There is an interesting thread that explains some of the traits of manufacture, might find it helpful, read the part by David North, I can't say for certain this pertains to the specimen you have posted..
Uncommon buckle: early HJ design
I'd rather be A "RaD Man than a Mad Man "
Interesting buckle you present. My buddy Garry has one that is a similar one but I will have to sask him if the construction is the same. The bottom of the rune on your buckle looks like it isn't straight.
Whilst there are of course some quite interestingly bizarre early period DJ buckles by designs of the Sig Rune and methods of construction, the example shown here and in my opinion of course, is not period. The obverse of the buckle and by my monitor appears to be chrome, however this observation is really quite academic.
For myself, there are no issues with the overall design and diminutive proportions of the Sig Rune, however there are two features that stand out for me at least, although the low resolution digital images really do not help. I have never seen before a Sig Rune with a clipped uneven lower section or one in brass, showing absolutely no wear or a hint of age discolouration.
For the reverse, I have never seen this method of tacking the Sig Rune to the box before and yet again, the C catch, braze points supporting the C catch and the solder points securing the Sig Rune, have no suggestion of age. Mint and unissued buckles do of course exist, however and again in my opinion, this is not the case in relation to the buckle shown.
Hopefully I will be proven wrong, however my thoughts are towards the buckle shown being a post 1945 creation, somewhat eccentrically made in order to deceive .
Regards and best wishes,
David
A strange one indeed, the box and prongs for me look original but I am with David and I have never seen that type of fixing before. Hopefully I am proven wrong and the buckle is all good but it is something I have never seen in one of these buckles .
Ben
Friends, no more opinions?
Similar Threads
Bookmarks