U-Boots Kriegsabzeichen - Original or Fake?

[VonRiver]

Dear Friends.,

I have a U-Boat War badge of WW2, and I'm not sure that it is original, made field or fake.
It's a U-boat war badge with trademark of the manufacturer f.o. (Friedrich Orth-Wien), and with a stange "das runic s", that was a
U-boat emblem.

Can you help me to identify if this badge is original or fake?
The fotos are attached.

Best regards.,
VonRiver

[big ned]

I think it's o.k. The really grumpy eagle is right for this maker, and the horizontal striations on the crossed ribbon are correct, on all the fake Orth U-Boat badges I've seen they are at an angle that matches the angle of the ribbon band.

On the reverse, the set up is a variation from the norm, the catch is a type I haven't seen before, but there are a few on Orth badges including a vertical pin, so it's probably alright IMO. Furthermore, the fakes always seem to have a die flaw at 1 o'clock on the 'O', it's looks like a full stop. The one above doesn't which bodes well.

Everything else looks correct to me, it'll be interesting to see what the other guys think. Below is a couple of pic's of a typical fake to show what I have pointed out as red flags, the angled striations on the ribbon and the 'dot' flaw on the letter 'O'.

Regards, Ned.

[Adrian]

To be honest, these photos don't convince me of this badge being authentic. From the front it looks ok but the reverse views don't fill me with confidence. I see more signs of a cast fake than an original badge. The unusual reverse hardware, the rough and pitted surface which looks cast and the very weak makers mark lead me to think fake based upon the above images.
If VonRiver can provide some more in better light and from a variety of angles it might help.

[VonRiver]

More fotos from my U-boat War Badge:

[tempelhof]

i don't like that mark. wish i could see it better. the fake posted by big ned is characteristic in it's mark and in the overly sharp detail of the "waves" in the ribbon on the bottom front of the badge. yours does not seem to have the "sharp" detail of the ribbon. so you're good there. but the maker mark ... well... i don't know why it's so obscure.
like Adrian, i don't like the back. the finish (poor details such as marker mark) and rough nature of it give me pause.
were it me, i'd look for a more "textbook" example.

[tempelhof]

you know what else... the profile details of the gun turret and flag look blunt to me in this example. the details are not right here either for this maker. at least not to my eye. the flag profile is box-like from the reverse view and this is not the case with good Friedrich Orth badges that i've seen although i can't claim to have seen a ton of them.

[StuG III]

I have to agree with Adrian and Tempelhof, the badge does not inspire any confidence for all the reasons already mentioned. The catch is also not one I'm accustomed to seeing on F.O badges. This one would not be for my collection, sorry.

Tom

[tempelhof]

compare the details of the flag and turret from reverse profile with this good FO.

[Adrian]

Hmm. Thank you for posting the additional photos. I can't say they make me anymore positive, the hinge looks like it's cast into the reverse of the badge, the surface flaws look even more like a casting and the faint makers mark is also indicative of this.

Tempelhof also makes valid points about the reverse profile of the turret and gun.

[Wagriff]

Unfortunately, this is a cast fake Orth. The makers mark has barely even made it through and is almost unrecognizable. The metal is extremely porous in appearance and the details are much too soft.