The medal you received is the same one pictured above in my post.
Both pictures show a nick on the eagle's right wing in line with the cross.
Both pictures also show nicks on the top right arm of the cross that match.
If you measure the medal you received I am sure it will match the measurements and weight I have posted.
In the email you sent me today you state and I quote:
"The one you posted is a picture on a original zincer."
But this is the exact medal you received ... an original zincer.
You also accused me in your email that I switched medals.
This is not true.
Your obv. and rev. photos match my photos.
Also note: the term "zincer" does not mean that the medal is struck in pure zinc. This could be a medal made of an alloy of zinc, lead, and other metals. Yes, the Germans actually used lead in some of their alloys! This medal probably contains both and is still original.
I saw that the one you posted is the one you sent me, but the pics you have posted is not the best quality, so I did look just hastely and it looked like another one, so that was my bad, sorry.
Now back to the medal, yes this is the same medal, but in your pics it looks like a zincer, but when you look at my pics, which are of better quality (and can get even better if necessary) you can clearly see things that aren´t so good, you see the cast marks for gods sake!!!
IMO this is a fake, and I would like to hear more opinions on the thing.
You can match the zinc bubbles in the field of your obverse and my obverse to verify that they match.
They both have a matching small rim nick at 9 o'clock.
This should leave no doubt that both medals match.
My pictures show a bit more detail because I use studio lights for my photos.
You posted 4 minutes ahead of me while I was composing this new post.
So I didn't see it.
Since then I have made edits as new thoughts came to mind.
OK, I am glad you admit the medals are the same.
At least we both agree on that now.
By cast marks I think you are referring to the line on the rim?
That could be caused from using a die collar used on the earlier tomback SW medal which is thinner.
Who else has 3 mm thick zinc SW medals to post?
Do they have the same rim marks?
Post the weight in grams along with photos.
Petri
You have a beautiful example of the early thinner medal there. It has a very lusterous finish because the underlying metal is not porous and not as reactive to dirt, air, and water. What you call buntmetal I call tombac.
If you lay both down on a table, the top of the early one should match the line on the rim of the zincer. I just verified this with a ruler against my screen in a number of places. I don't think this is a coincidence.
I think this is evidence of using an old die collar - not a casting line.
Dan
This social welfare medal I bought from you still puzzles me, I will show it to some people on a local gun show that collect these kind of medals, so they can see it live and tell what they think.
It will be interesting, so again sorry for jumping to conclusions to fast, sometimes you get carried away.
It will be very interesting to investigate this one.
Dear Petri
Yes, very interesting! That line surprised me too! If it is a genuine medal, the die collar is the only explanation that makes sense.
Also, some of these late war medals and badges that are the same size vary tremendously in weight. I weigh and measure all my medals and badges. I see supposedly zinc medals and badges that weigh way more than they should. I have to conclude many German firms were adding lead in with their zinc. This must have been a very common practice for late war German manufacturers.
Comment