Here's a buckle a friend of mine purchased from a newspaper ad. Knowing that this maker has been
reproduced, I wanted to run it by the panel of experts here.
Is this an original?
Detail of the markings to follow.

Here's a detail of the markings.

quote:

Originally posted by M. Bando:
Here's a buckle a friend of mine purchased from a newspaper ad. Knowing that this maker has been
reproduced, I wanted to run it by the panel of experts here.
Is this original?
Detail of the markings to follow.

No, it isn't

I've seen some really poor-quality fakes posted in forum, discussions of this maker, and I'd like to know if O&C in fact did make any SS EM steel buckles? If so, what does a original O&C steel buckle look like? The buckle I posted looks much better than the obvious fakes pictured on forum discussions, no comparison.
This buckle is high quality in detail and looks better than some vet-acquired buckles I've gotten, made by other companies. I have owned a couple of nickel silver O&C EM SS buckles, which did come from a vet.
So is any buckle marked 36/42 automatically fake because real ones did not exist?
I just can't imagine a more detailed and higher quality buckle than the one pictured.

Overhoff (O&C if you prefer) did manufacture SS buckles in nickel silver, aluminum, zink and steel from 1931 to 1945.
Regarding THIS particuliar fake, please read this complete article I wrote. No update to add at current moment.
http://www.wehrmacht-awards.co...wthread.php?t=331817

Jean Pierre-I did read your article of the WAF before posting, but I noticed that the way the SS runes sit one atop the other on the fakes you
illustrated is different from the side by side runes on the one posted by me. Also the originals you posted are silver-washed, while the one shown by me was painted or finished in green, which has mostly since-faded. I still want to see a known original with a green finish for comparison. Since the fakes you show are marked differently and because of the high quality of the one I posted I am still not convinced. None of the known originals I have from other makers are of better or even equal quality, in detail and quality of manufacture.

I believe that if Jean Pierre could do a 'hands-on' examination of this buckle, he would have no doubt that it is original. It is obviously different from the examples depicted in his article. Also the quality of this piece is better than any vet-acquired SS buckles I've seen. Against that, we have the fact that the code numbers in question have been used on obvious fakes in the past. I'm still waiting for anyone to post what they consider to be a 'real' green steel O&C SS EM buckle here. I cannot imagine any SS buckle of better quality construction and detail on the obverse than this one.
The buckle in question was purchased from the alleged son of a vet, who also sold 3 unissued black-edged HG division Luftwaffe EM breast eagles and a Army dagger, in decent condition. But the quality of the buckle speaks for itself-I wish all the forum members could do a hands-on, because seeing it in person is believing.

quote:

Originally posted by M. Bando:
I believe that if Jean Pierre could do a 'hands-on' examination of this buckle, he would have no doubt that it is original. It is obviously different from the examples depicted in his article. Also the quality of this piece is better than any vet-acquired SS buckles I've seen. Against that, we have the fact that the code numbers in question have been used on obvious fakes in the past. I'm still waiting for anyone to post what they consider to be a 'real' green steel O&C SS EM buckle here. I cannot imagine any SS buckle of better quality construction and detail on the obverse than this one.
The buckle in question was purchased from the alleged son of a vet, who also sold 3 unissued black-edged HG division Luftwaffe EM breast eagles and a Army dagger, in decent condition. But the quality of the buckle speaks for itself-I wish all the forum members could do a hands-on, because seeing it in person is believing.

Are you really convinced of what you're saying ?
With all due respect, I can't believe it.

Ric

Go back to the top of the thread-look at the quality and detail on the pics I posted. I am absolutely covinced of what I am saying. I'm still waiting for somebody to show me what an 'original'green steel O&C SS EM belt buckle looks like. I apologize for contradicting the resident expert here, but a hands-on examination of this buckle would probably convince anyone who posts here that this buckle is too well-made to be fake.

after looking at this thread many times and re-reading Jean-Pierre's monograph,i am in the camp that this is a reproduction....

On page 2 of Jean Pierre's article, he illustrates some fakes, with their obverse and also their reverse markings. The markings appear to be raised from the surface, rather than stamped-in. Is this just me? I have only seen raised markings on aluminum SS EM buckles. Are the examples shown aluminum or steel? My buckle is steel and the markings are clearly stamped-in.
Also, take another look at the degree of detail to the oakleaf wreath surrounding the swastika on my example. It has a terrific amount of detail to the leaves, compared to the ones on pg 2 of the article and also in comparison to the other 8 SS buckles in my collection (all vet-acquired).
Another thing I would bring-up is that on pg one of the article, when alleged originals are depicted, the SS runes piggybacking each other
are not normal in SS buckle markings. I have several marked examples marked 155/40 and 155/43 and all of those feature SS runes side by side, as on my example, and they are double circled.

It's a reproduction buckle....sorry.

Rob

100% fake
Regards
Iv�n

OK All-having been a collector of TR militaria since 1961, I don't consider myself an 'expert',
but I do feel my opinions and experience count for something. I have also acquired about ten SS EM belt buckles directly from WW2 vets over the years and have handled many more.
On a discussion like this, I would expect some proof or evidence that the item in discussion is fake, not just comments to that effect, period.
How about:
"Nobody has ever been known to get one of these directly from a veteran." OR

""A lot of these suddenly began appearing on the market about 15 years ago, when none had been seen before." OR

"The company which makes these is located in Vienna, Austria or Aurora, IL, USA." OR

ANYTHING which proves or supports the statements made above that the item is fake.
These are REASONS, not just dismissive statements.
The moderator of this forum stated a long time ago that original steel SS EM buckles were made by O&C, including elusive green versions, which he has requested to see.
If there is a real version of the one I posted I'm still waiting for somebody here to post images of it.

Mr.Bando..perhaps there are authentic examples of the buckle that you posted,but no one has it,or they just havent surfaced into the collectors hands,however,everyone has given their opinion of this item and the majority of them,including me,believe that this is a reproduction,based on the evidence provided so far by Jean Pierre,,our opinions are just that,most of us are seasoned collectors like yourself,and like you,present our opinions on your item based on many years of handling and observing these items,as you have,,,while the concensus of your buckle is fake,no amount of wishing for hard,concrete facts or evidence supporting your passionate view that this buckle is authentic,will make it so,,,for now,it is an unknown quantity,with no real hard facts to dispute otherwise,pro or con,hence the "opinions" of other collectors,and are as valid as incontrovertible fact or evidence until such time that a authentic and documented piece exists such as your friends,,,its a bummer,but that is what we have to deal with sometimes:conjecture,best guesses,yeares of experience,,i actually started collecting,if you can call it that in 1960,and still find lots that i dont know,so collection is a pursuit in truth,facts,etc,. You state that your friend bought this through a newspaper ad,well did he buy from the vet,vet's relatives etc,,did he even think to ask the provenance on it before he shelled out cash??..I dont think the burden is on collectors as a whole,to prove it bad,but only on those have this item to prove it is good,,,My 1c,,,(monetary devaluation from 2c),, ,Robert

As some of you know, my expertise is on the WW2 101st Airborne Division of the US Army and I was the one who classified and typed the variations of screaming eagle shoulder patches. I did this with a numbering system with Type 1 being the most common and as the numbers go higher, it indicates increasing rarity. Nobody else did this, so my system is pretty much accepted now, even by the Army.
That being said, when collectors send images of 101st patches to me, for Type identification when they are buying or considering buying one, I frequently have to tell them that the patch they are showing me is not of WW2 vintage 'in my opinion'. My type system was only applied to patches I acquired from WW2 veterans, so any not falling in that category I refuse to classify as being from the WW2 time period, even if the materials and manner of construction are similar. The day I get a patch of a certain design directly from a 101st vet, it gets classified as being of WW2 vintage. In recent years only a few new Types have emerged from the woodwork although I am not closed to the possibility that yet more previously unknown but original WW2 variants will still surface in the future.
Now I want to know if the moderator of this forum acquired his opinions by examining items with US or German 'veteran provenance', etc, or just what authority or empirical evidence told him that a SS EM buckle of the type I posted is fake? I mean there must be some BASIS for this, such as the criteria I stated above, for instance, the fact that no such buckles were ever seen by collectors until ten years ago, when they started appearing with regularity, Or a statement that no SS EM buckles were ever marked on the side nearest the retaining catch, but rather only under the two-pronged belt attachment side, or a statement, I know where these are coming from and who is making them, or SOMETHING other than just an opinion, based on WHAT? If anyone held this buckle in their hand, looked at the quality of manufacture, the detail, the careful attachment of the belthook catch, every aspect of it is of quality equal to the ones I've acquired directly from vets who brought them back.
Instead of any explanations such as I would use to justify my opinions of eagle patches and their authenticity of time vintage, all I'm getting here is statements that it's a reproduction, with no supporting evidence.
How hard it it to tell me some of the disqualifying factors I have listed above? But I don't see anybody offering such evidence.
This is NOT wishful thinking because I have been offered a full refund any time I want it.
This is based on simply holding a extremely well-made piece in my hand and comparing the quality of it to known original, vet-acquired SS buckles which happen to bear different markings.

Here is a thread which also discusses the 36/42 EM buckle, with a photo comparison that some may find interesting. ~ Ian

http://www.wehrmacht-awards.co...wthread.php?t=331817

quote:

Originally posted by bushido:
Here is a thread which also discusses the 36/42 EM buckle, with a photo comparison that some may find interesting. ~ Ian

http://www.wehrmacht-awards.co...wthread.php?t=331817

It's obvious M.Bando never read the above mentioned (twice) thread, differently he didn't waste his time re-deducing his evidence of originality.

Ric

Just a point I noticed. On all original known varients of the 36/42 none appear to have the catch attached in the way we see Mr. Bandos example, where the base on the top end of the catch is press formed into the recess of the eagles wing.
However we do see that feature on the fake examples presented on the above informative thread by Jean-Pierre.

-serge-

Serge,,thanks for mentioning that small but very significant feature,,,i was holding off on mentioning it,but it seems clearly to be a type of manufacturing process found only on the Fake buckles that i have seen so far,,,i didnt want to mention it and was hoping and waiting for someone else to,,,Robert

OK guys I'm gonna stop debating this becaause it seems it could go-on endlessly. The obviously fake and poorly-made examples shown in the oft cited article only prove that some crappy fakes exist bearing the same numbers. They are so different in other reespects from the example I posted that all it proves is that some fakes with those numbers do exist. It does not prove that all buckles with those numbers are automatically also fake.
I wish all of you could do a hands-on examination of the buckle in question. I've never examined a better quality SS EM buckle and I've had plenty of them in my hands.

Being 'made better' is a form of logical fallacy when trying to determine whether an item is period made or not.There are many examples of reproduction items (inc. buckles, medals and awards) that are crafted more precisely today,with better skills, techniques and material. Sadly, they are often crafted better than the original items they purport to be.

There are a surely a lot of copies that are made much better than the respective original items. The pictured belt buckle while a "quality piece" is a piece of junk and I do not care if it came from a vet's son or the vet himself somebody is yanking your chain Mark. I greatly respect your experience as an author and researcher but I have had some experience too handling hundreds of these (in my hands and no just looking at photos) in the past few years alone and that buckle will never be original.

John

Agreed

quote:

Originally posted by M. Bando:I believe that if Jean Pierre could do a 'hands-on' examination of this buckle, he would have no doubt that it is original.

unfortunately there is absolutely no need to have it in hands: It IS a fake which is currently made in Hungary. Not only I already know and handled that fake, but for the 5 Euro it costs I even bought one!
Fakers did a good job trying to duplicate an original but this is the only thing they did: try. You said to have expertise in patches of the 101st Airborne and that "when collectors send images of 101st patches to me, for Type identification when they are buying or considering buying one, I frequently have to tell them that the patch they are showing me is not of WW2 vintage 'in my opinion'" which is a very good attitude when in doubt and/or when difference is minor. But if someone send you images of a patch with a frog head instead of an eagle head, will you say the same? Furthermore, if you knew exactly where was made that patch with a frog head and which factory was making it, will you spend time trying to convince someone seeing an eagle that he/she is in fact looking at a frog and why this is a fact?

quote:

Originally posted by M. Bando:Now I want to know if the moderator of this forum acquired his opinions by examining items with US or German 'veteran provenance', etc, or just what authority or empirical evidence told him that a SS EM buckle of the type I posted is fake? I mean there must be some BASIS for this, such as the criteria I stated above, for instance, the fact that no such buckles were ever seen by collectors until ten years ago, when they started appearing with regularity, Or a statement that no SS EM buckles were ever marked on the side nearest the retaining catch, but rather only under the two-pronged belt attachment side, or a statement, I know where these are coming from and who is making them, or SOMETHING other than just an opinion, based on WHAT?

Based on what YOU do not know. You see an eagle and I see the frog I know. Am I going to explain everything again? No. Since you are the one needing to be concvinced, you can just type my name in Google and read everything I wrote since years on the subject then you will finally see the frog in your hands. But please do this on your spare time, not on mine.

quote:

If anyone held this buckle in their hand, looked at the quality of manufacture, the detail, the careful attachment of the belthook catch, every aspect of it is of quality equal to the ones I've acquired directly from vets who brought them back

Please quit trying to convince yourself since there is absolutely not a single point where you are right: You have a well known Hungarian FAKE made in 2004 and this is all you have!

quote:

OK guys I'm gonna stop debating this becaause it seems it could go-on endlessly. The obviously fake and poorly-made examples shown in the oft cited article only prove that some crappy fakes exist bearing the same numbers. They are so different in other reespects from the example I posted that all it proves is that some fakes with those numbers do exist. It does not prove that all buckles with those numbers are automatically also fake.
I wish all of you could do a hands-on examination of the buckle in question. I've never examined a better quality SS EM buckle and I've had plenty of them in my hands.

Errare humanum est, perseverare diabolicum. In the future, please be extremely careful with "SS" buckles in your hands...

Best Regards