E-Stand Schwerin U-boat badge Opinions

[Nordmark]

In the end it comes down to this: Buy what you are comfortable with. I would not feel comfortable with this badge, so I did not buy it. That´s how I collect and that´s how I spend my money.




PS: I find it quite entertaining what kind of outrages we were able to read the last few days, simply because an item is discussed on a forum...

[Larry Lipps]

Guys,
Ineresting discussion! Kriegs badges aren't really my thing, so hopefully someone can give me a quick explanation. Most of what appears to be wear is in the recesses, not the high points. How is wear actually being determined? I would have thought that the high points would be the first to go.

[Norm F]

Guys,
Ineresting discussion! Kriegs badges aren't really my thing, so hopefully someone can give me a quick explanation. Most of what appears to be wear is in the recesses, not the high points. How is wear actually being determined? I would have thought that the high points would be the first to go.

Hi Larry,

Hard to say what the exact process is in this case, but I think it boils down to three possible processes:

1) corrosion - Not being a metallurgist I couldn't say with any authority what the effects of months of salty sea air may have on a brass badge. But in this case the highlights would be constantly smoothed by wear while the recesses would show the pitting of the corrosion.

2) wear - For a homogeneous base metal, wear would be smooth, but if there were impurities causing a heterogeneous substrate, the wear could result in a rough, irregular surface.

3) die characteristics - Like Daniel implied before, a die with dirt and debris buildup would result in a pitted surface to the badge, after which burnishing and subsequent wear might smooth out the highlights.

Gordon Williamson's words were: "I have had several Schwerin badges over the years where the brass metal has suffered this type of corrosion", so it sounds like he's tending towards scenario 1 or maybe a combination of 1 and 2?

Best regards,
---Norm

[Van]

If the badge is well worn, then has it been re finished??
I was not "pushing hard in the fake direction" I just pointed out that it looked like a cast item to me.
Van

[Norm F]

If the badge is well worn, then has it been re finished??
I was not "pushing hard in the fake direction" I just pointed out that it looked like a cast item to me.
Van

Hi Van,

Flash photography and bright scans can be misleading, but if I'm not mistaken, if you were to examine that badge closely in hand in daylight you would see that most of the gilding is in fact gone. The finish on KM clean worn Tombak badges can be very hard to judge from posted photos. Non-flash photography in bright indirect daylight conditions can be helpful.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Mike Kenny]

Hi,

When I first saw the obverse pic of the badge in question, I also thought that the badge was cast however, when I viewed the reverse everything looked acceptable so i put it down as another ugly Schwerin U-boat badge example.

I say another as I've had an example like this in the past however, the "pitting" was confined to the wing area and there was still finish present OVER the "pitting". Pitting would tend to imply a chemical reaction, and I see no indications of any normal tombak based reactions (verdigris, etc). I personally don't believe the "pitting" is due to wear as, it has already been pointed out, the "pitting" is mainly in the recesses of the badge (or the high points of the die). I'm more inclined in this case to believe it is a manufacturing problem of either poor quality tombak material or die problems (wear, poor die maintenance, an example from near the end of a run, etc).

Regards
Mike

PS: I've just edited some of the posts above to remove the linked pics which were making this thread very difficult to navigate.


.

[Norm F]

...I'm more inclined in this case to believe it is a manufacturing problem of either poor quality tombak material or die problems (wear, poor die maintenance, an example from near the end of a run, etc).

Hi Mike,

That's a good point. I forgot to add Tombak stock quality as another scenario to the list of possible contributing factors especially if there was residual fire gilding over top of the pitting:

1) corrosion - Not being a metallurgist I couldn't say with any authority what the effects of months of salty sea air may have on a brass badge. But in this case the highlights would be constantly smoothed by wear while the recesses would show the pitting of the corrosion.

2) wear - For a homogeneous base metal, wear would be smooth, but if there were impurities causing a heterogeneous substrate, the wear could result in a rough, irregular surface.

3) die characteristics - Like Daniel implied before, a die with dirt and debris buildup would result in a pitted surface to the badge, after which burnishing and subsequent wear might smooth out the highlights.

4) pitted Tombak stock for the planchet - In this case there could be residual finish over top of the pitting.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Schütze0815]

If the badge is well worn, then has it been re finished??
I was not "pushing hard in the fake direction" I just pointed out that it looked like a cast item to me.
Van

Hi Van,
well sometimes my English is not good enough to form the right sentence or find the right words to express or describe what my mind is thinking.
Maybe “pointing” would have been better.
Regards
Sascha

[Thomas Durante]

When I first saw the obverse pic of the badge in question, I also thought that the badge was cast however, when I viewed the reverse everything looked acceptable so i put it down as another ugly Schwerin U-boat badge example.
.

This is how I saw it too, first thought was a casting, but looking at the reverse I felt it was quite believable and in line with other original Schwerins.

Tom