Verwundetenabzeichen in Silber "65"

[tempelhof]

it's just that so many of the known facts have "issues" that a easy to spot once learned. i tend to look for these first then, not finding any, broaden the focus to considering the badge as authentic. just seems easier to me.

[spunkmaja]

Does anyone know if this is a late or early war variant where the "65" mark is by the catch, instead of in the middle?

/Jonas

[Adrian]

I don't know about the positioning of the makers mark but because it's made of zinc I would date it mid to late war.

[tempelhof]

i must respectfully agree with my friend, Adrian

mid to late war for the reasons stated.

as to the positioning of the mm, i am not aware of this being something which i'd classify as a "variant" (meaning that a minority of badges were "purposefully" done this way for a time) but i am not concerned at all about the positioning of it.

if someone has a 65 VWA with this mm positioning or has seen a few, perhaps they can share an opinion on this.

[spunkmaja]

i must respectfully agree with my friend, Adrian

mid to late war for the reasons stated.

as to the positioning of the mm, i am not aware of this being something which i'd classify as a "variant" (meaning that a minority of badges were "purposefully" done this way for a time) but i am not concerned at all about the positioning of it.

if someone has a 65 VWA with this mm positioning or has seen a few, perhaps they can share an opinion on this.

I believe it is a variant since the hinge and catch are also positioned differently on a center marked piece compared to a lower marked one. Probably not many have noticed it since the difference is not that eye catching. But if you compare the two side by side it is actually easy to see.

[rbminis]

Just to show your point Jonas.
Ralph.

[spunkmaja]

Thanks Ralph, good comparison pictures

/Jonas