Sorry for the crap photos...i have an opportunity to pick this up but it looks a little different then what in have seen before. Thoughts?
-
-
Front -
Dante, it is impossible to have any thoughts since the picture is so bad. Please post pictures of both the front and back.Originally posted by Dante Gambino View Post
Good clear closeups.Comment
-
I agree.
Br. JamesComment
-
No chance. The fat runes as well as Morigi-reverse give it away. 100% fake without doubt, no further pics needed my side. Sorry, hope you didn't waste too much money on it and all the other nice things one should say.Comment
-
Completely wrong.
Regards, WimFreedom is not for FreeComment
-
Not original IMO.Comment
-
i would not want to buy this one, keep your money untill a nice Hoffstätter comes alongComment
-
thanks guys!Comment
-
im assuming this one is bad too..ruins are too fat? Anyone have a nice pic of a good one so I can compare?Comment
-
nevermind...did some more research...this one is bad too....gotta get those marked backs and thinner ruins! Thanks again!Comment
-
One of the first rules is that it has to be mm with "Hoffstätter" in incuse relief Unless it is a Gahr of course.
Regards, WimFreedom is not for FreeComment
-
Agree with Wim. Either stamped by Hoffstatter from Bonn; or hand engraved from the more desirable Gahr firm.Originally posted by Wim Vangossum View Post
MilComment
-
Here we go again. Nonsense. Whose rule? Yours?Originally posted by Wim Vangossum View Post
No evidence, but what the hell, who needs proof on the old
WAF.
Just throw those opinions out as if they prove themselves.
Right Wim?Comment
-
Who said the Gahr's were "hand engraved" on the reverse?Originally posted by Military View Post
Why would the firm go to this trouble on a mass produced item?
Another collector myth in the making.
Only on the WAF, folks.Comment
Comment