SS collar tab set Rottenführer - opinions needed

[Felix]

I probably deserve this given the fact that I put too much weight on what I thought was "Felix's" experience in the matter.

Then again there are those that agree with him. The problem is, does the "parellal test" hold up in all cases or is that just another myth of "collector folklore" ???

Chris

I am only one collector who has studied and tries to share information that I believe is correct and valuable. I hate to see people getting burned. I have been question before and called a lot of names by various people. It is how the collecting world is sometimes.

There are certainly many collectors with great knowledge whose advice you can trust. I have given mine. I have no problems if you think my advice is bad.

Cheers
//Felix

[Felix]

No disrespect taken ,

you have made some very good points that need to be taken on board. I respect anyone who is prepared to analyse an item on a series of indicators, weigh them up and come to a conclusion. Many times, I have done this myself on several WAF threads or asked others to take this appraoach.

However, the question now becomes one of 101%. By this I mean;

1/ -who has a beyond doubt veteran brought back example in their collection ???

2/ -How many advanced collectors of many years standing, have handled one ???

3/ -are there any period photos of the type of non-parallel tab in wear ???

I strongly suspect this is what Felix has based his opinion/ postings upon.

Do not get me wrong, I really like this tab, I nearly bought it. I am kicking myself for not taking heed of Peter's experience on this one. I love, collect & discuss variations from the text-book norm for their interest factor. When you can pick a period variation for yourself then you have truely come of age in this game.

"But" and there is always a but. The 3 questions above are important points in the analysis/ acceptance of any DAK or tropical item so why not also SS tabs

The one pictured below of a cut off version. This is the only image of this variant type that I have found so far. This was part of a thread where the owner was saying that these three tabs were direct veteran bring-backs. The main focus was the "DF 3" tab. Some advanced collectors were very involved in this thread, Felix was one of them. They were saying on the "DF 3" tab being original before May 1945.

If the "DF 3" tab was bad then where does that leave the other two tabs ??? Felix stated that the focus of the thread was "DF 3" tabs and he was not going to discuss the others but did not seem impressed. The owner was adamant, they had come directly from a veteran.



My interest and study of this type of variant SS tab continues to grow,

Chris

It is fine with me that you critisize me. You also raise some good questions. That is indeed part of my judgements of the rune collar tab in question and the other tabs "vet finds" that you posted a picture of. I think that is pretty obvious.

Here is what I replied in the other thread:
Who says I am wrong? Prove to me that the tab in question is original. The burden of proof lies on the one claiming a piece of SS insignia is original, not the other way around. Please find me a collar tab that has iron clad provenance that is in this style.

Whose advice you should trust is not my decision. It is yours. For those who do not like my advice it is ok. I try to help when I can and that is what I do here.

So, according to my knowledge this tab is not an original. I think it is clearly stated in the other thread you provided a link for.

About the SS3 tab, I can say that it is a very bad fake. Very obvious. As is the cut of tab. As for the style of SS rune tab in question, which reminds a bit about the cut of one, I say it again. It is not an original IMO.

Again, who can say that I made a mistake and prove it?

Cheers
//Felix

[90th Light]

I am only one collector who has studied and tries to share information that I believe is correct and valuable. I hate to see people getting burned. I have been question before and called a lot of names by various people. It is how the collecting world is sometimes.

There are certainly many collectors with great knowledge whose advice you can trust. I have given mine. I have no problems if you think my advice is bad.

Cheers
//Felix

Yes and I have taken on your advice and acted upon it.

Now I am putting it to the test and seeing if it was any good.

Who knows you may yet be right. That would depend upon the majority verdict of heavy weight SS collectors to whose circles you belong.

However, I know you put a lot of time into it and have a keen eye for detail. That is what I placed a higher weighting upon in making my decision,

Chris

[Sal Williams]

can someone explain the parallel thing to me? I dont see it

[codytrcollector]

I stand by my opinion too. I find the burden of proof to be placed upon anyone who gives an opinion, not just the one who says a item is real. Question; why does the person(s) who say a item is authentic have to prove it is real? You say it's fake, and while doing so have submitted no evidence to prove this. So we are just to take your word for it? I think not.
I could also say I own one of these that I got straight from a vet, and I am absolutely sure he brought it back after the war, but would that really prove anything? I could be lying just as so many before me have in the past.
IMO, and what seems to be everyone else's here, the materials used and construction; for this variant, throughout are accurate to period produced pieces. Your test IMO is fault unless the tab is in-hand, and even so, there are always exception to the rules such as different makers.
As I've already stated, I've sent pictures to many of other respected collectors. I honestly have yet to find one other individual to think this set is fake. Felix, as of now, you stand alone. Due to that, IMO, the burden is place upon you seeing how you are the only one saying said tabs are fake. Please, submit factual evidence which proves your stance is correct. I welcome it with open arms, honestly, as it will only help the collection community, and I will gladly admit I was wrong once you do so. However, until then I will continue to preach this as a original variant as that's what I've been not only taught, but shown.
Add: take daggers or EK's as an analogy. Many daggers and EK's were produced by different markers. Due to this, you will always find some differences. The same would logical apply to ss tabs, no?

[codytrcollector]

can someone explain the parallel thing to me? I dont see it

The right side top line of the bolt should follow thru in a straight line to the left side bottom line.

[Felix]

I stand by my opinion too.
Ok, thats fine with me. What you collect is not of my concern. Fakes or not.

I find the burden of proof to be placed upon anyone who gives an opinion, not just the one who says a item is real. Question; why does the person(s) who say a item is authentic have to prove it is real? You say it's fake, and while doing so have submitted no evidence to prove this. So we are just to take your word for it? I think not.

If you take my word or not is not up to me. Feel free to feel what you want about this tab. I will not try to convince you. What you collect is not of my concern. I have given my opinion, but perhaps not enough for you. Thats no problem for me. You are totally wrong when you think the burden of prof is the responsibility of the one giving an opinion and claiming an item is bad.

I could also say I own one of these that I got straight from a vet, and I am absolutely sure he brought it back after the war, but would that really prove anything? I could be lying just as so many before me have in the past.
Now I know why you defend a not original tab. Vet stories one has to treat as such, without prof that is nothing.

IMO, and what seems to be everyone else's here, the materials used and construction; for this variant, throughout are accurate to period produced pieces. Your test IMO is fault unless the tab is in-hand, and even so, there are always exception to the rules such as different makers.
As I've already stated, I've sent pictures to many of other respected collectors. I honestly have yet to find one other individual to think this set is fake. Felix, as of now, you stand alone.

If I stand alone by your defintion is not important to me. What is important is what can be proven and what is original and proven as such. How much does these so called respected collectors really know about what is real or not? What are their interests?

Due to that, IMO, the burden is place upon you seeing how you are the only one saying said tabs are fake. Please, submit factual evidence which proves your stance is correct.

Please read above and follow other threads, and do your home work. Did I say that before? Its all there if you are willing to search.

I welcome it with open arms, honestly, as it will only help the collection community, and I will gladly admit I was wrong once you do so. However, until then I will continue to preach this as a original variant as that's what I've been not only taught, but shown.
I am glad, but doesnt we all? I too will be happy to learn more if I am wrong, but then there has to be iron clad prof. It has not come foreward.

Add: take daggers or EK's as an analogy. Many daggers and EK's were produced by different markers. Due to this, you will always find some differences. The same would logical apply to ss tabs, no?

As you asked, and the answer is YES there are differences. But yet no dagger will be like a letter opener and no IC will be like a hair cross in a snipers scope. And a runes will not look like that if real.

[codytrcollector]

Well with that said I guess all that is left is to agree to disagree on said tab set. This is no longer a debate with factual evidence being provided, but instead, a never-ending argument with absolutely no substance between strong minded oppositions which will never change each others stance. This argumentative-stubborn-elitist attitude is becoming quite frustrating to deal with as well, and is exactly the reason why so many have left here for the "other" forum.
As for myself needing to do more "homework" as you love to continue stating over and over, I will once again agree with that, but will also say again, I am not a novice by any stretch either. I would suggest that you continue to do your homework too as one can never learn enough nor learn it all.
In regards to the other collectors you asked of, you can see who said what on the other thread regarding this set on this forum. Anyone who has given me a opinion in Private I have directed them to this thread and asked for them to post here when time permits. Many of them are no longer active on forums such as this one due to situations such as this one, and I can't blame them.
Add: Thank you for your detailed response to my prior post.
Once again, I will point out that although you believe the burden proof falls upon the one who states the tab is original, you have yet to give any reasoning other than one test that makes these tabs fake. I have, however, stated many reasons why they aren't fake. I am completely and always willing to respectably admit when I am wrong, but sufficient evidence must be brought forth prior to my doing so.

[J. M. C.]

can someone explain the parallel thing to me? I dont see it

Hi Sal,
Here's an illustration of how the lines "should" look on one of my Dachau tabs.

[dhunter93]

I am not a fan of the runic tab either.. but to each their own..good luck

Oh, the rank tab looks like an nskk tab not ss to me (size etc) if it's real.

Put them both under UV light

[codytrcollector]

I am not a fan of the runic tab either.. but to each their own..good luck

Oh, the rank tab looks like an nskk tab not ss to me (size etc) if it's real.

Put them both under UV light

The material used on the rank tab leads me to believe this tab is not for the nskk. UV test could be helpful, I guess, but it is definitely not a full-proof test by any stretch. Fakers often use period materials, and chemicals can cause a false positive result in a original item.
I agree, to each their own. All that matters is you're happy with what is in your collection. Truthfully, I have nothing invested in this as I'm not the buyer and have never owned this set.
As for my prior post about myself finding this example from a vet, and Felix's post about never trusting the story, he is completely right as I was using that statement as a example of how anyone can make anything up. I have never encountered a vet with this variant and that was not the message I was trying to portray. Sorry for any confusion.

[Sal Williams]

thanks Jim and Cody

[TonyS]

I would feel much more comfortable with this Rottenfuehrer set than the set that started this thread.

Maybe that first set is fake and and maybe it's a variant; but I wouldn't buy them.

[Vilja]

I would feel much more comfortable with this Rottenfuehrer set than the set that started this thread.

Maybe that first set is fake and and maybe it's a variant; but I wouldn't buy them.

Whoever recently purchased this set of tunic removed Rottenfuhrer tabs from "The Collector's Guild"…..I would like to buy them.
They still show as being for sale, but I have been informed that they have been sold.
I would really like to have this set of tabs for my collection/display.
Your help with this matter will be much appreciated.

Thank you,
Vilja

[codytrcollector]

Proof, IMO, that the set in question are authentic. If one doesn't believe the photographs in the link match said example, they have to at least admit the tabs in the pictures "fail" their test.
http://www.warrelics.eu/forum/ss-uni...9/#post1024846
The second period photo in the link shows the variant above from collectors guild, such is a good tool to use for comparison. IMO, the difference are quite evident between the two.