on the left is a reproduction in my opinion.

Yuri

[Tim B.]

Another Schwerin for Comparison

Boy this thread is seeing a lot of action!

Yuri,
Here's mine as well.

Brians,
I agree with the rest, the badge on the left is no good. I don't like anything about it other than I don't own it. Sorry.

Tim

[Tim B.]

PIC didn't load

Try this again,
Front:

[Tim B.]

Reverse

.