Nsdap 10 Year Long Service Award for Review

[Nydigger1]

Any info is appreciated. I have spoken with a few of my collecting friends state-side who say its good, yet I have also spoken with a European collector who said it was fake. I have seen thin variant examples of all 3 of these nsdap long service awards. This one is made of bronze and has a decent amount of wear on the front and back, im guessing from use. The ribbon passes the UV test as well.

Thank you

[wahnsinn_opc]

Hello. For me Not good.

[Nydigger1]

Hello. For me Not good.

Thank you for the input, can you please explain what makes it fake? Just trying to learn / clarify. Thank you.

[tranchant]

10years NS medal

hello nyd
look one in one piece construction on a medalbar in my collection! details are very good, your look strange!
best regards
patrick

[Tony T-S]

The comparison to the original on the medal bar says it all. Not for me either.

[Nydigger1]

hello nyd
look one in one piece construction on a medalbar in my collection! details are very good, your look strange!
best regards
patrick

I appreciate the responses everyone but I would suggest taking another look between the medal bar example and the example i posted. The details on mine arent as striking as the medal bar because the example I posted has a significant amount of wear both to the front and the back, which I assume is from use.

People have been dismissive due to lack of detail but I submit that that the detail is lacking BECAUSE of the wear. If you look at the thickness of mine and the suspension where it connects to the ring, vs the medal bar, those details are the same. Its tough to explain via pictures but Im almost positive, in hand, you all would understand why im reluctant to dismiss my example as a fake. In hand its much more convincing.

[Nydigger1]

First two pics are of the suspension ring which is comparable to other examples, nextv2 pics are to show the wear, aka, lack of detail. Look at how worn down the wreath is on the reverse as well as the wear on the front (wreath and eagle) i submit that the correct suspension loop amount of wear, does not immediately dismiss this as a bad badge. Someone mentioned casting to me before but i see no cast marks. Its a 1 piece all around.

[ironfist]

imo

Hello .
Just to put my 2 eggs worth in.
How much wear do you think this would have gotten.
Sorry but with this amount of poor detail Or (wear ) i would steer clear of it .
Much better examples out there.
Regards Pete

[Nydigger1]

Hello .
Just to put my 2 eggs worth in.
How much wear do you think this would have gotten.
Sorry but with this amount of poor detail Or (wear ) i would steer clear of it .
Much better examples out there.
Regards Pete

I appreciate the response.

I have / have had several pieces from both collections and vet lots that have seen even more use than this nsdap 10 year. Here are 2 flaks I currently have as an example of what wear and use can do to a piece. One is completely warped while the other has so much wear to the front that the details are mostly gone. The 2nd example with the missing details was just given the thumbs up on the Luft section yesterday.

My rule of thumb is to look at the hardware of a piece and let that speak for itself rather than just nice or ugly a piece looks. And so far the only things said about my piece is lack of detail even though there is NOTHING else that would give it away as bad. No cast marks, no funky hardware, etc etc.



What we do know is that the ribbon is good, the suspension is correct, it IS NOT cast, and the base metal is correct. IMO the piece has more factors in favor of it being good than against if using the wear / lack of details DUE TO the wear is the only thing that the assumption is based on.

It is entirely possible that the medal was originally worn by the owner at some point, especially if it was someone who contributed to the party but was not part of the military. It would make sense because like with the flaks (both early nickel silver) the pattern of the nsdap medal is consistent with an early example and would have seen some kind of use.

Not trying to argue, but its important that pieces like this are discussed thoroughly for the future and that we discuss hardware and overall factors of a piece instead of just the looks. I look forward to continuing this discussion with all involved. Thank you for reading.

[DanCz]

I take all your points on board and so long as you are happy with the medal then at the end of the day that is all that really matters. However, this not a particularly rare item and much better quality examples can be readily found. I certainly would pass on this example.

[Medals45]

NYD, I have on of these medals in my collection. I have a cased example. Comparing my medal to yours the thing that jumps out at me on yours is the eagle. There is no real detail on the eagles chest, diamond boxes. I don't think that it is due to wear, but about casting. E medals has a nice group you can check out to compare. My medal is quite heavy. There are some pics of my medal on this web site . As a former poster replied if you are happy with the medal than that is what matters. Remember though that fake medals will never appreciate in value. I always have in the back of my mind that even selling real medals is not always easy. The vendors at shows will only give you 1/2 the value of the piece, they have overhead costs. Tread carefully it is a mine field !

[Medals45]

NyDig, I was doing some research on the these awards and saw your post. I own a 10 year award. First difference I see comparing to mine is the thickness. That may or may not be an issue. What I do see is how your eagle lacks all detail on breast. I know you say due to wear but I don't believe so. There are fakes of the 15 and also the 25 out there, have to be very careful.

John

[rebeldevil89]

Any info is appreciated. I have spoken with a few of my collecting friends state-side who say its good, yet I have also spoken with a European collector who said it was fake. I have seen thin variant examples of all 3 of these nsdap long service awards. This one is made of bronze and has a decent amount of wear on the front and back, im guessing from use. The ribbon passes the UV test as well.

Thank you

Personal opinion, but it looks like more than just wear to me. Looks like it never had the detail to begin with, could be wrong though.

[Jean-Claude]

Hi,

No expert but I do have a few of these and I think the piece shown by NyDigger matches an original bronze specimen I have that is also not in the best of shapes but drapery mount singles of the earlier bronze version are not so easy to find so I'm happy with it.

To me mine looks like the exact same version as the OP but with a bit less wear. Being bronze instead of zink would expain why its thinner & more subject to wear but I must say its the first time I see one with such extensive wear, particularly on the beading of the arms & wreath which are not high points and exposed like the eagle is. The only explanation I can think of is that it was once part of a longer medal bar that got banged around but even so medals/medals bars were not worn on a daily basis so its difficult to visualize what caused such wear

Attached pictures of mine are not the best but all I have for now

Best regards

JC

[CurtD]

The original medal looks like a coin that has been passed around for 60+ years. Notice that both sides are heavily worn. That is just not going to happen to a medal. I suspect it was filed down to hide imperfections. At any rate, there are certainly many better examples available. This is not an expensive medal.