some SS chain parts

[Michael Fay]

Have had these for many years-way before joining WAF. I Boughtthem from Johnsons militaria who claimed they were authentic pieces. At the time this site had a lot of parts they claimed were authentic TR era produced, and also sold reproduction parts, as I remeber
Just dusted them off and took pics.
Would like some "chained SS" collectors evals.
So did Johnson's Militaria rip me off ?

[Michael Fay]

ss chain parts etc

ss chain parts etc:

I know to expect the worst...but I cant tell for sure...
ALso no markings(Kulturzeichen) on back on any of them.

[Frogprince]

If possible, for future reference I would like to see a larger, closer, example of the skull link. Regards, FP

[Michael Fay]

side view of of a TK link

side view of a TK link for FrogPrinz

[Michael Fay]

1st tk front close up

1st tk front close up for FrogPrinz

[Michael Fay]

2nd TK link

2nd TK link for Frog Prinz with its rust.
I look forward to your thoughts on these.

[Larry Lipps]

I'll post yours next to another and you can make your own determination.

I would add that it actually looks more like a Type II skull on a Type I planchet, but The Type II has round corners for the links.

[Frogprince]

First, my thanks to Michael for posting the closeups of the chain links under discussion. With my original thoughts on the Rune link being that while defects are certainly not common, they can be seen with individual links from time to time (but rarely) in original chain sets. And what was attracting my attention was the link border which normally has a sharper wedge shape like an inverted "V". With the left side a "V", but the right side in the image looking like it was flattened out. With in manufacturing operations the normal procedure being that bad strikes got tossed into the reject bin for recycling or reworking. So maybe this was something out of a reject bin??? But no judgement either way, because it is usually with the Skull link where the differences with postwar versus period come into focus.

And the Skull link was too far away to make a reasonable judgement which is what was being asked. But now that I can see it better. There does seem to be a combination of both the "Type II" and "Type I" link characteristics. And I'm sorry to have to say that I personally do not like what I'm seeing (irrespective of where they came came from). Best regards to all, Fred

PS: My thanks also to Larry for posting the side by side comparison.

[Michael Fay]

Gracias

Thanks to Larry Lipps for your thoughts and time.
ANd Frogprince/fred also much thanks.

I have suspected the worse for a long time. But foolish collectors always hold out some hope, i.e. it was an authentic era reject.

Now I got to re-live being a newbie to colecting all over again, buying off of the Johnsons militaria now (Johnson bookshop and militaria) almost a decade ago.
They really appeared trustworthy to my newbie beginner's eyes.

Kind of painfully funny.
I still remember what they cost a piece.

final point: I pmed Frogprince earlier and was surprised to find a high level of old fashioned politeness. A refreshing surprise.