Large Aluminium Train Eagle opinions needed

[reichcollector]

Hello all

Could I please have your opinion on the reverse markings on this Large Aluminium Train Eagle, sorry these are the only pictures I have at the moment.

Thank for looking

[eaglecollector]

Hi,

I have not come across this variant and it has not been documented by Meda in his book. But if you can provide a full photo of the front and back would be more useful.

EC.

[drdata]

Interesting. I too would like a full front/rear and measurements. While the markings do not match mine, this is the first example I have seen that has the same three stud mounting arrangement on the bottom, besides mine. Most seem to have a single post in the center or bottom edge, and on those its clear the extra two post were never present (they were not part of casting and ground off).

Folks here could not decide if mine was fake or simply unfinished. I did PM JR Meda, and he was kind enough to take a look. As it was a pm I do not want to paste here, but he seemed to indicate he had seen something similar and might be able to find more info, which seemed to imply mine may not be fake.

I was trying to determine if rail eagle differ from building ones wrt post arrangement.

I am no expert, but from what I see I like your Adler. The threading on the post is a very good sign as it sees to have been cut off its mounting, as it should be. Sadly, mine has nice post (not casting of a cut off one), but unfinished so not sure it real, and seems it was never mounted if so.

Check mine out if you do not mind:

https://www.warrelics.eu/forum/art-d...-please-15273/

Regards

[reichcollector]

Thanks to EC & drdata for your helpful replies, Unfortunately I do not have any other pictures at the moment of the eagle I am interested in buying, but have listed below some pictures of a similar eagle I found some time ago which is almost identical.

The story that I was told for the first eagle is that it was bought directly from the vet who at first tried to prise the eagle of with his bayonet (hence the slight damage) and then realised the fixing lugs needed cutting off.

Regards
RC

[drdata]

Does seem to match yours. I like the markings and post on yours. Would think perhaps mine was a copy, but the marks are different and in different locations.

I think its ok. But am no expert of course. They seemed to have a lot of rail eagle threads at the site I linked to in my thread. Check out the confirmed ones in JRs postings...

He is the man on these.




regards

[reichcollector]

Thanks again drdata

I like the way you have mounted yours in the frame, I like mounting the best of my daggers in the same way. It looks from both sets of pictures that the two side bolts were used for securing the eagle to the train, and cut of from behind to remove them. Maybe the bottom lug was used as a filler hole during manufacture, or just a spare post in case it needed fitting in a different position.
As to the markings being in a different place on yours could be due to different manufacturers or a change of moulds, they are still beautiful display pieces.

Regards
RC

[Andrew]

very nice display!!!!

[drdata]

very nice display indeed. The tunic is quite nice, as are the display cases. I like blades, and you have many prime examples.


BTW, did you ever mention the wingspan on yours? IIRC, mine was 24 3/4 or such. Seems most fakes are of the 26" variety, but that is just what I came across when searching.

[reichcollector]

Thanks Andrew / drdata

I to like my blades, I will have to start a new thread to display some of my collection.
The wingspan of the eagle pictured in my first post that I hope to buy is 720mm just over 28", I believe they came in a number of sizes.

Regards
RC

[drdata]

28 inches huh. That is large. I believe that originals were made in small, medium, and large sizes, what ever that means in inches. Must admit that 28 is among the largest I have heard of, but you know my disclaimer. I think its good.

A few random thoughts:

1. There is a negative/depression near the lower swaz ring when viewed from the rear. On mine, the lower 3 studs fill in this area. They seem to nice to be a simple sprue for casting, and you could not grind them off easily and still leave the low spot. IOW, if I ground of two of my three post you could easily see where they were as that part of the ring would be filled in. Most originals seems to have a center, or only the lower stud, and from what I can tell these never had extra ones that were removed, for reasons cited.

2. Seems that we can all agree that conventional mounting on a rail car had a threaded post with a nut on the inside. Not 100%, but think I saw a pic from the inside and you could see the nuts.

As the story goes the GI's try to pry them (bending braking), then, not having a wrench, break out their hacksaw and voilà, the cut (but threaded) studs we find on known good ones.

Anyone find it odd that all these GIs have a metal saw, but there is no crescent wrench to be had in all of Europe?

3. Yet to be confirmed how a wall eagle is attached. Could be the same, but I see a 1900s building being thicker than a rail car. We know there are cement anchors that allow you to mount into cinder block without drilling through and using an inside nut. To use an anchor I would need to drill through the eagle, or use some bracket that was drilled and mounted, and then the eagle into the bracket.

I do not see a press-in fit being practical.

This is germane (pun intended) to me as my eagle was supposed to be wall, not rail. The hope is to confirm that wall mounting was done in some manner that would allow the unfinished studs seen on mine.

If hopes were horses than beggars were ride, I know.

Cheers