Need help with 25 year NSDAP medal

[JoeW]

Hi Joe.

Yes, Ron's ring in Post #61 is the large size but I was actually referring to the small sized ring in Thomas's post #69.

Stan

I should have figured as the ring didn't match the comment. Are there any images of small ring (19) LS crosses mounted on Ordenschalle out there or on WAF? Either very small hooks would be used or sewn to the bar as in a multi-medal bar I have. But it doesn't seem logical to produce a medal requiring specialized forms of mounting on bars when they also produced the larger ring (19) crosses that worked with all types of standard medal bar devices.

Perhaps the small rings (19)s were intended only for the ladies' award of the 25 year cross.

[JoeW]

Well, I guess I answered my own question. I consulted my Atwood assembled Assmann catalog and found this page of medal bar devices. It appears that at least of their stock, one used a retaining device that would accept the small ring (19) 25 year LC crosses.



I am also curious about the diameter of the large (19) ring and the corresponding diamter of the hole of the loop on the medal. I will measure my small ring.

[Stan]

Joe, this court-mount holds a DRK medal with a small loop.

Stan

[JoeW]

Thank you for providing physical evidence to correct visual speculation about size and fit. So both large and small ring (19) gold crosses and both fit and could be used for medal bar mounting. But only the large ring (19) would accept the 30 mm ribbon for men. So again, the only reason would be the small ring would accept and look “designed” for the ladies 15mm ribbon.

[Jean-Claude]

Thank you for providing physical evidence to correct visual speculation about size and fit. So both large and small ring (19) gold crosses and both fit and could be used for medal bar mounting. But only the large ring (19) would accept the 30 mm ribbon for men. So again, the only reason would be the small ring would accept and look “designed” for the ladies 15mm ribbon.

Right but it should be noted that like most others medals NSDAP long service awards were often mounted on 25mm ribbon as well as 30mm ribbon either as single mounts like the ones shown in attached picture (often using the back plate 22884 style shown in your Assmann catalog page) or on long medal bars but, unlike the ladie's version, were not worn loose (just passed through the ribbon ring) so I agree the ring size did not matter on mounted ones

JC

[Jean-Claude]

Duplicate post

[jwburchell]

Re-assessment

On February 16, 2006, I posted my example of this award and received comments that it could be a reproduction, including the ribbon. See from posting #15 here: http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...=NSDAP+25+year

Since then, the obvious fake ribbon aside, discussions on this Forum have led to other examples of this award being shown with observations and comments being made on specific features which now lead me to seek another review of my example. Given the rarity of this award, I do not want to lightly dismiss the possibility that it could be an original piece, albeit contested.

Herewith, for re-consideration are more recent photos as well as summary comments of my example and salient points from earlier in this thread (which is a very good and informative read entirely):

My example shown here is a “thick”, heavier, 3-piece example showing the die flaw in the upper left wing of the eagle. (see comments #31, 33, 35, 36, 39 and 40)

On the reverse lower left arm, the rays do not cross over into the “EK” rim (see #24)

The suspension ring is unmarked (see #32)

The lettering or wreath is off-centre (see #42)

The symmetry of the swastika is good versus copies (see #45, 49, 50)

The eagle’s head shape is different from “19” marked ones (see #53)

It does bear markings at the top of the reverse upper arm being a guiding circle for attachment of the suspension loop.

Re: the very heavy version…unmarked with the flaw to the wing “IMO these are absolutely original” (#56, also #62)

#63: “All the major dealers agree that the heavy versions are indeed original….”.

I look forward to comments and a final assessment of this example.

John

[Brian S]

Thanks John. I have the same and look forward to answers as years ago was not conclusive.

[der-hase-fee]

The quality of the piece shown in post #82 does not meet that of other originals, unfortunately.

[kronn]

The post #82 IMO not good, not the expected quality

Alejandro

[jwburchell]

Thanks to the two gentlemen above for comments. Just to keep this going and - without wishing to be defensive - but drawing upon feedback from other Forum members, please note earlier comments in posts #52 and #56 that original "...surplus was always...not in very nice condition...." and that on heavy, unmarked examples with the wing flaw "quality...was not very good". I submit that allowances for this fact need to be made.

[Brian S]

Here's one. Quality doesn't look much different to me. ???

[Brian S]

Another

[Ian Hulley]

Another

If we are going to post my medal and photo then at least we can see the reverse text and the detail of the frosting/polished surround of the frame.

Ian.

[Ian Hulley]

Sorry John, there is a world of difference in the quality.

Ian