Silver L 14

[norge]

Hi All. Is this one a good one? Hope pics are good enough. Best, norge

[norge]

L 14

[Ron P]

I'm not familiar with this maker but having said that the hinge setup looks ackward and mismatched from the base. The leaves on the obverse lack detail (but might be from uneven paint) and the Swaz does not appear very crisp. Also the reverse seems to lack finish while the obverse has a lot as though repainted. However, lets see what the experts say. I myself have doubts. Regards, Ron.

[Andreas Klein]

I have no problems with the badge. Perhaps i would test the obverse finish with aceton but imo it's good.

It seems that sometimes the makers put only finish on the obverse of a badge.

[fugpaw]

I have no problems with the badge. Perhaps i would test the obverse finish with aceton but imo it's good.

It seems that sometimes the makers put only finish on the obverse of a badge.

Andreas - due to the overall finish of this WB, would you consider it to be made late war?

The reason I ask is that the details are not very sharp (the leaves, the berries at the top etc.) - which suggests to me a worn die. Or is it just a simple matter that Friedrich Orth manufactured WB's were not the best quality?

Mike

[Hans N]

This is a type of WB that i don´t beleave in.

[fugpaw]

This is a type of WB that i don´t beleave in.

Hans - (I think I already know the answer) but why?

Mike

[Hans N]

Why not do the other way around Mike since you think you know the answer Don´t spoil my "fun" here by asking me why i don´t like it that fast

Come let´s discuss this type here and now...

[fugpaw]

OK Hans - here's why I dont' like it:

1. The berries at the top are wrong.

2. The detail overall is very poor.

3. The catch/hinge setup is suspect from my perspective.

4. I don't like the maker mark.

Anything I've missed?

Mike

[fugpaw]

Opinions required on my observations, come on Hans I know you want to cut loose - so do it!

Mike

[Hans N]

Well... i would like to know first why Andreas likes it... after all he is a co-writer of the WB book that´s in the doing.

[Dennis P]

Mike K did some nice comparison shots of these L14s with the L22s sharing the same type of maker mark. The berry pattern was the same as I recall, and other obverse traits as well. I don't want to post HIS photos, but maybe he will see this thread and weigh in with his opinion.

I do not recall a consensus of opinion being drawn from prior threads.

I thought that Andreas had a tombak version of this badge with a different setup. I know that Mike K's hinge was of a different type.

I am anxious to hear all opinions on these L14s out there as they always seem to generate controversy. I have files on five different types of L/14 massives, NOT including the notorious Floch FAKE. Four of the five (including the one that started this thread) continue to spark debate.

Dennis

[Dennis P]

Here is a berry, hilt and bow comparison of the L/14 being discussed and one of my L/22 SWBs. They share similar traits (six top berries, a double knot bow etc.) and the same style of reverse lettering to the maker mark.

What conclusion should I draw from this.......that is a GOOD question, and I don't have the definitive answer. These SWBs only surface from time to time (unlike Floch Fakes), and I only have photo files on four of these L/22 similar variations, with two setups and possibly material variations.

Dennis

[Hans N]

Hello Dennis,

your on the right track here. Here is another badge that shares the same design

[Hans N]

Since Andreas is obviously not going to give us his thoughts on why he thinks this type of WB is good i might as well post the reverse of the WB i posted which will give you the answer to why i don´t like the L/14 type that started this thread.