While I am quite sure this will kick up an uproar of a debate, I submit photos of a rather interesting Luftwaffe 25 GAB. maker marked R.K. The box looks really crappy and frankly, I like the back of the badge far more than the front. I know there is heated debate as to whether these were ever made in anything other than a trial/sample run. But I have not seen a fake with the R.K. mark prior to this. Your thoughts/opinions are greatly welcome!
-
Last edited by stogieman; 05-03-2005, 08:47 PM. -
The Reverse:
If I was buying this badge based on the back alone, I would probably take the chance. There's an awful lot about the back that I like. The rivets, the mark, the catch. There's even some "bubbling" in the metal that comes very close to the appearance of other RK badges. Interesting, N'est-ce pas?Last edited by stogieman; 05-03-2005, 08:47 PM. -
I don't like it.
Rick,
Disagree here. I find that most of these fake LuftGrdCombat badges are in fact marked "R.K." regardless if they are unnumbered or numbered and some even with the three rivet construction. Detlev has shown some in the past and I have file PICS saved as well. Seems there should be many old posts on this badge in question, usually in the #25 version or unnumbered. The file PIC I have almost identical to yours is marked #75. I don't seem to remember seeing any #50 badges though.
IMO, this one doesn't have the correct beak on the eagle for R.K. manufacture, the wreath appears too wide with the leaves too far spread apart and overall, the quality stinks.
Considering many collectors consider the three-rivet Muk-5 and R.K. to be the best quality badges, this one wouldn't fly for me. 
The back does look better, but not much IMO.
TimComment
-
Tried to do a search...
... in this forum but came up empty-handed. I agree on the front, like I said, just crappy... What scares me on this one is that the base metal is approaching reality on the back. Yes, the rivets are way too big for an R.K., and the hinge crimp is way off base. But the catch isn't bad...
I've said it before, I'll say it again, you'd think that someone with the talent to do this could find a more productive way to use their time...Comment
-
Hi Rick,
I have studied some years ago an example I got 25 marked R.K.
It was very nice looking, as yours, but unfortunately the end of my studys it was a probably sure reproduction
like yours.
As said Tim, eagle beck is wrong but what is more wrong is in reverse side:
- rivets,
- hinge's plates (ears)
- catch's plate
- "R" in mm
.......but I am sure will come out a sure 25 original one !!
ivan
Ivan BombardieriComment
-
1....
Ivan BombardieriComment
-
Ivan!
Sure as anything these two badges are twins! The only difference is yours has been aged a bit! The other thing that has always concerned me when something like this pops up is that if they tooled up to make them, you'd think there'd be a bunch floating around. i wonder how many "original" badges like this are squirreled away in collections!Comment
-
...right. mine is a clear example of not believe about the originality of one badge only from how it looks !Originally posted by Rick Versailles
ex-mine example was in one collection from a long time.
do you remember the example of Helmut Weitze's site?
I had it in my hands and it looks slightly different from ours.
I know there are collections with 50's 75's of this badges, clear reproductions.Last edited by IVAN; 12-15-2003, 01:46 PM.
Ivan BombardieriComment
Comment