"RZM 36/40 SS" Again???

[all4blairs]

Although this aluminum SS NCO Belt Buckle "RZM 36/40 SS" meets all of Mr. Redeuilh measurements; including a total weight of 20 grams or 0.7 oz, I still have doubts; well you know because it‘s a 36/40!?!?!?

Eagle's Wingspread original 2.0937 inches or 2 & 3/32”,Original Length 2.535 or 2 &17/32”, From Top Eagle's head to Bottom of rope- original 1.75 inches, and all the rest line up after measure, and careful re measure with my vernier caliper. Weight was done on a digital postal scale, 19.84 grams = (0.7 ounces) but my scale gives me 20 grams, close enough? Ends of cross bar as smooth as a baby’s but!

Thanks for any and all of your time.
John

[Ric Ferrari]

Although this aluminum SS NCO Belt Buckle "RZM 36/40 SS" meets all of Mr. Redeuilh measurements; including a total weight of 20 grams or 0.7 oz, I still have doubts; well you know because it‘s a 36/40!?!?!?

Eagle's Wingspread original 2.0937 inches or 2 & 3/32”,Original Length 2.535 or 2 &17/32”, From Top Eagle's head to Bottom of rope- original 1.75 inches, and all the rest line up after measure, and careful re measure with my vernier caliper. Weight was done on a digital postal scale, 19.84 grams = (0.7 ounces) but my scale gives me 20 grams, close enough? Ends of cross bar as smooth as a baby’s but!

Thanks for any and all of your time.
John

If I may add to the mentioned measurements my opinion based on pics, I would say

Ric

[all4blairs]

Surprise

Ric again thanks; a SURPRISE impulse buy my wife made (local US civil war show) for our anniversary, she only knows I like those NAZI things!?!?!? She did get a money back guarantee though so some things have sunk in!
John

[Ric Ferrari]

Ric again thanks; a SURPRISE impulse buy my wife made (local US civil war show) for our anniversary, she only knows I like those NAZI things!?!?!? She did get a money back guarantee though so some things have sunk in!
John

John,

you're a lucky man having such a lovely wife

Ric

[Jean Pierre Redeuilh]

Eagle's Wingspread original 2.0937 inches or 2 & 3/32”,From Top Eagle's head to Bottom of rope- original 1.75 inches,

This is the only measurements you should care right now since all others have been modified to match.

[all4blairs]

with a great epiphany

Jean:
At only 1/32ths of an inch difference wingspread and 2/32ths inch difference head/rope some (like me!) will have difficulty making an accurate measurement(s). NOW I’m POSITIVE you and every other intelligent person in this hobby already knows this, but it was with a great epiphany that I FINALLY discovered that if I just ran my vernier caliper* out to the desired measure then all one need do is drop the caliper over the object (wings, head/rope) and observe! Wonder of wonder and what; to my great relief, I get on this particular “RZM 36/40 SS” is “wingspread 2 and 3/32ths inch” and “head/rope 1 and 24/32ths inch“. What I MUST do now is give you and Ric and those like you at Wehrmacht-Awards the kindest of regards, because Ya’ll are truly a boon to the hobby!

“Thank You THANKYOUVERYMUCH” (Elvis)

John Robert Blair Jr. (don’t let the Jr. fool ya I’m a 55 year old ex Marine, USMC 77-81)

*The Vernier caliper is an extremely precise measuring instrument; the reading error is 1/20 mm = 0.05 mm.
I generally use my vernier caliper to measure case length for ammo reloading.

[Jean Pierre Redeuilh]

Jean:
At only 1/32ths of an inch difference wingspread and 2/32ths inch difference head/rope some (like me!) will have difficulty making an accurate measurement(s).

This is why fakers are selling more and more their crap: overall buckle sizes are now matching. But not all details! This would probably never happened if people did not say everywhere and to everybody what I was so stupid to write to help collectors in the past: length less than 63 mm is fake. Simple and easy to remember. But also easy enough to be repeated over and over until it reaches faker's ears.

[all4blairs]

complicit in the inevitable

Jean Pierre :
Should I feel in some small way complicit in the inevitable corruptions of collecting in general because I used an internet forum to validate the authenticity of a artifact? If so; duly noted and the responsibility accepted, but if not then neither should you; because the secrets impossible as they would be to keep, would be nothing more than just that a BIG secret and there would be no gain either by the GREEDY or more importantly the diligent hobbyist historian collector!

Such is our plight and that of all that follow; the perils are many but so are the rewards, and both you and I choose to participate freely in this particularly challenging and fascinating HOBBY.

It is better to have loved and LOST; than to have never loved at all!

Thank you THANKYOUVERYMUCH
John (after Elvis)

[Jean Pierre Redeuilh]

Jean Pierre :
Should I feel in some small way complicit in the inevitable corruptions of collecting in general because I used an internet forum to validate the authenticity of a artifact? If so; duly noted and the responsibility accepted, but if not then neither should you; because the secrets impossible as they would be to keep, would be nothing more than just that a BIG secret and there would be no gain either by the GREEDY or more importantly the diligent hobbyist historian collector!

Such is our plight and that of all that follow; the perils are many but so are the rewards, and both you and I choose to participate freely in this particularly challenging and fascinating HOBBY.

It is better to have loved and LOST; than to have never loved at all!

Thank you THANKYOUVERYMUCH
John (after Elvis)

No, absolutely nothing toward You. It is a comment I had to write since several monthes and your inquiry was just the right place to start with it.
Please keep in mind that "length less than 63 mm is fake" was the sentence I commented and You never used that sentence.
Listing the complete measurements along from where they were coming from (as You did) was never a problem. And I certainly appreciate you stated where they were coming from!

Complete measurements I published in 2001 were including 6 different values. With 6 different numbers to care for, fakers would never have improved so quickly since they wouldn't have known which one was used the most by collectors. Fakers adapt to quick and easy modifications, not hard ones. Modifying 6 parameters would have been too big a job and the former clue "a fake is always smaller than an original (due to casting process) would have been plenty enough. Next modification could have been larger fakes, wider fakes, etc ... with no accurate proportion. But with the stupidity of some (sorry if I offending some but it is true) to repeat what I wrote once or twice "length less than 63 mm is fake" made faker's job easy. No matter if it was for a lack of knowledge in that field or a lack of motivation to spend few extra minutes and carefully study posted photos to say if it was an original or fake buckle, the result was the exact same: they gave fakers the quick modification they were waiting for! Result? Now fakes are at 64 mm or a bit above (depending of the source)and everybody needs a caliper to measure something else!
The exact same thing happened also in late 2000 when too many collectors were relying on internal size. At that time, cast fakes were not able to freely slide on a genuine WWII german belt. In the worst case they were not even able to fit on a belt. So, to the question "Is it a fake or an original", the quick and easy clue was: if it freely slides on a belt = original. If it does not slide = fake. It took exactly 6 monthes to fakers to react and at that time there was just very few Forum/Group dedicated to belt buckles. What fakers did? A quick and easy modification. Read if you wish that article I wrote just when the first internal modified surfaced http://www.internationalmilitaria.com/ssbelt.html
At that point I HAD to publish a set of values, not just one other difference.
Then later I felt guilty to stupidily write " length less than 63 mm is fake". I should had never done that but it is now too late.

Another thing people should stop to say is which Type/variant fakers did NOT reproduce (yet). Example been: "This variant as not been reproduced. Only variant/Type blah-blah was." What we are doing with that kind of sentence is helping fakers because readers will from now on seek only that variant/Type which was not (yet) reproduced. Even worst some readers will (wrongly) assume the variant/Type not reproduced is the only variant/Type original.

I hope you do understand now my post. Absolutely not against anything You wrote.

[all4blairs]

charge us a fee

Jean Pierre :
You never did offend me, and I thank you for your concern. I don’t think there will ever be a cure for greed, I was just trying to say “don’t beat yourself up so badly buddy” because you are fighting the good fight.
Do like Don Boyle does with rings and charge us a fee too authenticate our “ NCO 36/40 SS’s”.
That’s all
John