Warning: session_start(): open(/var/cpanel/php/sessions/ea-php74/sess_86868d25b81973110fb67a6723dbddb1b63ef2ed7ba92442, O_RDWR) failed: No space left on device (28) in /home/devwehrmacht/public_html/forums/includes/vb5/frontend/controller/page.php on line 71 Warning: session_start(): Failed to read session data: files (path: /var/cpanel/php/sessions/ea-php74) in /home/devwehrmacht/public_html/forums/includes/vb5/frontend/controller/page.php on line 71 Party Pins - ok? - Wehrmacht-Awards.com Militaria Forums

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Party Pins - ok?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
    #1

    Party Pins - ok?

    Hi guys,
    Can you please give me your opinions of theses pins. I've tried to research them and from what I've found they all seem ok. Since it's not an area I collect I wanted to put them up for comments and see if they really are or .
    Thanks and Merry Christmas!
    Tim
    Attached Files
    Tags: None
    #2
    backs

    backs...
    Attached Files

    Comment

      #3
      I think the party badge should be discussed. M1/128 should be Eugen Schmidhäussler, Pforzheim.
      Paul Schulze & Co, Lubeck I could not find on the M1 list BUT they are listed as M9/128 for tinnies/day badges. There is another m1/128 example on the party badge data base, but it does not look like this one (the pics are not very clear).

      Mike Pinkus owns that one, and perhaps he could get a closer pic to post for comparison. The front looks good on this one, but the reverse is giving me some troubles.

      Al

      Comment

        #4
        The enamel NSDAP badge M1/128 is the only one I would be concerned about the others seem okay to me.

        Comment

          #5
          I think that you got a nice set of pins there Tim, thanks for posting them.....i understand the concerns about the 128 marked pin but i like the maker marks on the pin plate(i can not recall a fake with that characteristic...just another complexity level for a faker)....as far as the 128 marking being for one set of manufacturors only, i think we fail to account for the number of changes throughout the RZM history of the numbers being recycled among varioous makers for whatever reasons)......ill try and post some pics of my 128 tomorrow
          mike



          Originally posted by Al P
          I think the party badge should be discussed. M1/128 should be Eugen Schmidhäussler, Pforzheim.
          Paul Schulze & Co, Lubeck I could not find on the M1 list BUT they are listed as M9/128 for tinnies/day badges. There is another m1/128 example on the party badge data base, but it does not look like this one (the pics are not very clear).

          Mike Pinkus owns that one, and perhaps he could get a closer pic to post for comparison. The front looks good on this one, but the reverse is giving me some troubles.

          Al

          Comment

            #6
            Thanks for the replies.

            I'm not sure what to think of the 128 pin. The quality is certainly top notch and the construction seems right but I must admit I'm not up on the different makers' marks. It's definitely different on the reverse from Mike's shown in the long party pin thread. I'm really curious to see if any conclusion can be drawn about this one. It would be interesting to see if someone else has one like this although it may not prove anything either way.

            Al's comment "M1/128 should be Eugen Schmidhäussler, Pforzheim. Paul Schulze & Co, Lubeck I could not find on the M1 list BUT they are listed as M9/128 for tinnies/day badges". is interesting. I think it's a good sign that the company and #128 are related (or the fakers used that number because of the connection . I'm going to stay optimistic for now).

            Tim
            Last edited by Tim L.; 12-25-2004, 03:24 PM.

            Comment

              #7
              Party Pins - ok?

              Gentlemen I question the M1/128 badge--why would the maker double its mark on the pin, its maker name and its maker RZM code. I have never seen this before,granted I haven't seen all the badges made but from what I have seen it's unusual. I can look at Mike's pin on number #206 of the NSDAP Membership Badge Database and tell that it is good but this M1/128 looks like you standard M1/129 fake from the front- first impression I got. The rest seem to look OK.

              Comment

                #8
                Originally posted by jray2986
                Gentlemen I question the M1/128 badge--why would the maker double its mark on the pin, its maker name and its maker RZM code. I have never seen this before,granted I haven't seen all the badges made but from what I have seen it's unusual. I can look at Mike's pin on number #206 of the NSDAP Membership Badge Database and tell that it is good but this M1/128 looks like you standard M1/129 fake from the front- first impression I got. The rest seem to look OK.
                Hi jray2986(?),

                In this thread http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73852&highlight=m1%2F129 you referred to an example of an M1/129 as a "standard fake". Is that the one you mean? If so, the obverse isn't close to being the same as the one I posted here. A simple comparison of the areas with the "-", the shape of the "A"s and the way the swaz is floating in the M1/129 fake and the edges of the swaz in the one I posted touch the edge clearly show they are not the same. Here's a side by side pic. Is there another "standard M1/129 fake" you're referring to? if so, could you post a pic?

                Thanks,
                Tim
                Attached Files

                Comment

                  #9
                  Originally posted by Mike Pinkus
                  ....as far as the 128 marking being for one set of manufacturors only, i think we fail to account for the number of changes throughout the RZM history of the numbers being recycled among varioous makers for whatever reasons).
                  mike
                  Hi Mike,

                  It is a myth that RZM numbers were recycled. C.R. Davis who wrote the previous RZM Handbook in 1977 reviewed all known RZM numbers and documents to find only two (2!) RZM numbers out of the thousands issued had ever been reissued in the 10 years the RZM was active. Numbers were simply retired or withdrawn, and new ones were added onto the end of the list (or sometimes the middle, since they were added in blocks).

                  The comments about the M1/128 belonging to a different manufacturer than shown on the pin plate are correct. That's just sloppy work by the fakers - like putting an Assmann logo next to a Junkers name. The badge shown is just a newer generation of fakes made by someone who doesn't understand the RZM process (they wrongly believe that the manufacturer numbers - like 128 - stay the same from category to category - M1 to M9) when they actually don't.

                  I actually have a photo of this M1/128 marking in my RZM book as a fake due to the number/maker name on the pin plate mismatch.

                  I suspect that either the fakers of the previously seen M1/128 fake badge have either updated their dies as people caught on - or we have a fake of a fake, which was reproduced with the same error. Either way, this party pin is a repro.
                  Last edited by sjl; 12-26-2004, 04:29 PM.

                  Comment

                    #10
                    Hi Stephen,

                    Thanks for the info. Would you mind posting the picture of the this badge from your book. (is that the C.R Davis book?).

                    Thanks,
                    Tim

                    Comment

                      #11
                      Great Info!!! The maker on the pin cover, Paul Schulze & Co, Lubeck, was not even listed on the M1 list so I wonder if they did produce party badges at all.

                      The front of this badge is very scary, are there any signs that it is a repro or are we in trouble here?

                      Al

                      Comment

                        #12
                        I've had this pin for about 6 years so if it's fake I wouldn't doubt if the obverse has been used with other maker marks. It's really nice quality so that isn't going to be a give away. I'm still on the fence about this badge but if it's bad I can live with 4 out of 5 . The pin in question was part of a small lot that included the painted party pin shown here, a machine embroidered coast artillery breast eagle, and a panzer collar skull. The other pieces are ok, well worth the what I paid, and I like the 128 pin either way.

                        Hopefully Stephen can post the picture and text from his book, it would be good to have this thread as a reference if one of these pins turns up again.

                        Tim

                        Comment

                          #13
                          Stephen
                          thanks for the info as always...if possible i would like to see a pic...do they know anything of the origins of this fake?..
                          mike
                          Originally posted by Tim L.
                          Hi Stephen,

                          Thanks for the info. Would you mind posting the picture of the this badge from your book. (is that the C.R Davis book?).

                          Thanks,
                          Tim

                          Comment

                            #14
                            Originally posted by Mike Pinkus
                            Stephen
                            thanks for the info as always...if possible i would like to see a pic...do they know anything of the origins of this fake?..
                            mike
                            I don't have photo privileges here (I'll have to pay up in the new year), so I've put it up on the web. If anyone wants to repost it here, please do: http://home.interlog.com/~sjl/m1_128.jpg.

                            The clincher for me that this is a fake is that P. Schulze never had an "M1" number, and so could not produce Party pins by law. Their "M9" number was only a license for producing Day Badges (Tinnies). The RZM had severe penalties for producing without a license, and RZM badges could only be sold through RZM approved and controlled retailers, so there was no way they could even get these badges sold if they made them.

                            The enamel is the best quality I've seen on a fake, although it tends to bulge around the letters and it has the tell-tale pin that overhangs the front.

                            CR Davis' book is long out of print, but great if you can get it - especially with the addendum after he discovered a trove of new RZM documents. My book is more of a collector's guide with photos, the RZM's history and structure, and the complete M lists. Once you understand how the RZM worked, it becomes easier to spot fakes. It was because Davis's book is long gone that I published mine earlier this year.

                            Hope it helps.
                            Last edited by sjl; 12-27-2004, 12:18 AM.

                            Comment

                              #15
                              Repost of picture.
                              Attached Files

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next

                              Users Viewing this Thread

                              Collapse

                              There is currently 1 user online. 0 members and 1 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 10,032 at 08:13 PM on 09-28-2024.

                              Working...
                              X