Verwundetenabzeichen 1939 in Silber

[Adrian]

Fair play for voicing your concerns, this is a discussion forum after all, we have something to discuss now. Differing opinions are all good because we have the chance to learn from them.

[tempelhof]

certainly.

i don't like to find a badge this beautiful and then begin to find what i consider to be issues. to be certain, as i have said, i would go to a heavyweight badge guy such as i have identified for a second opinion.

i am afraid you'd get the same opinion as mine. but on this badge, he's one guy out there i would defer to on this as i am pretty sure of my call. i just don't like making it. i'd be happier to be forced to reverse it. and i will if given an opportunity like that.

[tempelhof]

okay, i see this badge has been shown today over there and has been identified as a floch. problem is, the member (Hans N) does not give any reason why he sees it this way. no doubt this is because the subject of floch wound badges has been covered many times over the years.

he's a heavyweight and i don't argue with him. so i stick with my call.

it would be nice if members over there will give DAZZA3483 a little reasoning.

[tempelhof]

let me throw this out there as well.

the symmetry issue with the "berries" at the top of the wreath (and badge)...

first, an authentic L/53:



second, a floch:



third, the badge in question today:



there is a symmetry in the authentic badge not found in the floch. the distorted symmetry of the "berry" arrangement in the badge in question more closely resembles that found in the floch.

basically, the distance between the lowermost "berry" and the "berry" in the 3 o'clock position is shorter than the distance between the lowermost "berry" and the "berry" in the 9 o'clock position in the floch.

in the authentic badge these distances are more equal.

[Walkwolf]

Thanks for going into such detail with this badge, and catching the flaws.
'The proof is in the pudding' as they say, and it proves that fakes are
getting harder to discern.

The intact bright finish was suspect at first, but the pin and catch
looked ok. Does this mean the one pictured in post #10
is bad as well, or am I going nuts..........?

[Glenn66]

Does this mean the one pictured in post #10
is bad as well, or am I going nuts..........?

That example does appear to have similar dot pattern issues I have to agree.

[DAZZA3483]

Thanks for the replies gents,excellent opinions and analysis..it looks like you may have been possibly 'Floched' like me Walkwolf

Your diagrams are great tempelhof..thank you.

To be honest after reading other forums and doing some research I did have my suspicions,especially when the badge arrived in such superb A1 condition..a rarity itself.I was given a little hope when I found other examples with exactly the same setup.Does this go to possibly highlight that collectors (and Dealers!) maybe dont know enough about these Floch fakes to identify one?

Its a real shame,like Ned says the badge is really top quailty,there is nothing I could find on this badge as an example of poor workmanship...it could possibly be better made than the original!!

Now then, here's a question I would like to throw open to members,

IS IT POSSIBLE THERE WERE DIFFERENT DIES USED THROUGH THE WAR YEARS FOR THE L/53 HENSE THE SLIGHT VARIATIONS LIKE THE DOT/BERRY PATTERN?.


The possible 'offender' in daylight...

[big ned]

Well, here's a link to the L/53 Verwundetenabzeichen that shows both original and fake (Floch in this case) versions. I am suprised that although this thread is over 3 years old, that the L/53 Floch fake has not been highlighted in more recent books and databases designed to help the collector, very odd IMO.

It does appear that Daz's badge is a bad 'un, and I would like to apologise to him and others here for my erroneous positive comments on the piece which I genuinely believed to be good. I am shocked at how good the rear set up is, nigh on perfect, so it's fair to say that if I were in the same position as Daz was, I'd have been 'Floched' too.....

http://www.germancombatawards.com/th...light=l+53+swb

Regards, Ned.

[tempelhof]

Well... I wish I was a member there. I'd like to see that material.

At any rate, you hardly need apologize Big Ned. The problem is these badges have been circulating for literally decades and they have been shown in forums for years and on many of those occasions accepted as authentic which has led collectors to retain them and hold those inappropriately vetted badges up to authenticate even more of them! this is what makes them so difficult to eliminate.

And yes, Walkwolf, your example is bad as well. I didn't really like opening this thread. because I don't like walking in and stepping on peoples' badges and this thread just wasn't one to have me throwing out the kinds of comments I'd much rather leave.
But, as you can see, this is an example of what I was just talking about. A bad badge comes up, and another is used to authenticate it because they look exactly the same as each other and the reference example is "accepted". The problem, of course, is it should not have been.

Whenever these things are found, I think we should take a dremel and engrave "FLOCH" or "FAKE" on the back. I know some feel they should be destroyed, but I disagree. I think they should be engraved and circulated as widely as possible.

[DAZZA3483]

OH WELL!..you live and learn folks.Many thanks to all for your help,the dealer has agreed to refund if I send it back.