Need help with authenticating or not on this two items. No markings that I see. Diestruck zinc alloy?? Photos taken with flash so might have lighten some areas more than others. Thanks
Need help with authenticating or not on this two items. No markings that I see. Diestruck zinc alloy?? Photos taken with flash so might have lighten some areas more than others. Thanks
They look detailed enough, but it would help if the pictures weren't so bright. It's hard to look at the detail when there's no contrast...
New photos taken in natural light no flash.
Sorry recon173 they're cast not die struck and IMO both
are post war reproductions.
Wolfslair
Am not disputing whether the eagle and skull is real or not. SS collecting is not my forte. I happen to be besides a collector for 47 years am also Industrial engineer specializing in materials so I have to disagree with you on the assesment that these items are cast. The vertical diestriking lines are very evident on the lower edges of the perimeter both the eagle and the skull. Maybe you cant see that in the photo as my camera doesnt take great photos. I may not be an expert with SS eagles but I know casting from die struk metal.
Also you failed to notice in your determination that die cast almost always forms Closed shrinkage defects, also known as shrinkage porosity, which are defects that form within the casting that cause either depressions or obstrussions in the metal and also you have Gas porosity which is the formation of bubbles within the casting after it has cooled. To make a long story short since any type of casting is done under no pressure it will almost always produce casting flaws which usually are very evident.
None of these casting flaws appear on these items. Lack of detail is another flaw of die casting. Also what about alloy injection molding? The Germans used that quite frequently in certain medals (almost all of the lightweight RAD, Luftschutz etc, insignia and tinnies.
Regards
I wouldn't want these in my collection. Unmarked skull is the wrong material to be an unmarked Deschler.
Eagle comes closest to looking like a latewar zinc, but lacks the proper markings. Prongs and attachments seem incorrect. I'm no expert. Let's see if some of the big dogs agree with this.
I'm no expert either, but I have seen a lot of fakes. The higher end fakes which people try (and successfully) pawn off of on people for $400+ look quite similar to the ones shown here. They looked detailed enough, but are in too remarkable of shape. Certain edges which should be sharper appear more softer as well. Wait for an answer from Bob or Adrian though, they know their stuff...
Matthew
they look like reproductions to me,and i also don like the fact they aren't marked,,,
Hello recon173,
With all due respect to your experience as an industrial engineer, your conclusions have been obtained because you have these articles in hand. At certain times, photographs do not accuratly portray minute details and we as observers can only give opinions
on what is presented. Whether the insignia in question was die cast,
die struck, injection moulded or even sand casted, fact remains that they are reproductions. As stated by others these items lack
the correct marking to the reverse. I am unaware of any period made skulls that are unmarked and the unmarked eagle bears no resemblence to any known original examples. Hope this helps.
Regards,
Wolfslair
recon173,
I've re-examined and had a closer look at the reverse of both the the skull & eagle photos you originally posted.
What I have noticed is that the eagles lower left underside wing
(as we see it on our computer screen, the right side) has the remains of the lower outer circle of the RZM mark. It looks as if it has been partially removed. The skull also has remaining signs of the circular RZM to the upper top side of the skull.
You may have failed to notice these flaws whilst being in hand.
Regards,
Wolfslair.
Similar Threads
Bookmarks