Minesweeper opinions?

[luftkrieg]

Gentlemen,

I have become quite fond of the Minesweeper Badge and am on the look out for an affordable early example (i.e. non zinc) to add to my collection.

I have come across this Minsweeper Badge for sale. The price is good but my fear is that it may be too good to be true. I am a little green when it comes to these badges so I would like your learned opinion on this badge before I buy. I am going to hazard a guess and say it is good. These are the only pictures at the moment.

My thanks
Pierce

[luftkrieg]

The seller's description to me:

"Good early example. Some gilt remaining to wreath. Coke bottle pin. Uniform top hook absent. Very sharp detail. Non maker marked."

[Norm F]

Hi Pierce,

It's a good honest zinc Deumer. So not "early" per se since it's not tombak. Shame about the top hook being broken off.

This is one of the more common zinc Minesweepers and damaged as well so therefore it should be one of the most inexpensive combat badges you can get. Damaged badges are harder to re-sell if your interest wavers to another field so you wouldn't want to pay more than $100 or so for this one in my opinion (but I realize there will be different ideas on estimates of value).

Best regards,
---Norm

[BubbaZ]

Hi Pierce,
As Norm has said, this is classic mid-to-late war zincer by Wilhelm Deumer – Lüdenscheid. One of the most common zinc Minesweepers. Top hook is broken, otherwise looks fine
I enclose my zinc unmarked Deumer for you to compare.
Cheers,
Hubert

[luftkrieg]

Thanks for the replies gents! I appreciate you taking a look.
Hubert- this is a great example.


To me both these lines are contradictory:

"Good early example" & "Some gilt remaining to wreath"

I am aware that the zinc pieces get a nice bronze wash which wears off over time. Am I right in thinking an early tomback example would not be guilded?

Thanks again
Pierce

[Norm F]

To me both these lines are contradictory:

"Good early example" & "Some gilt remaining to wreath"

I am aware that the zinc pieces get a nice bronze wash which wears off over time. Am I right in thinking an early tomback example would not be guilded?

Thanks again
Pierce

Hi Pierce,

Gilding (not "guilding") is simply the application of a gold colored layer, by whatever method. A badge treated in this manner can be described as "gilt" or "gilded" which is the same thing. Early tombak (brass alloy) badges typically received a fire gilding, a highly toxic high quality method using a heated amalgam of gold and mercury, whereas later zinc badges received a safer low cost application of gold colored lacquer.

So all KM badges were "gilded" by some process or other, and it's fine to say "some gilding remaining" (but "gilt" is an adjective, not a noun). What isn't correct is to call a zinc badge "early wartime" since it wasn't used in badge production until probably the latter half of 1941 at the earliest.

Best regards,
---Norm

[luftkrieg]

Hi Pierce,

Gilding (not "guilding") is simply the application of a gold colored layer, by whatever method. A badge treated in this manner can be described as "gilt" or "gilded" which is the same thing. Early tombak (brass alloy) badges typically received a fire gilding, a highly toxic high quality method using a heated amalgam of gold and mercury, whereas later zinc badges received a safer low cost application of gold colored lacquer.

So all KM badges were "gilded" by some process or other, and it's fine to say "some gilding remaining" (but "gilt" is an adjective, not a noun). What isn't correct is to call a zinc badge "early wartime" since it wasn't used in badge production until probably the latter half of 1941 at the earliest.

Best regards,
---Norm

Norm,

Thank you for this detailed reply. I have definitely learned something from this thread.

Kind regards
Pierce