GWL Pilot's Badges

[Larry Lipps]

That's another issue I thought had died years ago. That only the makers mark with the ring break were real. The ring break has been copied with near perfection, and there are badges with providence without it. I would be hesitant basing an opinion only on the maker's mark.

[Jos L C]

The funny thing is , and I mean the funny things is that " no dealer " can be of any help when it comes to fakes..
Dealers are spreading these items , but they never know where they come from, same with other items than badges..
Let's continue the everlasting game.., spreaders versus collectors, how exciting..
We probably love this detective work all the time and it keeps things going, people with the answers versus " the specialists" , pathetic, but interesting to those who love to puzzle.
Meaning your provider and " maybe best friend" is watching and following your problem in some cases.
Do not tell me dealers don't know any source when they are the first to sell them, they even ordered them to surprise their best customers.

Just something to realize..

Jos.

[Pierre]

Gents, could we sum up your thoughts by no fingerprints on a GWL pilot badge = fake taking in consideration that bunch of mint ones arrived on recent shows? Or could it be a new "russian hoarde" even if those badge weren't cased?

Pierre

[mmiller]

'Someday' may be closer than we think. We always feared the day when ... the fakes would outnumber the authentic pieces. AT that point, the fakes would become accepted as the 'norm', and the authentic pieces would be uncharacteristic to the (fake's) 'norm'. The authentic stuff then becomes fake.

Jos,

Gee, you sound a tad cynical. I can't understand why! I guess we'll have to go down fighting.


Regards,
Mark

[Joe D]

Gents, could we sum up your thoughts by no fingerprints on a GWL pilot badge = fake taking in consideration that bunch of mint ones arrived on recent shows? Or could it be a new "russian hoarde" even if those badge weren't cased?

Pierre

So, what is the verdict? No fingerprint equals fake.

[mmiller]

Joe,

Well, for the time being, at least, I would say that the swirls indicate authentic. Sans swirls = we aren't sure. Maybe OK, maybe fake. All of a sudden, a lot of this kind are turning up. They weren't around 4 or 5 years ago. To me, it's not rocket science....

I'm not a gambler with my collection. I know what I would spend my money on.

Regards,
Mark

[Joe D]

Thanks Mark The SOS should be interesting.

[Robert P.]

I've gone way back in our archives and read some of the very first threads on the GWL Pilot badges. Even back then, the 'swirls' were considered mandantory to originality.
http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...ight=GWL+Pilot

And, these other fakes have been out since the 70's! Going back and doing a search has opened my eyes. Some of the older 'salts' are gone from the WAF now, but still a few remain, and I'm glad that they do! I thank them for posting these photos for us to learn from. This thread, and others like it, will 'document' what's original. Our existance as an elite group of collectors depends on it. Thank you!

Robert

[Pierre]

Considering the amount of money which has to be paid for a tombak pilot badge nowadays I will stay away from these GWL pilot badges without the fingerprints.

Many thanks to the experts who pointed out this detail and saved my a$$ one more time.

Pierre

[Robert P.]

Guys, this post has taken a turn I hadn't expected but I'd like to try and get more feedback to my original question before it dies. The basic purpose of the forum is to share knowledge and experience about this minefield we call a hobby. Considering that I saw five pilots badges on one dealers table at the MAX without any trace of the "fingerprint" pattern and at the Houston Show, there were three more, I'm still looking for answers. Basically, is it acceptable for GWL Pilot's Badges to not have this pattern and be accepted as original? I've long had concerns about the "perfect fake" creeping in and being accepted as original. I certainly don't want to cast doubt on original examples, but I don't want to see a flood of fakes become accepted as originals. I know a lot of you guys have GWL badges so what's the verdict?

Larry,

I've thought about what you said all last night and halfway through today. You said it perfectly, Larry! I'm certain that most of the older collectors, and hopefully most of the new, here feel exactly the same way as you stated. I hope that one day our low number of original badges aren't considered fakes because the fakes out-number the originals. Members before us have already laid the foundation of what's original. We've worked our way through the GWL maker mark years ago when the copies started coming on the scene. That foundation has been laid. Now we're seeing the growing numbers of GWL Pilot's badges emerging from dealers, and being posted here. I believe this thread is laying another 'absolute' for us to judge them by. Looking at their maker mark I see a difference in design. The badge Steven Cassidy posted is what I consider original, IMO, so are your photos, Larry. I believe this only because of the many threads I have read in the archives, from the oldest to the newest. Pierre made a sound statement in regard to the money we spend. I feel exactly as Larry stated, "I don't want to see a flood of fakes become accepted as originals."

Robert

[Mathias1703]

Robert,

we talked about the GWL badges today and I get your point.

I have the pilot that I offered on e-stand (not for sale anymore) in my hands and I´m comparing the piece with all photos that I found in the internet, books and so on.

The only difference I see is the missing fingerprint on the eagle. But I saw a lot of Pilot/Observer from GWL without the fringerprint too.

So I would like to discuss the pilotbadge again in this thread. If this badge is a fake we have a big problem with pieces marker marks GWL.

Another point is that nobody made only one fake. I think the crooks are making 50, 100 pieces or more. So where are the other fakes comparable with my badge?

I got the badge round about 1 year ago and I thought..."wow, what a beauty"! I posted the badge here and all were happy with it. It´s very difficult for me to believe that the badge is a fake.
But now I can´t sell it because who would like to buy a GWL without the fingerprint after this thread?
The only way for me is back to the seller (I hope it´s possible).

Maybe some of you guys could post the measures and the weight from a GWL with fingerprint...?
This would be very interesting for me.

I will post the photos again here in the thread and I hope it´s okay, that I like to discuss the piece once more.

regards,

Mathias

[Mathias1703]

[Mathias1703]

[Robert P.]

I do see a difference in the GWL maker marks (the circle) in of the photos Larry posted (post #1). Two of the circles are broken, one is complete - yet all have the fingerprint swirls. Did the earlier badges have a perfect complete circle before the die flaw develope?

Mathias, in one of your photos the swastika appears to have a coating of paint? over the swastika. Does the eagle appear to be painted black?


Robert

[Tim Calvert]

Mathias,

I can't imagine that one being fake. Too many good things about it.
I've been on the road for 7 months and don't have my collection handy,
but I own a GWL pilot that, if I recall correctly, doesn't show signs of
the fingerprint. I got it in 2000 from Andy Hopkins who got it from
Niemann in the 90's. It's featured in the article by Andy on this site,
has been worn and is, other than the fingerprint, 100% textbook.
I've compared it to 4 other GWL pilot's that were or are in my collection
and which had the fingerprint.

IMO, having a badge in hand and if need be, checking it out under 10x
magnification should solve all questions if you know what to look for.


There may be a new uber badge on the market that lacks the fingerprint,
but I think it's wrong to jump to simple conclusions like "all GWL pilot &
P/O's w/o fingerprints are fake".

Here is an old shot of the badge I'm talking about.