SS Skull RZM 52 Opinions Please

[TotenkopfSS]

Hi everyone

could I have please your opinions about this skull?

thanks in advance to all of you for help and time, cheers! M.

[Christian J]

Rare piece.

[wolfslair]

Need better clear frontal and reverse pics.

[Robert H]

Maybe I am wrong but I am not sure about this one.

[Funia]

IMO orginal
Peter

[FrenchVolunteer]

Hi,

still posting low-quality pictures hosted on third party website to get opinions on rare and expensive items, and it is happening for months...

The yearly WAF membership is 35 usd... This is ridiculous !

Also it is a very bad model given to other non-associated members, that will be encouraged to post pictures hosted on third party websites.

I'm reposting slighly upgraded pictures for the WAF archives.

See You

Vince

[Funia]

Looks like little compresed by ground dug.
Of course this is only my opinion.
Peter

[Ian Hulley]

It's either corroded or cast.

Ian

[SScollector]

Original, in my opinion and as already stated. I also believe that it is a dug example with a small level of corrosion throughout and cleaned up, but a cool variation, nonetheless. This one shows when Deschler placed the "52" up at the top of the skull, soon before replacing them with the so-called "transitional Deschler M1/52" skull. Anyway, these forehead 52's are many times more difficult to find than the jawbone 52 type skulls. This one has a nice look, imo.

Chris

[Funia]

Of course front is corroded.
But ground pressure change the overall shape of this skull.
Still suport my opinion - orginal rare Deschler dug.
Peter
P.S Ops I wrote this in same time witch SS collector.

[SScollector]

I also agree with funia here, as some of the overall roundness and formations of the skull, (mostly on the upper parts), have lost some of their original shape, due to environmental conditions. IMO, it is still not a bad looking piece though. Hope this helps!

Chris

[dhunter93]

I also agree with funia here, as some of the overall roundness and formations of the skull, (mostly on the upper parts), have lost some of their original shape, due to environmental conditions. IMO, it is still not a bad looking piece though. Hope this helps!

Chris

Chris, the lip edge appears the same thickness all the way around, I thought the 52 would have different lip thickness where it makes hard turns especially in the corners?

[SScollector]

Ian, here is a nicer example of this type, in case you could use an extra image for comparison purposes. I personally, think that it is a fine original, just not in perfect condition. Also, in case you are unaware, the die flaw on the bottom edge of the jaw that runs into the bottom of the crossbone on that same side appears on most, if not all of the skulls of this exact variation that I have ever seen or handled. Anyway, I just wanted to make sure that was clear here.

dhunter93, the outer edge looks proper also, IMO. Please see this example here as well. Typically, any of the early Tombac Deschler skulls, (D&SM + all of the RZM 52 types), are extremely thin, compared to the CupAl, aluminum, and zinc types. I can still see a bit of variation though, around the crossbones and eye socket areas when looking at the back side.

Thanks guys!

Chris

[dhunter93]

I see now the fat part of the lip is rotted away.. Thanks Chris

[FrenchVolunteer]

Hi,

it would have been so easy to post the link from the auction the first time...

https://encheres.catawiki.eu/kavels/...n-munchen-1940

See You

Vince