Kriegsmarine Flottenkriegsabzeichen FO Dilemma

[Saladin]

Hello All,
the badge below is up for sale and I have a dilemma.
Is it an original badge that has had the cast in hardware removed and replaced with some soldered fittings OR is it a complete reproduction.

Any help or opinions on this one would be appreciated

All the best
Doug

[Adrian Stevenson]

I suspect it has been restored.

[Saladin]

Thanks for the input Adrian
So do you think it is an original?

All the best
Doug

[Adrian Stevenson]

Hi Doug, I think so, going by the marks left around the pin and catch.

Cheers, Ade.

[harryamb2]

I have got the feeling that this is a copy imo.

[Saladin]

Hi Doug, I think so, going by the marks left around the pin and catch.

Cheers, Ade.

Hi Ade.
Well I took a chance on it so I'll do some more forensics on it when it arrives.

I'm not too sure either way Harry.
I don't think a confirmed decision could be made with the pictures that the seller sent.

The high seas fleet badges made by Orth have a chequered history as you know
They started with purely soldered hardware and then with the cast in fittings that continually failed resulting in a factory modification that was the grinding off of the cast in fittings and replaced with the original soldered fittings. Finally there is a recently discovered variant where the rear die set up was modified resulting in 4 known variants
I am hoping that this badge turns out to be one of the second type variants with the cast in fittings that has failed after issue and which has had a field repair
Anyway once I can get some weights I should be able to tell either way.
Doug

[Norm F]

Hi Guys,

I guess when Doug posts the additional info we might be able to say more. Fo now, like Doug, I'm on the fence between post-war restoration or reproduction, but there definitely are some areas of concern.

On the reverse:
1) The finish on the reverse is not correct for these badges which should have a gilded reverse.
2) The "f.o" mark has a distorted cross-bar on the "f" either from casting or from damage.
3) The hardware is not wartime and is improvised, so definitely not a factory variant.

On the obverse:
1) There's damage/distortion to the lower part of the eagle.
2) The obverse detail in general seems a little soft (although admittedly the photos aren't great).
3) Most concerning, the calibre of the cannons and size of the bridge windows are too small which to me is suggestive of casting artifact.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Norm F]

The high seas fleet badges made by Orth have a chequered history as you know
They started with purely soldered hardware and then with the cast in fittings that continually failed resulting in a factory modification that was the grinding off of the cast in fittings and replaced with the original soldered fittings. Finally there is a recently discovered variant where the rear die set up was modified resulting in 4 known variants...

BTW, here are the four variants mentioned by Doug. In fact there are six variants since both Type 2 and Type 3 are found with or without the "blob flaw" above the maker mark.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Saladin]

Hello Norm and All,
thank you for your patience and certainly Norm you gave me a good heads up to what I am looking for in an original badge.
The badge arrived yeaterday so I took some photos pictured below and I hope they are HD enough to give a clear indication of the state of the badge.



So now to the forensics:
I first of all tried the acetone test and to my suprise the gilding didn't come off...I was suprised that I didn't have a q tip full of gold paint.

Weight. This fella' came in at a hefty 34.2 grams. Not too much of a concern knowing the variations in metal make up of these zinc badges.

So it is supposed to be a type 3 with possible post war hardware fitted to a type 2.
I scoured the forums this morning and hey ho I have found some of the brothers to my badge.

Here is a badge from 2014
Flotten-Kriegsabzeichen

Here is another from 2009
High Seas Fleet by Friedrich Orth. Real or Fake?

So the one from 2009 doesn't seem to have the flaw above the makers mark (shown below) that is on my badge



but the 2014 thread the badge has the same flaw.
Then I noticed that the badge that Ade showed in 2009 also showed the same flaw...note the crescent moon shape on top of the flaw.

Looking at both the 2009 and 2014 thread.
Look for the scratch marks here:



Both badges have them but the badge at the 2014 thread was considered to be original whilst 2009 was not.
Here are another three examples from WAF and GCA forums:





Only the the first two have the scratch marks. but all 3 are considered to be reproductions

I actually think that the bottom one could actually be a good badge with a replaced hook

Finally to The hook.
Look at all the examples that are considered either original (2014) and the ones considered to be fakes.
They all look to be the same to me applied to that same stump and all from the same design yet all the hinges are slight variations.



So to conclude I think this is an old cast reproduction quite well executed with the mould taken from a type 2 badge with new hardware fitted in an attempt to deceive.

All the best
Doug

[Norm F]

Hi Doug,

I agree with your analysis that this is a cast fake. The "blob flaw" above the maker mark (where you mention the "crescent moon shape") is not actually a sign of the fake since that was an acquired flaw during Orth's production and can be found in originals as well, but there are other more damning traits. As you mention the identical scratch pattern appears in the other fake you posted indicating "two peas from the casting pod". As well, on your closeup of the hinge you can see two things: one is that the hinge is a cast form of the hinge on the original and the second feature is a distinct casting seam on the margins.

Best regards,
---Norm