reverse
combined images and posted below
combined images and posted below
-
-
badge
Too many differences in the eagle I think. I would pass on this one. Not sure if the right one is a good one based on rob's observations of the hull line.Last edited by John R.; 03-13-2006, 09:27 AM.Comment
-
HI Rob and John:
Thank you guys for the information. Here is a close-up of the maker mark. And, here is something really odd on the underside of the pin...it is a rectangular area that almost looks like a box for a maker's mark, but is not..it is just some die flaw...however, I have seen this same die flaw on pins on other definately authentic u-boat badge pins on the underside, same as you see here. As I recall these pins were all on zincers, and they all caught my attention because I thought they were at first maker marks, but they were just die flaws....does anybody have any explanation for this, or has anybody else noticed this on the underside of U-boat badge pins?
Kindest Regards,
JohnComment
-
Notice the rectangular "box" on the underside of the pin that at first glance looks as if it could contain a makers number...I have seen this before on pieces that were definately original:Comment
-
Could be likely if the pin set up was taken off another manufacturers badge, anyone know which one it could be without doing the research, "100"?
John not sure about the front of the badge you show there does not seen to be any "ballast" line running along the side of the boat, or is it just the angle of the photo?Regards, Rob
Collecting Inerests Awards / Badges and KriegsmarineComment
-
HI Rob:
Yes...at first when I see these type of pins with this "phantom box" I think they are marked 100 and sometimes they are but this one has no markings. The sub does have a ballast line. I have provided some pictures. The line is a little light so I can not tell if the line is light because the piece is cast or because the piece is well worn. Here are pictures. If you do not mind I can send the piece to you for a hands on inspection if that would help with coming to a more definative conclusion.
Kindest Regards,
JohnComment
-
The badge definately does not conform to the pictures that John has posted:Comment
-
I know in the early days some fake items puportedly were made in England and I am wondering if this is perhaps one of them as this piece certainly does have honest patina and age.Comment
-
Hi John,
On the ballast line I was actually referring to the other John's (Trident3) badge not yours.
You are quite welcome to send it to me but I would not like it to get lost on its way over the "pond". Will PM you re this.Regards, Rob
Collecting Inerests Awards / Badges and KriegsmarineComment
-
badge
I thought this was the image that went with the reverse, maybe not. I can see your point about the lacking ballast line, so I am not sure of the image as you pointed out.
Might have pulled the wrong image here.
Does look like neither John's or the image I posted have really well defined keel lines, so perhaps this another point to look at.
So, are all three of these good reverses? They have all been OK'd at one point or the other on the forum.Last edited by John R.; 03-13-2006, 09:28 AM.Comment
-
I think "100" belonged to L/55, Rudolf Wachtler and Lange, MittweidaOriginally posted by rhudspithComment
-
Back to the top for reviewComment
-
Hello John
yes : 100 is W&L but the eagle and the boat design is completely different . Another Schwerin mm
all the best
giorgioComment
-
What makes Schwerin Berlin submarine badges difficult to identify just from the mark is that each "strike" was different. So, you have ones that have deep strikes and others with light strikes, both types fine, but confusing to a collector who did not know.
The bottom line today is that you can't go by the mark for a Schwerin sub badge alone. You need to see the entire badge and evaluate it as a whole, not just the mark--the differences in good badges are just too great and the new fakes too good.
JohnComment
-
I agree .
The pin system of the Jonh T badge looks like the type used by W&L .
A badge very odd
giorgioComment
Comment