Estand Badge - Zinc or buntmetal - %?

[Darrell]

.....If it's not brass or tombak it's either zinc or plastic.
Tony

Exactly. Zinc. That's what almost everyone in this thread is saying. We can go on all day about theoretical chemical compositions et. al. But at the end of the discussion it's regarded as zinc.

That's all this thread was created to get ... a concensous on material. And because most of us here classify items as either Zinc vs. Tombak - Buntmetal-whatever, it clearly falls into the former category.

End of story if you ask me. Maybe we should start another thread on definitions and chemical compositions of different alloys. It maybe interesting, but not what this discussion was created to settle.

[MH184]

And just in case you're still in two minds, read this:

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=189400

[John R.]

The original sales post by Dan is 100% correct. It is a zinc and buntmetall/tombak badge. However, it is classified as zinc not buntmetall/tombak even though, as is typical with these badges, the fittings (hinge, pin and catch) are in fact, not pure zinc unless the catch is cast-in (normally). This also applies to the various non-zinc finishes on the reverse that changed over the course of the war.

Other metals can be used for the hardware also with their own unique non-zinc properties including iron and other alloy steels.

Also, in fact, zinc is part of of tombak/buntmetall and as to what percentage, it is not important to the classification of these badges. In the case of tombak/buntmetall, the zinc composition is as Tony stated give or take based on the period of time produced and other factors.

The point is not chemistry as Tony has summarized it very well IMO and is a nice reference.

Basically though, as most of us know, badges are either zinc or tombak based on the badge, not the hardware or reverse finish. In some cases of course aluminum, silver, kriegsmetall, and other metals were used in the making of a badge. In the case of Kriegsmarine normal issue badges though, most fall into either the tombak or zinc catagories of which this example is zinc.

Again, the description used by Dan is right and if you refer to the best reference for the minesweeper badge, Das Kriegsabzeichen für Minensuch, U-bootsjagd und Sicherungsverbände by Verlag Weber you will see that is exactly how he describes the badges in that book.

John

[Darrell]

Not a knock against you John but man, suddenly everyone is so technical in describing what materials badges are made out of now.

Next thing people will be told to make a running inventory on what material the catch / pin / hinge are made of as well as the small pin "inside" the hinge.

Geez people, call it zinc or call it Tombak like we have always done in the past and put it to rest

[John R.]

Hey, knock away. It is just a forum. Nothing is sudden about it, the information on the material characteristics of the hardware is old news and in the reference books if collectors would actually buy and read them including those like Weber's written in German.

I think it is important to know as much about a badge as possible including the hardware, but that is my take on the hobby--I look at it as research and I am glad Dan brought it up intentionally or not, it does not matter I think. He described it correctly, but not completely, and it deserved a response IMO of more depth than a cursory reply.

Since the basic research is done, I think it may (or may not to others) be normal to get more and more technical in what we are looking at. The question was brought up about the badge and in this case, not sure if just saying "zinc" or "tombak" was a good enough answer.

John

[MH184]

Hi John,


Original sales thread - the thread has been edited, the description now evident is not the one in the same that caused the contention and henceforth deliberation.



Kr

Marcus