UBB.threads
Posted By: Ric Ferrari Re: For Gaspare : Fake Honor Ring & Cert! - 01/17/2020 10:45 PM
Originally Posted by Gaspare
Members.. THIS year a book on HRs is coming out of Italy. This book will be the most accurate yet. Seems Don has had it wrong all this time.. Doesn't mean Don can't spot a authentic HR,,just means the way he thought them made is not correct......



We all know that PP were made by a die struck, then rounded seamed and finished.......period. Almost all (if not all) rings in our collections prove this way.

Someone already made his attempt to convince that PP were made by casting, but we know that's false.

Now the same person is working by a supposed scientifical approach to prove SSHr were casted even if it appear at least anomalous, considering all PP rings were stamped.

I don't know if a new book will prove the way SShr were made, but so far no proofs, just opinions and a lot of warning about next incredible news (just perfect to promote next book sale).

Ric

Posted By: Gaspare Re: For Gaspare : Fake Honor Ring & Cert! - 01/17/2020 11:36 PM
Ric., members, , a while ago when Odal was still alive he and I went in on a expensive load of period trade booklets [ jewelers, engravers, retailers]. A gold mine of ring line drawings, jeweler advertisements etc. They were in Germany and Odal showed me a few quick scans and I asked him to send me 5 or 7 booklets I really needed..
We had all the time in the world..... I wanted Odal to have his pick. It was a no loose situation.. The he shows me a diagram of a very weird manufacture method. The more I looked at it the more I realized this could be for the HR... I asked Odal for that issue and he said no problem he'd send it with my half [30 more issues!] in a couple weeks.. I modified the diagram and sent it to Antonio.. Of course he flipped out. He had already been working on something that was leading in that direction! Some emails and photos and I do not believe the HR was made from one die.. or at least the 2nd pattern... Antonio has been spending lots of time and a big expense sending samples to labs etc. He;s got something and he's putting it in print and hopefully this year we'll see for sure..

* The trade guilds/booklets,, A couple weeks later Odal passed away. I never got the books. I sent a nice condolence card to his wife [not mentioning the books]. I was going to wait then ask. Then suddenly a member here shows me Odals rings on a auction. Not fluent in German I asked the auctioneer to contact his wife and just ask IF she had seen the books. I got it loud and clear,,,,leave her alone. Forget the money, the books, she lost her husband and father to their children. It's all ok,,,R.I.P. brother..

Attached picture zzzzzEN2.JPG
Attached picture zzzzzEN3 (2).JPG
Posted By: Ric Ferrari Re: For Gaspare : Fake Honor Ring & Cert! - 01/18/2020 01:12 AM
Originally Posted by Gaspare
.....he shows me a diagram of a very weird manufacture method. The more I looked at it the more I realized this could be for the HR... I asked Odal for that issue and he said no problem he'd send it with my half [30 more issues!] in a couple weeks.. I modified the diagram and sent it to Antonio.. Of course he flipped out. He had already been working on something that was leading in that direction! Some emails and photos and I do not believe the HR was made from one die.. or at least the 2nd pattern... Antonio has been spending lots of time and a big expense sending samples to labs etc. He;s got something and he's putting it in print and hopefully this year we'll see for sure....


Very interesting and I sincerely hope we will definitively know how Gahr made SSHr, but what I read since the past year is very different : a cast theory based mainly on observation and analysis performed by a microscope.

I proved by a very simple test (on WAF) that a certified die struck ring like Hapur's SSHr repro under strong magnification show features and details that we can also see on a cast ring.

In addition you reported the technical reasons why it may happen.

Ric
Posted By: Mikee Re: For Gaspare : Fake Honor Ring & Cert! - 01/18/2020 03:15 AM
I have also been collecting these books for a number of years. It is very interesting stuff that I for one reason or another kept close hold.
Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari

Very interesting and I sincerely hope we will definitively know how Gahr made SSHr, but what I read since the past year is very different : a cast theory based mainly on observation and analysis performed by a microscope.


WRONG.
No need microscope to see the differences between each ring - Anyway I remember you that first you said that microscope analysys:
Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
Hello Antonio,
an impressive job and interesting approach to check fake rings.
Ric


And differences (and casting flaws) cannot be explained with your "die stricking" theory. Isn't this true? Isn't this an evidence?
In fact you NEVER answered to any question, and NEVER shared any proof about your fake theory. In what you believe if you have no evidences?

If you want a serious discussion I show here some pictures of rings with some questions, and you explain how they are possible in die struck rings.

Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
I proved by a very simple test (on WAF) that a certified die struck ring like Hapur's SSHr repro under strong magnification show features and details that we can also see on a cast ring.


I report my words: you can't judge any ring with only one picture. YOU NEED MANY PICTURES. One picture can fool, I always said that.
Can you judge a belt buckle by only seeing a close up and nothing more? Of course no. If this is a test for you, I will show you some close ups of various buckles and you'll tell us if they are cast or die struck. Ok?
The only thing you proved is exactly what I always said: one picture is useless. Can you judge something from one, bad made, picture? Of course not.
Quite simple.

Put 10-20 pictures, under real magnification, and even a child will find out the difference between a cast and a die struck item.

Fact is this: you believe in a theory but you can't prove it. So your theory is pure trash. I don't believe in any theory, I simply understood that die stricking theory cannot explain anything in TK rings construction. All what we knew is FAKE.

If you mix pp rings with TK rings it means you understood absolutely nothing. Half of the pp rings production is bijouterie production (and in period magazines you can find also dealers that offered "Bijouterieguss" items... But I know you never read any period magazine). PP ring and TK rings are 2 different fields that have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in common. There were pp rings cast and pp rings die struck, there were tens of different patterns and tens of different makers, from Afrika to Norway.
TK rings were exclusively made by one jeweller, and the reason was because they were too complicated... Probably no one wanted to deal with RFSS and a so complicated ring.
His meaning was so deep that we have never understood what we were looking at.
For those interested I can tell that finally the meanings of the runes and the whole ring, are revealed, in the book there will be at least 30 pages of an incredible study, not made by me (I don't have the necessary knowledge for it), made by a friend who was helped from one of the most knowledgeable authors on TR esotheric/runic world (and indirectly involved one of the last Weistor pupils). And everything matches with the TK ring construction.

I really don't care what you think Ric, I'm sure at 100% you cannot have a serious discussion and offer evidences. This is clear since years. The best you can do is a personal attack. Exaclty like one that has nothing to say.
I'm not nice, I know, you can have tens of friends here, but this doesn't erase the fact your posts are empty.
When you'll be able to have a serious discussion, I'm here, and I'll be happy to change my mind.

The first question that hurted you was: there's a single evidence supporting TK ring were die struck?
BTW: I MUST publically thanks Gaspare, because in these last years he spent time answering my emails, sharing his knowledge, discussing about various possibilities, and following almost step by step what I hope will be something important for all the community.

I really think it is thanks to people like Gaspare, with an open mind, if we can go on and make new discoveries.

Have a nice days guys.
Posted By: Ric Ferrari Re: For Gaspare : Fake Honor Ring & Cert! - 01/18/2020 02:43 PM
Originally Posted by Antonio Scapini
......If you want a serious discussion I show here some pictures of rings with some questions, and you explain how they are possible in die struck rings.

.........PP ring and TK rings are 2 different fields that have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in common. There were pp rings cast and pp rings die struck..



I accept your offer of a serious discussion (with polite behaviour) but to begin with, may you please post some well detailed pictures of this ring offered by your site ?

http://phpstack-500133-1583587.cloudwaysapps.com/~germand2/ubbthreads.php/topics/345347/silver-heer-ring-original.html#Post345347

Thank you in advance

Ric
First thanks for posting it, you and everybody know I highly appreciate if someone find an item on my site that is fake.
Ring is already removed and put in the dust bin.

Anyway I mean a discussion on TK rings, not on the items I sell.

If you want have a serious discussion we can start from the beginning. You and me only, a public discussion, with Gaspare as mod.

And of course the first question for a serious discussion is always the same: any evidence support the die stricking theory?
Posted By: Ric Ferrari Re: For Gaspare : Fake Honor Ring & Cert! - 01/18/2020 03:01 PM
Originally Posted by Antonio Scapini
...........There were pp rings cast and pp rings die struck..


I agree that we must start from the beginning, so let's start from above statement :

may you show PP ring example made by casting ?

Ric

P.S. reason of my request : if we disagree about corner stone for any rings collector, there isn't chance to have a serious discussion but just a dialogue between deaf people.
There's no corner stone.

PP rings are another field, I think no one collector would ever mix pp rings with TK rings...
And I'm not for sure the best person to talk with. I never made deep studies on them, never analyzed, and I'm not interested to do it; but got confirm from Gaspare that some patterns are cast.

I'm not interested by pp rings, and I know most of them were die struck. But PP rings are also civil rings, not only skull rings, pp rings were also wedding rings, sympathizers rings...
Most of the wedding rings were cast, and so the round sympathyzers rings (TK rings have much more in common with these patterns than with pp skull rings); some female rings were die struck, exactly like most skull rings...
Some firms bought cast bands from other makers and prepare their rings on cast bands, other bought pressed bands....
I can tell you makers like Carl Zachmann of Pforzheim produced cast bijouterie (and so cast pp rings in "poor" metals), Fried W. Muller of Pforzheim produced cast models for pp requests, Hermann Schumann of Pforzheim used "Feinguss" (investment casting) for pp articles.... and again: Karl Klink of Niefern offered all the necessary tools for the creation of seamless rings after the casting process and after the pressing process...
This field is complex, much more than what you think.

So, on what we have to agree about pp rings? Are for you pp rings the only you see here on forum related to Army world? If yes I agree with you. Gaspare confirm this. So no problems.

[u]That said: PP RINGS have nothing, NOTHING in common with TK rings.[/u]

So, can we talk about TK rings now?
What is the proof of your famous statement "TK rings were die struck"?

PS: Furthermore you made a lot of confusion mixing the words "pressing" and "stricking" several times; they are different processes. Anyway we can go on without considering this.
Posted By: Gaspare Re: For Gaspare : Fake Honor Ring & Cert! - 01/18/2020 05:04 PM
You guys are more than welcome if you want to offer your findings, theories, research etc. about the Honor Ring here..

There is the old theory of the HR being die pressed,,and some say die struck which is quick almost violent like a coin..

And,, then the new alternative offering which I'm really not exactly sure...

But I can tell you both to please lets keep it polite and professional as I know you both can be.. I can promise there will be many around the world reading it!
Posted By: Ric Ferrari Re: For Gaspare : Fake Honor Ring & Cert! - 01/18/2020 05:08 PM
When I'm referring to PP rings I'm considering mass produced rings not custom ones, so do not consider wedding rings or something like that.

So far nobody knows how Gahr made SSHr , differently we don't need to debate the matter and the two opinions/theories (stamped or cast) are still on the table and no definitive proofs supporting one of them have been provided.

That being said, the discussion is still open to any serious contribute.....

Ric

P.S. thank you G. for your welcome, polite behaviour is my habit, so no problem to be myself
Ok, now there are no evidences for both the theories... Good starting.

So, if rings are, as you say, die struck, how can it be possible they show different position of the leaves on the ring body band? (see distance of the leaves from the top of the band).
Even rings produced in the same date.

Dies for the die struck rings are "female" and the distance between leaves and edge of the band is always the same (with minor variations, but never so big variations as in TK rings).

Attached picture C6.jpg
Attached picture P3.jpg
Posted By: Ric Ferrari Re: For Gaspare : Fake Honor Ring & Cert! - 01/18/2020 05:43 PM
Originally Posted by Antonio Scapini
Ok, now there are no evidences for both the theories... Good starting.

So, if rings are, as you say, die struck, how can it be possible they show different position of the leaves on the ring body band? (see distance of the leaves from the top of the band).
Even rings produced in the same date.

Dies for the die struck rings are "female" and the distance between leaves and edge of the band is always the same (with minor variations, but never so big variations as in TK rings).


_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I have to make the same question :

So, if rings are, as you say, die cast, how can it be possible they show different position of the leaves on the ring body band? (see distance of the leaves from the top of the band).
Even rings produced in the same date ?

Ric

Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
...for the hand tooling


If you finish a ring by hand tooling you cannot have all the rings measuring exactly the same height. No questions about. Height of TK ring is always the same. The band was no hand cut or hand worked.

If you mean hand tooling on the leaves, on the 3 rings I posted there are no hand toolings around the leaves, you can see checking the perfectly matching details of the 3 rings. No hand work on those leaves (on most of '40 style rings the hand tooling around the leaves is few when absolutely absent - on '30 is almost always present and very invasive - and there's a reason).

Please don't change radically what you write and answer the question. When you'll give your answer I will give you mine, and I'm sure you will be amazed!
Of course the position of the leaves has nothing to do with the hand tooling, since you deleted your reply I understand you understood by yourself you wrote something totally wrong. Good.

BTW: this is only one of the questions I asked myself when I started this research and one of the many questions are uncompatible with the die stricking production.
Posted By: Ric Ferrari Re: For Gaspare : Fake Honor Ring & Cert! - 01/18/2020 06:03 PM
I deleted my post where I was mentioning hand tooling, because based on wrong reading of your post.....so do not consider it.

Of course we agree that hand tooling do not modify position of leaves compared to band edge.

Ric
Absolutely yes.

Please, we go on in this discussion, I'm sure many are following with interest.
We can talk as old friends as we were.
This is not a war, I have nothing to win exactly like you.

I'm also sure if you give your answer, you'll be amazed reading mine.

This is only the first point... There's a lot to talk about.

PS: if I don't reply is why I have to go.
Posted By: Ric Ferrari Re: For Gaspare : Fake Honor Ring & Cert! - 01/18/2020 06:25 PM
Originally Posted by Antonio Scapini
.......I'm also sure if you give your answer, you'll be amazed reading mine.


______________________________________________________________________________________________________

I do not know the reason why some SSHr show different distance of leaves from edge band, probably because Gahr made different female dies having a different distance of leaves from edge band.

That's my answer

Ric
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: For Gaspare : Fake Honor Ring & Cert! - 01/19/2020 10:16 AM
I hope you can give to my add my info about method of made SSHR : In the process of restoration and restoration of the ring model of the 40s, I noticed that there were at least two ring models (maybe there were 3 types), they appear in different years, from 41 to 44, many rings have traces of processing, it can be seen it is easy in the areas between the triangle and the bones of the skull, there the leaves are always cut by a calmail by hand and each time in a different way. And a very large number of skulls, there are many varieties, even the skulls are identical at first glance, they differ in little things(how teeth look and areas around teeth look like eyes socket). This does not speak at all in favor of a stamp where everything will be the same. From this I concluded that the stamp theory is misleading.
I try show yellow likes where need look


Attached picture 1.JPG
Attached picture 2.JPG
Attached picture 3.JPG
Attached picture 4.JPG
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: For Gaspare : Fake Honor Ring & Cert! - 01/19/2020 11:19 AM
one art of examples
too u can see different in bones
this all told to us , that its not was stamp method - IMO

Attached picture 1.JPG
Attached picture 2.JPG
Attached picture 3.JPG
Attached picture 4.JPG
Posted By: Ric Ferrari Re: For Gaspare : Fake Honor Ring & Cert! - 01/19/2020 01:00 PM
Originally Posted by Evgeniy
I hope you can give to my add my info about method of made SSHR : In the process of restoration and restoration of the ring model of the 40s, I noticed that there were at least two ring models (maybe there were 3 types), they appear in different years, from 41 to 44, many rings have traces of processing, it can be seen it is easy in the areas between the triangle and the bones of the skull, there the leaves are always cut by a calmail by hand and each time in a different way. And a very large number of skulls, there are many varieties, even the skulls are identical at first glance, they differ in little things(how teeth look and areas around teeth look like eyes socket). This does not speak at all in favor of a stamp where everything will be the same. From this I concluded that the stamp theory is misleading.
I try show yellow likes where need look


________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Hello Evgeniy,

absolutely correct in pointing out that many SSHr were hand tooled to highlight some band design features.

However such features does not support neither cast theory nor die struck theory in my opinion, because the band out of casting/stamping process was a standard one then hand tooling could modify it one way or another.

Ric
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: For Gaspare : Fake Honor Ring & Cert! - 01/19/2020 03:00 PM
Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
Originally Posted by Evgeniy
I hope you can give to my add my info about method of made SSHR : In the process of restoration and restoration of the ring model of the 40s, I noticed that there were at least two ring models (maybe there were 3 types), they appear in different years, from 41 to 44, many rings have traces of processing, it can be seen it is easy in the areas between the triangle and the bones of the skull, there the leaves are always cut by a calmail by hand and each time in a different way. And a very large number of skulls, there are many varieties, even the skulls are identical at first glance, they differ in little things(how teeth look and areas around teeth look like eyes socket). This does not speak at all in favor of a stamp where everything will be the same. From this I concluded that the stamp theory is misleading.
I try show yellow likes where need look


________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Hello Evgeniy,

absolutely correct in pointing out that many SSHr were hand tooled to highlight some band design features.

However such features does not support neither cast theory nor die struck theory in my opinion, because the band out of casting/stamping process was a standard one then hand tooling could modify it one way or another.

Ric




if the rings were stamped, then so much work on finishing the rings would not be required, as we see, the stamp suggests that there are very few improvements, because there is a good relief. But here we see everywhere improvements and even in the skull, eyes, teeth and the area around them, bones (cuts on the bones).
I make my copies by casting and there is one size and there are very few finishing touches.
Posted By: Ric Ferrari Re: For Gaspare : Fake Honor Ring & Cert! - 01/20/2020 12:06 AM
Originally Posted by Evgeniy
if the rings were stamped, then so much work on finishing the rings would not be required, as we see, the stamp suggests that there are very few improvements, because there is a good relief. But here we see everywhere improvements and even in the skull, eyes, teeth and the area around them, bones (cuts on the bones).
I make my copies by casting and there is one size and there are very few finishing touches.


_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hello Evgeniy,

first you say : " if the rings were stamped, then so much work on finishing the rings would not be required, as we see, the stamp suggests that there are very few improvements"

then you say : " I make my copies by casting and there is one size and there are very few finishing touches"

So you're saying that both casting and stamping don't need much hand finishing........am I right ?

Ric
Posted By: Gaspare SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/20/2020 12:19 AM
.. I am going to attempt to move the debate from a 'fake HR warning'..

Done!,

Thank You for the help Vern!

Posted By: ed773 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/20/2020 01:51 PM
Good morming all!
Thank you all for some very interesting reading. And I must say, the only reading on this site any more.
I am not a ring guy, but have really looked forward to reading this about these rings.
Thank you all!
Ed
Guys, let me say one thing: please, talk of one topic per time, being a forum we have to focus on just one topic.
There are tens of things to talk about before to understand something in a serious way. If we put different arguments on each other this discussion will turn very fast in a complete confusion and so, useless.

Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
I do not know the reason why some SSHr show different distance of leaves from edge band, probably because Gahr made different female dies having a different distance of leaves from edge band.

That's my answer

Ric

Almost each ring has a different distance between leaves and band's edge.
Design of the leaves/runes is perfectly matching (where no hand toolings are present of course), it means the die used was only 1 (actually 2 for the leaves/runes, 1 for the so called '30 and one for the so called '40... but we should also talk about this...).
So, or Gahr had an endless number of dies, or the die stricking process has nothing to do with them.

Of course this is not possible for investment casting, nor for die casting processes in the way we normally consider them.

On my side it is incredible to see that a so important detail was never discussed, never considered in all these years.


Originally Posted by Evgeniy
I hope you can give to my add my info about method of made SSHR : In the process of restoration and restoration of the ring model of the 40s, I noticed that there were at least two ring models (maybe there were 3 types), they appear in different years, from 41 to 44, many rings have traces of processing, it can be seen it is easy in the areas between the triangle and the bones of the skull, there the leaves are always cut by a calmail by hand and each time in a different way. And a very large number of skulls, there are many varieties, even the skulls are identical at first glance, they differ in little things(how teeth look and areas around teeth look like eyes socket). This does not speak at all in favor of a stamp where everything will be the same. From this I concluded that the stamp theory is misleading.
I try show yellow likes where need look


Hello Evgeniy,

in this case the areas you are considering are different due to the hand tooling and because they are not the same area (some rings are bigger and so the last "leave" is longer and different).
I agree with Ric, if 2 pieces are different, no way they were die struck/pressed or die cast. But, I repeat, in this case you are cosidering hand worked areas (and some different), most of the areas you highlighted are hand re-worked.


Originally Posted by Evgeniy
if the rings were stamped, then so much work on finishing the rings would not be required, as we see, the stamp suggests that there are very few improvements, because there is a good relief. But here we see everywhere improvements and even in the skull, eyes, teeth and the area around them, bones (cuts on the bones).
I make my copies by casting and there is one size and there are very few finishing touches.


Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
Hello Evgeniy,

first you say : " if the rings were stamped, then so much work on finishing the rings would not be required, as we see, the stamp suggests that there are very few improvements"

then you say : " I make my copies by casting and there is one size and there are very few finishing touches"

So you're saying that both casting and stamping don't need much hand finishing........am I right ?

Ric


Yes, a die struck piece no need any hand finish. Check for example Hapur rings: no hand tooling on them. All the die struck items no need hand tooling, from awards to jewelry. No questions on this. PP rings that were die struck don't show any hand tooling and so no other items in all the jewelry production. All the books/reports/period papers on the subject report that.
At the same time a die cast item no need hand finish; only an investment cast item can require some minor working, but nothing in common with all the work we see especially on '30 style rings.

This is another point that no one has ever pointed out, but very clear to dismiss a construction by die stricking/pressing and also die casting.
From my side absolutely important and one of the first things to consider.

I add another important detail: check the whole TK rings production: can you see where/when Gahr made more hand toolings on the rings?
On most of '40 style rings the hand tooling around the leaves is few when absolutely absent - on '30 is almost always present and very invasive.

So why should Gahr spent so much time in hand finish rings (especially in '30) if they were die struck/die cast?
This is a very important questions no one has ever asked... And of course there's an answer.

Do you see in few posts how many unanswered questions? Just only looking at the rings, without any magnifier or microscope. With a little of common sense, simply considering these 2 questions (distance of leaves from band's edge and hand tooling) you can dismiss everything said on TK rings until now.
And these are only 2 questions. There are tens...
In my experience hand finishing on leaves to modify their appearance is not the rule but an exception, most of SSHr show the exact same features on outer band.

The same we can say about increased distance between leaves and band edge, it's not the rule but an exception.

Believing some exception like a rule could drive us to wrong conclusions, so it's better focusing on standard features IMO.

Ric

Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/21/2020 04:11 AM
ok, a lot of things going on.. It will settle.. IF a point has been raised / a question, lets try and get to a answer if we can.. I realize there are multiple questions on this subject but lets try and be clear and concise [if we can!]


Some basics .. This not only applies to rings/jewelry,,but other items we collect both in authentic and reproduction...

1st we have the term 'Lost Wax Cast' - see link below. check history , procedure , the steps involved etc. *Something to remember,, the LWC we have now is a bit different then back in the period of 1920 to 1940....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost-wax_casting

Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/21/2020 04:15 AM
another is the term 'Die Cast'.. a good process but not exactly towards silver, gold.. Yes possible. During the 3rd reich much experimenting was going on with ALL these methods...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_casting

Again,,check the history etc..
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/21/2020 04:21 AM
and another,, 'Die Struck' or Die Pressed'.. A great process and during the 3rd reich much jewelry and other items was manufactured by this process.



http://www.jabel.com/die-struck-jewelry-qa/

And,, on this one too see history, and check out the cool movie labeled 'watch our documentary' from their site below!..

http://www.jabel.com/jabel-documentary/


Thank you, G......it's a pleasure to have such a Mod.

Please help us to be clear and concise.......in viewers benefit.

Ric
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/21/2020 03:14 PM
no no,, its my pleasure..
The HR has been a mystery for so long.. When you have someone commanding a answer to you with confidence you believe.. Years ago guys collected everything they could get their hands on.. Something rare, unfamiliar, you'd go to the expert.. They giv you the cert and your done.. There's no one to blame it's just how it was done back then..

OK so far we have this:

, if rings are, die struck, how can it be possible they show different position of the leaves on the ring body band? (see distance of the leaves from the top of the band).
Even rings produced in the same date.

Dies for the die struck rings are "female" and the distance between leaves and edge of the band is always the same (with minor variations, but never so big variations as in TK rings).
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ same question :

if rings are, die cast, how can it be possible they show different position of the leaves on the ring body band? (see distance of the leaves from the top of the band).

SO, now the real question or answer is: How is it possible to have the discrepancy in distance of leafs from top of body?

You all are doing very well,,and thank you Evgeniy for the photos so we all could see the oddity..Please continue guys,,,,,,,,,,

Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
In my experience hand finishing on leaves to modify their appearance is not the rule but an exception, most of SSHr show the exact same features on outer band.


ALL the '30 style rings have hand finishing. ALL. Including yours. I know 3 of yours, and all 3 shows heavy hand tooling. Feel free to post them here, and let see if it is the rule as I say, or an "exception" like you say.

This is not an exception, this is THE rule. I can also tell you the exact year when Gahr stopped to make hard hand tooling on the leaves.

Please find an untouched 30 style ring and post close ups here. In all the years of research I spent I found only one. And that way the key to understand MANY things...
On my side I have at least 50 different rings I can show here.

If this is you point of observation, if you have noticed that ALL the rings are hand finished, I understand many many things... And, of course, if you try to dismiss an evidence like this without any proof, it is obvious where you want to lead this discussion.

Or we talk and show evidences, or we talk about opinions.

Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
The same we can say about increased distance between leaves and band edge, it's not the rule but an exception.


Are you kidding?
Almost all TK rings are off center, the variable distance from leaves to top edge is THE rule.
Look at the rings posted by Evgeniy, they exactly show what I'm saying.

Post all your '40 rings please, so we can see if they show all the same distance. This is better visible in '40 style rings, since most part of '30 style rings have the leaves hand re-worked; anyway you can see it in '30 rings too, very well.

Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
Believing some exception like a rule could drive us to wrong conclusions, so it's better focusing on standard features IMO.

Ric

I repeat: I know 3 of your rings, and all them show what I say. So, or you never watched at your rings, or you are saying a lie.

In the meanwhile I show you what are the real standar features, I can use 2 of your rings, just for example. Both shows hard hand tooling all around... Seems these "exceptions" are not "exceptions"

Attached picture fccec90345b43aa6a30ef457e32739d9.jpg
Attached picture fccec90345b43aa6a30ef457e32739d9_1.jpg
Attached picture T18_12.jpg
I can add some more evidences.
A quick comparison between Ric's ring "Giessler 21.6.39" with 3 other rings of the same production period.
It is well visible that the position of the leaves in the 4 rings is different.


Attached picture B11.jpg
Attached picture 229562_1.jpg
Attached picture Giessler39_1.jpg
Attached picture 2001.jpg
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/21/2020 04:49 PM
Antonio, please can you give name to each photo?

Thank you very much.



Jan
Even those rings that look to show the same distance between leaves/runes and band edge, seen under magnification, they haven't.
Very precise measurements were taken during the tests.
Here an example: you can see the different distance between leaves/runes in ring 1 and in ring 2. Of course both of the same type.

Attached picture 2019-2113(1)-4_112.jpg
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/21/2020 04:56 PM
Originally Posted by Gaspare

if rings are, die struck, how can it be possible they show different position of the leaves on the ring body band? (see distance of the leaves from the top of the band).
Even rings produced in the same date.

Dies for the die struck rings are "female" and the distance between leaves and edge of the band is always the same (with minor variations, but never so big variations as in TK rings).
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ same question :

if rings are, die cast, how can it be possible they show different position of the leaves on the ring body band? (see distance of the leaves from the top of the band).

SO, now the real question or answer is: How is it possible to have the discrepancy in distance of leafs from top of body?

You all are doing very well,,and thank you Evgeniy for the photos so we all could see the oddity..Please continue guys,,,,,,,,,,




Hello!

My englisch is very bad, I know - sorry.

Possible solution:

1. Create a mold made out of metal
2. Fill the mold with some wax. This will result in a wax made model of the ring.
3. Carfully extract the model from its mold.
This sometimes wont work without the model being damaged since the wax sticks to the metal.
4. Fix the damaged spots by hand before continuing the process
5. Cover the wax model with some fire resistent material and let it dry
6. Remove all the wax before the burning process. Burn the whole thing. By that all the water inside the fire resistent material (covering the wax model) should evaporate. This step is necessary to make sure that it won?t be destroyed while casting later on.
7. Now fill the hollow mold with silver.
8. Uncover the ring. The outer mantle will be destroyed in the process.

The rings differ by the means of manual work in step 4. However the still look similar, being made from the same Mold (step 1) as a reason for that.

Regards,
Dierk
Originally Posted by lartiste
Antonio, please can you give name to each photo?

Thank you very much.

Jan

Hi Jan, yes, privately, because all these rings will be published in the book with names and dates and I shouldn't post them...
Everything will be shared at the proper time.
Originally Posted by 12472
Hello!

My englisch is very bad, I know - sorry.

Possible solution:

1. Create a mold made out of metal
2. Fill the mold with some wax. This will result in a wax made model of the ring.
3. Carfully extract the model from its mold.
This sometimes wont work without the model being damaged since the wax sticks to the metal.
4. Fix the damaged spots by hand before continuing the process
5. Cover the wax model with some fire resistent material and let it dry
6. Remove all the wax before the burning process. Burn the whole thing. By that all the water inside the fire resistent material (covering the wax model) should evaporate. This step is necessary to make sure that it won?t be destroyed while casting later on.
7. Now fill the hollow mold with silver.
8. Uncover the ring. The outer mantle will be destroyed in the process.

The rings differ by the means of manual work in step 4. However the still look similar, being made from the same Mold (step 1) as a reason for that.

Regards,
Dierk


Hello Dierk, with investment casting (lost was casting) you can obtain some minor variations, is right. But this process cannot explain all the off center leaves/runes and also the big variations of the distance between leaves/runes and edge band. Using an original metal die the wax model is always the same.
And don't forget a ring obtained with lost wax process (exactly like for one sie struck or die cast) no need the big hand tooling we see (especially in '30 style rings).
Furthermore lost wax casting is totally uncompatible with other important characteristics of the rings I will reveal in future... ;-)
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/21/2020 06:14 PM
Originally Posted by Antonio Scapini
Originally Posted by 12472
Hello!

My englisch is very bad, I know - sorry.

Possible solution:

1. Create a mold made out of metal
2. Fill the mold with some wax. This will result in a wax made model of the ring.
3. Carfully extract the model from its mold.
This sometimes wont work without the model being damaged since the wax sticks to the metal.
4. Fix the damaged spots by hand before continuing the process
5. Cover the wax model with some fire resistent material and let it dry
6. Remove all the wax before the burning process. Burn the whole thing. By that all the water inside the fire resistent material (covering the wax model) should evaporate. This step is necessary to make sure that it won?t be destroyed while casting later on.
7. Now fill the hollow mold with silver.
8. Uncover the ring. The outer mantle will be destroyed in the process.

The rings differ by the means of manual work in step 4. However the still look similar, being made from the same Mold (step 1) as a reason for that.

Regards,
Dierk


Hello Dierk, with investment casting (lost was casting) you can obtain some minor variations, is right. But this process cannot explain all the off center leaves/runes and also the big variations of the distance between leaves/runes and edge band. Using an original metal die the wax model is always the same.
And don't forget a ring obtained with lost wax process (exactly like for one sie struck or die cast) no need the big hand tooling we see (especially in '30 style rings).
Furthermore lost wax casting is totally uncompatible with other important characteristics of the rings I will reveal in future... ;-)


I am not in any case expert concerning ring construction. But would like to share my opinion. Last week I spent 2 hours to observe my rings again. My opinion, which logically explains also your question, is that early rings consists of 3 parts (totenkopf, inner ring, outer ring) and put together required big hand tooling. Latter Gahr simplified the construction and the rings consisted only of 2 parts (totenkopf, ring).
Originally Posted by Antonio Scapini
Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
In my experience hand finishing on leaves to modify their appearance is not the rule but an exception, most of SSHr show the exact same features on outer band.


ALL the '30 style rings have hand finishing. ALL. Including yours. I know 3 of yours, and all 3 shows heavy hand tooling. Feel free to post them here, and let see if it is the rule as I say, or an "exception" like you say.

This is not an exception, this is THE rule. I can also tell you the exact year when Gahr stopped to make hard hand tooling on the leaves.

Please find an untouched 30 style ring and post close ups here. In all the years of research I spent I found only one. And that way the key to understand MANY things...
On my side I have at least 50 different rings I can show here.

If this is you point of observation, if you have noticed that ALL the rings are hand finished, I understand many many things... And, of course, if you try to dismiss an evidence like this without any proof, it is obvious where you want to lead this discussion.

Or we talk and show evidences, or we talk about opinions.

Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
The same we can say about increased distance between leaves and band edge, it's not the rule but an exception.


Are you kidding?
Almost all TK rings are off center, the variable distance from leaves to top edge is THE rule.
Look at the rings posted by Evgeniy, they exactly show what I'm saying.

Post all your '40 rings please, so we can see if they show all the same distance. This is better visible in '40 style rings, since most part of '30 style rings have the leaves hand re-worked; anyway you can see it in '30 rings too, very well.

Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
Believing some exception like a rule could drive us to wrong conclusions, so it's better focusing on standard features IMO.

Ric

I repeat: I know 3 of your rings, and all them show what I say. So, or you never watched at your rings, or you are saying a lie.

In the meanwhile I show you what are the real standar features, I can use 2 of your rings, just for example. Both shows hard hand tooling all around... Seems these "exceptions" are not "exceptions"


_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


I did forget to mention that I was referring to '40 pattern., about '30 pattern you're correct in pointing out that hand finishing is very frequent.

'40 pattern show a more standard production, skull variants apart, than '30 pattern so I think it's a better subject to study.

Ric


Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/21/2020 07:21 PM
Originally Posted by lartiste


I am not in any case expert concerning ring construction. But would like to share my opinion. Last week I spent 2 hours to observe my rings again. My opinion, which logically explains also your question, is that early rings consists of 3 parts (totenkopf, inner ring, outer ring) and put together required big hand tooling. Latter Gahr simplified the construction and the rings consisted only of 2 parts (totenkopf, ring).



Hello!

Soldering the inner ring to the outer ring is very time consuming and I think, you should see traces of solder at the seam?

Because the material of the solder has a different alloy than the ring itself.
Why? the melting point of the solder must be lower than the melting point of the rings, otherwise the rings will be destroyed while soldering.


Other suggestion:

The ring was too wide after pouring. Maybe, because the silver was poured in at the edge. In order to remove the traces of it, the edge was then polished.
This handwork allows the leaf-band to move out of the center.

Perhaps (to save rework) the silver was no longer casted in on the edge of the 40s rings but instead at the place behind the skull, where the ring is soldered together.

Best regards,
Dierk
I'm sorry for this warning to Antonio, but we all remember what happened on WAF.

If Antonio will call me again lier or something else or will ask if I'm kidding in any future replies to my comments, I will no longer give my contribute to this interesting discussion.

I'm not interested in duplicating fight already seen on WAF, so Antonio must keep a polite behaviour..if he's still interested in my opinions of course.

Thank you

Ric
Originally Posted by 12472
Hello!

Soldering the inner ring to the outer ring is very time consuming and I think, you should see traces of solder at the seam?

Because the material of the solder has a different alloy than the ring itself.
Why? the melting point of the solder must be lower than the melting point of the rings, otherwise the rings will be destroyed while soldering?...



Best regards,
Dierk


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Hello Dierk,

I have the exact same opinion about two bands theory, I can add that after a close examination (magnification 20 x) none of my 8 SSHr shows traces of a double band construction.

On the other end I was lucky enough to find an italian ring made by nickel in 1930 that clearly show a double band construction even under a 10x magnification.

Ric
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/22/2020 08:44 AM
Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari


Hello Dierk,

I have the exact same opinion about two bands theory, I can add that after a close examination (magnification 20 x) none of my 8 SSHr shows traces of a double band construction.

On the other end I was lucky enough to find an italian ring made by nickel in 1930 that clearly show a double band construction even under a 10x magnification.

Ric



Hello,

I think an x-ray could clarify whether the ring consists of two or three parts, this is also common for welds...

For example:

https://www.zeros-berlin.de/roentgenpruefung-rt/#


Best regards,
Dierk
Originally Posted by 12472
Hello,

I think an x-ray could clarify whether the ring consists of two or three parts, this is also common for welds...

For example:

https://www.zeros-berlin.de/roentgenpruefung-rt/#


Best regards,
Dierk


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Sure, but if the ring band is made of two bands soldered together and only x-ray confirm it, then it's very hard to support die cast theory........do you agree ?

Differently, it could be possible that Gahr received/prepared blank planchets by silver alloy made out of two layers joined and ready to be strucked.....

....and that could make sense : having inner layers softer to be easily engraved and outer layer harder to preserve band design from wearing

Ric
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/22/2020 10:36 AM
Hello Ric,

I think, x-rays are only suitable for the question 2 or 3 parts.

For the question: "die struck or cast" - it won't help. The outer ring can still be cast, even if it was soldered to the inner ring.

If the outer ring were die strucked, all rings should be approximately identical - like one coin to another.
If it was cast, there are more variations - because of the handwork on the wax model. In addition, the fire resistent material does not always flow around the wax quite evenly, when you cover the wax.

The edges of the leaves are important. If die strucked, they are either at a 90 degree angle to the surface, or they become narrower towards the top - like a triangle standing on a broadside. But they can't get any wider at the top (like a triangle standing on its peak) - this is not technically possible.
It's hard for me to explain in English, maybe I could show it in a picture...

Best regards,
Dierk
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/22/2020 11:26 AM
Hello again,

sketch to clarify what I mean...

Best regards,
Dierk

Attached picture IMG_0002.JPG
Originally Posted by 12472
Hello!

Soldering the inner ring to the outer ring is very time consuming and I think, you should see traces of solder at the seam?

Because the material of the solder has a different alloy than the ring itself.
Why? the melting point of the solder must be lower than the melting point of the rings, otherwise the rings will be destroyed while soldering??.

Best regards,
Dierk


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hello Dierk,

as you rightly said "you should see traces of solder at the seam....."

So, why there are no traces visible at naked eye (but possibly by x-ray) of a joining seam of supposed two layers of the ring band ? My answer is because silver alloy planchet by two layers was made before SSHr production starting.

If you use a silver alloy made by two layers joined together and then you have to heat up and casting it into a die, are you still able to distinguish the two layers, when the ring is finished ?

I sincerely do not believe so....but if you use a two layers silver alloy to stamp a ring, you will finally have a finished ring that possibly show under x-ray a two layers band construction.....that's what I was meaning in my previous post.

Ric
Originally Posted by 12472
Hello again,

sketch to clarify what I mean...

Best regards,
Dierk


_________________________________________________________________________________________

Dierk,

I did already notice your reasoning posted in German Forum and it's a very interesting suggestion !
So, if we will see under strong magnification areas of design unaltered by hand tooling and showing situation like C, then we can conclude that die struck manufacture is not compatible with that feature??...good point !

Ric
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/22/2020 11:51 AM
Hello Ric,

thank you.

Ok I understand - a laminate like the material mentioned in German Cupal.
The German cross in gold and SS-skulls often made of this material.
Then we would be X-raying again...

Best regards,
Dierk
Dierk,

you did perfectly understand what I mean.

So, I reiterate the concept :

how can we heat up a cupal alloy (for example) and then cast it into a mold and in spite of that, still viewing its laminated structure ? It's impossible in my opinion.

Ric
Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
Originally Posted by 12472
Hello!

Soldering the inner ring to the outer ring is very time consuming and I think, you should see traces of solder at the seam?

Because the material of the solder has a different alloy than the ring itself.
Why? the melting point of the solder must be lower than the melting point of the rings, otherwise the rings will be destroyed while soldering??.

Best regards,
Dierk


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hello Dierk,

as you rightly said "you should see traces of solder at the seam....."

So, why there are no traces visible at naked eye (but possibly by x-ray) of a joining seam of supposed two layers of the ring band ? My answer is because silver alloy planchet by two layers was made before SSHr production starting.

If you use a silver alloy made by two layers joined together and then you have to heat up and casting it into a die, are you still able to distinguish the two layers, when the ring is finished ?

I sincerely do not believe so....but if you use a two layers silver alloy to stamp a ring, you will finally have a finished ring that possibly show under x-ray a two layers band construction.....that's what I was meaning in my previous post.

Ric


Guys, may I ask you why are you talking about "soldering" between 2 metals when there's no soldering? Have you haver seen, or have you any evidence, about the solder between 2 rings parts? No. So, why are you talking about something that doesn't exist?

Or we talk about EVIDENCES, or we reason about imaginary things... In this case I'm not interested.


Furthermore you are talking about the 2 bands, when actually the focus was still on the external design and the uncompatibility with the die stricking and the die casting.

If you don't consider the fact that a very important point as the distance between leaves and edge exclude the die stricking and die casting, and add things without any proof, then I think there's something wrong in a scientifical approach.


Below I post some common rings, where 2 metals are cast toghether and, expecially in the first ring, if they were of the same color, they would appear, APPEAR, as one. But being one of them gold, then you can see the difference. No need any oldering, no need any pressure. Quite easy.


Attached picture 6.jpg
Attached picture 0.jpg
Attached picture 1.jpg
Originally Posted by 12472
Hello Ric,

I think, x-rays are only suitable for the question 2 or 3 parts.


I can tell you that under X-ray there are the same surprises you can understand simply studying these rings and putting togheter all the info in a logical way.
Anyway I have also X-ray tests, made for die struck copy, die cast copy, and originals. And I repeat: you have only confirm of what you can know studying them well, with the right approach. And the right approach IMO is: forget all what you think to know, analyze only the facts, don't speculate on an idea or on what is not proven (like for example the soldering between 2 parts of the ring...).

Originally Posted by 12472

If the outer ring were die strucked, all rings should be approximately identical - like one coin to another.

This is plan and simple. TK rings no only shows variations on the distance between leaves and edge, but also in many details.

Below another comparison between 3 '40 style rings. You can see not only the different distance between leaves and edge, but also a big flaw. Everything is totally uncompatible with die stricking.

Attached picture Senza titolo-2_1.jpg
Originally Posted by 12472
The edges of the leaves are important. If die strucked, they are either at a 90 degree angle to the surface, or they become narrower towards the top - like a triangle standing on a broadside. But they can't get any wider at the top (like a triangle standing on its peak) - this is not technically possible.
Best regards,
Dierk

This is another of the things I always said, since they are quite common.
Below the difference between a die struck ring and a TK ring. I think everyone can have his conclusion.

Die stricking is uncompatible not only for the variabile positions of the design, but also for the excessive hand tooling on '30 style and for the uncompatible shape of the leaves with a die in die stricking process. And there are many more reasons that I tell in future...

Attached picture Leaves_Comp12.jpg
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/22/2020 12:49 PM
Hello Antonio,

thank you for your posts, I will answer in my next post!
I need a lot of time to write, my school days are decades ago.

First the text as an answer for Ric

hard to say, but i suspect that materials with different composition can be seen in the x-ray. A weld seam is also clearly visible on such a picture - and it's usually made of the same material as the rest.

I have another question.
Assume that the Totenkopfring consists of 90% silver and approx. 10% copper - and the ring band is only one piece and was cast...
It is certain, that both materials solidify so (when cooling down) that the composition of the alloy is the same on all surfaces?
Or is it possible, the structure of the alloy separate while solifidy?
If the alloy is mixed differently, it may be that a material examination (inside and outside) does not help.

An important question, perhaps only to be determined by a test casting.

Best regards,
Dierk
Originally Posted by Antonio Scapini
Guys, may I ask you why are you talking about "soldering" between 2 metals when there's no soldering? Have you haver seen, or have you any evidence, about the solder between 2 rings parts? No. So, why are you talking about something that doesn't exist?...?..

_________________________________________________________________________

Originally Posted by lartiste
I am not in any case expert concerning ring construction. But would like to share my opinion. Last week I spent 2 hours to observe my rings again. My opinion, which logically explains also your question, is that early rings consists of 3 parts (totenkopf, inner ring, outer ring) and put together required big hand tooling. Latter Gahr simplified the construction and the rings consisted only of 2 parts (totenkopf, ring).


_________________________________________________________________________

Dierk answered to lartiste post and I did go on.

Probably I missed something :

according to your past comments on WAF, the two layers band is an evidence, not visible at naked eye in spite of tons of pictures you posted on WAF, you considered to explain die cast theory, did it change something about ?

Is the two layers band construction no longer of interest to support die cast or die struck theories ?

Ric

Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/22/2020 01:43 PM
Hello Antonio,

first - personally I'm sure that the Totenkopfringe were cast. The detailed pictures speak for themselves.

Attached is a picture of my 1941 ring, brought out of the ground by myself in 2008. Unfortunately you can see a slight damage by my folding spade at this exact spot, but guaranteed original.
Sorry, my camera is over 20 years old...

Could your Africa ring also be (in German) tauschiert? I can't find the right word in English (maybe damascening?), but I mean this:

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tauschierung

Would also fit the origin North Africa, I believe.

At this point thanks for all the effort, I'm curious the further course of this discussion.

Best regards,
Dierk

Attached picture Img_0002 (1).jpg
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/22/2020 04:30 PM
Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
Originally Posted by Antonio Scapini
Guys, may I ask you why are you talking about "soldering" between 2 metals when there's no soldering? Have you haver seen, or have you any evidence, about the solder between 2 rings parts? No. So, why are you talking about something that doesn't exist?...?..

_________________________________________________________________________

Originally Posted by lartiste
I am not in any case expert concerning ring construction. But would like to share my opinion. Last week I spent 2 hours to observe my rings again. My opinion, which logically explains also your question, is that early rings consists of 3 parts (totenkopf, inner ring, outer ring) and put together required big hand tooling. Latter Gahr simplified the construction and the rings consisted only of 2 parts (totenkopf, ring).


_________________________________________________________________________

Dierk answered to lartiste post and I did go on.

Probably I missed something :

according to your past comments on WAF, the two layers band is an evidence, not visible at naked eye in spite of tons of pictures you posted on WAF, you considered to explain die cast theory, did it change something about ?

Is the two layers band construction no longer of interest to support die cast or die struck theories ?

Ric



Yes, you are correct Ric, sorry if I misleaded the discussion in wrong direction.

Unfortunately Antonio raised question on Saturday and until today did not offer any answer.
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/22/2020 05:52 PM
May be we would consider one of solutions Martin Toman offered in his book - "wax casting trees" . The skull is attached where the ring was cut out of the tree. Latter Gahr changed the way of production. This theory would explain differences among rings and also why iit was necessary to hand finished the rings - not all wax disappeared ... .
Originally Posted by lartiste
Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
Originally Posted by Antonio Scapini
Guys, may I ask you why are you talking about "soldering" between 2 metals when there's no soldering? Have you haver seen, or have you any evidence, about the solder between 2 rings parts? No. So, why are you talking about something that doesn't exist?...?..

_________________________________________________________________________

Originally Posted by lartiste
I am not in any case expert concerning ring construction. But would like to share my opinion. Last week I spent 2 hours to observe my rings again. My opinion, which logically explains also your question, is that early rings consists of 3 parts (totenkopf, inner ring, outer ring) and put together required big hand tooling. Latter Gahr simplified the construction and the rings consisted only of 2 parts (totenkopf, ring).


_________________________________________________________________________

Dierk answered to lartiste post and I did go on.

Probably I missed something :

according to your past comments on WAF, the two layers band is an evidence, not visible at naked eye in spite of tons of pictures you posted on WAF, you considered to explain die cast theory, did it change something about ?

Is the two layers band construction no longer of interest to support die cast or die struck theories ?

Ric



_____________________________________________________________________

Yes, you are correct Ric, sorry if I misleaded the discussion in wrong direction.

Unfortunately Antonio raised question on Saturday and until today did not offer any answer.


_________________________________________________________________________________________

Hello Lartiste,

nothing to be sorry and when I say : "according to your past comments on WAF, the two layers band is an evidence, not visible at naked eye in spite of tons of pictures you posted on WAF, you considered to explain die cast theory, did it change something about ?

Is the two layers band construction no longer of interest to support die cast or die struck theories ? "

I'm referring to Antonio comments on WAF, not you.

Ric


Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/22/2020 10:24 PM
ok, 1st a welcome to our new member Dierk!. You are also on MFF which I have been a member for many years.. They tolerate my inability to understand German and have usually been very polite to me.. We have a world wide membership here and things can get difficult/slow sometimes but we welcome you..

As far as this discussion/debate,, PLEASE I know it can get frustrating,,but please no name calling or accusations. No need for it here and will not be tolerated..
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/22/2020 10:54 PM
a few comments..

The die pressing process has been basically unchanged over the years. Yes changes in automation,improved materials etc ..

The lost wax process is old. But it isn't the same as the 3rd reich times as it is now. There are been many improvements since the war..

I can also say there was a lot of experimentation during the 3rd reich. That even if a process that was being tried wasn't profitable, labor intensive etc. it would be used sometimes just to prove a point!

I urge everyone to read the links provided in the prior page for a more through understanding..

After reading all this and around, seeing photos etc. I'd say I do not believe the HR was made from a single die, pressed [like most PPrings]. There is a lot going on , some a bit strange but overall interesting. Looking forward to see more here..
Originally Posted by 12472
Hello Antonio,

first - personally I'm sure that the Totenkopfringe were cast. The detailed pictures speak for themselves.

Attached is a picture of my 1941 ring, brought out of the ground by myself in 2008. Unfortunately you can see a slight damage by my folding spade at this exact spot, but guaranteed original???..Best regards,
Dierk


______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hello Dierk and all,

it seems I still remain among few people who believe that SSHr were made by stamping them and not by casting.

Well, I still believe SSHr were made by pressing a blank planchet into a die, the same way Hapur make his SSHr repro.....to be clear.

I recently received Evgeniy's superb SSHr repro made by casting and compared it with my SSHr - 20.4.44 in mint condition I have to confirm my opinion.

So, let's go ahead and see what pop up to support one theory or another, I will offer my open minded approach to help discussion.

Ric
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/23/2020 03:09 PM
, die struck, "how can it be possible they show different position of the leaves on the ring body band? (see distance of the leaves from the top of the band).
Even rings produced in the same date.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

die cast," how can it be possible they show different position of the leaves on the ring body band? (see distance of the leaves from the top of the band)".

*

Ric, members,,after reading the above and studying Evgeniy photos on page 2 the first question I have is:

- How is it possible to have the discrepancy in distance of leafs from top of body?


Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/23/2020 03:30 PM
Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari


So, if we will see under strong magnification areas of design unaltered by hand tooling and showing situation like C, then we can conclude that die struck manufacture is not compatible with that feature??...good point !



Hello!

I would like to write something in addition...

Yes, for our consideration it is important whether the traces on the leaves, the runes etc. have been processed after production and which were created during the production.
And in connection with a rework, with which tool? Only if you know the tracks of a tool, you can assign them.

I firmly believe in it, the Gahr company used gravers for this rework. I work with this tools myself and the gravers have hardly changed in the last centuries.

We have to limit ourselves to the edges, that do not show any traces as they are typical for gravers. And many undercut edges (in Antonio's photos) don't looks like they've been reworked.

Here is a photo of this gravers, as every jeweler and endgraver use it - so that it is clear which tool I mean.

@Gaspare: thank you for your post. So far I've only read this forum. You know how difficult it is - if you don't speak the language...

Best regards,
Dierk

Attached picture Stichel 002.jpg
Attached picture Stichel 001.jpg
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/23/2020 03:53 PM
Originally Posted by Gaspare
Ric, members,,after reading the above and studying Evgeniy photos on page 2 the first question I have is:

- How is it possible to have the discrepancy in distance of leafs from top of body?


I still believe that the rings were a little wider than the 7mm after they were made. Then they were revised - processing by emery, turning on a lathe, polishing, howsoever. Thereby the tape can become off-center.

Best regards,
Dierk
Originally Posted by Gaspare
Ric, members,,after reading the above and studying Evgeniy photos on page 2 the first question I have is:

- How is it possible to have the discrepancy in distance of leafs from top of body?


__________________________________________________________________________________________________


G., Dierk, all,

why don't we consider that Gahr could have many female dies available to be able to answer to strong request of SSHr ?

The mentioned distance don't detract ring appearance, so Gahr could have female dies with different distance.

Ric


Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/24/2020 08:30 AM
Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari


why don't we consider that Gahr could have many female dies available to be able to answer to strong request of SSHr ?

The mentioned distance don't detract ring appearance, so Gahr could have female dies with different distance.


Hello Ric,

the problem of these undercut edges remains, Antonio's photos are very impressive.
Also with my ring I see similar places with undercut edges, but unfortunately my ring is worn heavily. Detail images of a ring in new condition would be helpful.

Of course, around 17,000 rings could not have been made with a single die, due to the high pressure, there is wear on the dies.
Usually a so-called "Ur-Patritze" is engraved first (I don't know the English word). Short explanation: a die (German: "Matritze") is a mirror image of the embossed object. The opposite is the so-called "Patritze" - the exact image of the object to be manufactured.
The "Patritze" is made of hardened steel, it is pressed into soft steel and leaves an imprint. Then the soft steel is hardened. This way, you can always produce new dies that do not always have to be engraved again. Through this step, the dies vary a little.

That would explain the differences - yes. But not the undercut edges...

Best regards,
Dierk
Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
Originally Posted by 12472
Hello Antonio,

first - personally I'm sure that the Totenkopfringe were cast. The detailed pictures speak for themselves.

Attached is a picture of my 1941 ring, brought out of the ground by myself in 2008. Unfortunately you can see a slight damage by my folding spade at this exact spot, but guaranteed original???..Best regards,
Dierk


______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hello Dierk and all,

it seems I still remain among few people who believe that SSHr were made by stamping them and not by casting.

Well, I still believe SSHr were made by pressing a blank planchet into a die, the same way Hapur make his SSHr repro.....to be clear.

I recently received Evgeniy's superb SSHr repro made by casting and compared it with my SSHr - 20.4.44 in mint condition I have to confirm my opinion.

So, let's go ahead and see what pop up to support one theory or another, I will offer my open minded approach to help discussion.

Ric


__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hello,

here's from Hapur's site a very interesting page showing how he makes his repro SSHr and how Third Reich jewellers made almost all private purchase rings :

https://www.totenkopfrings.com/how-it-s-made

Gahr didn't need to invent his own and total different way to satisfy Himmler requests (let's forget collectors mithologies on SSHr) and he used the same way as for PP rings, but probably improved by a multiple dies process just to be able to satisfy strong request of SSHr by Berlin around '40, it's the reason why we can observe several '40 pattern dies/rings with different distance of leafs from band edge and some more minor difference.

So the decision of changing band structure from '30 to '40 did depend on necessity to speed up manufacture process having less time dedicated to hand finishing to highlight leafs and other details....like we see on many '30 rings.

So far this is still my opinion/theory on how Gahr made SSHr, but like I said I'm ready to consider different theories if supported by facts.

Ric

P.S. too simple/obvious to be acceptable ? Well, Gahr was a business owner not a scientist/inventor looking for a new way to make rings......and all he needed to make them was already known and available.


Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/24/2020 09:16 AM
its copy is less thick and therefore it is not entirely correct to compare it with the original, because there seems to be one more minus in the theory of the stamp: rings of the 40s are very thick (thicker than fantasy rings from hapur) and it seems to me to stamp such a workpiece thickness could be problematic, the stamp would wear out (this is my opinion, just an assumption).
But it would also be necessary to bend this plate into a ring after a stamp. But it?s not platinum, it?s metal, and wooden hammers or something like that, which would sometimes lead to sloppy blows that could leave marks on the surface of the rings, should be used in this operation. But we don?t see anything like that. For how I paid attention earlier, a lot of traces of working with pins on all rings and these traces of river processing are always different. As I wrote above, in the mass production rings in the Reich (skull rings and other jewelry, popular among soldiers and officers), there is nothing like this, because they were made with a stamp and no mechanical interventions (processing with a shtizel and the like) were almost not required . Again, as I think, mass jewelry was made a stamp, because these rings were much thinner (although there is an exception here - the ring of the leader of the Hitler Youth).
P.S. besides, as I read someone?s statement, Gar had already mastered the production of castings - finials for flagophos.
But whether he used a stamp for jewelry in his production, I do not know.
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/24/2020 10:11 AM
Hello everybody,

one also has to differentiate, Gahr was a goldsmith, not a fashion jewelry factory.
For goldsmiths, making rings by casting is not unusual. Company Gahr had the monopoly on these rings and was able to manufacture them as they wanted - only "Heinrich" had to like the rings.

Best regards,
Dierk
Originally Posted by 12472
Hello everybody,

one also has to differentiate, Gahr was a goldsmith, not a fashion jewelry factory.
For goldsmiths, making rings by casting is not unusual. Company Gahr had the monopoly on these rings and was able to manufacture them as they wanted - only "Heinrich" had to like the rings.

Best regards,
Dierk


_________________________________________________________________________________________

Hello Dierk,

you're right, Gahr was able to decide the way to manufacture them, but to satisfy a strong request (about 20.000 SSHr made ?) , a way like casting couldn't be acceptable because of too steps, so too time wasting.

On the other way, if he had been requested to make pol tops for standarte like this :

http://www.johnnyg.whsites.net/sp108.html

then die casting was the right answer.

The same we can say for custom rings, wedding rings, ecc.....probably making one (rubber ?) mold just for a single ring was less expensive to make a hand carved die for stamping it.

Ric
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/24/2020 12:29 PM
Hello Ric,

Yes, everything is correct.


But - in the beginning Gahr probably didn't know how many rings there would be in total. Initially it was only a small number as a gift from Himmler planned. A complicated die would not have been worthwhile? I don't know...

When did the point come, that the "old" procedure was no longer practical? Maybe it was already too late to change the work.

Really difficult. I hope Antonio sheds more light on this. The x-rays he spoke of, would be very interesting - I hope...

Best regards,
Dierk
Originally Posted by 12472
Hello Ric,

Yes, everything is correct.


But - in the beginning Gahr probably didn't know how many rings there would be in total. Initially it was only a small number as a gift from Himmler planned. A complicated die would not have been worthwhile? I don't know...

When did the point come, that the "old" procedure was no longer practical? Maybe it was already too late to change the work.

Really difficult. I hope Antonio sheds more light on this. The x-rays he spoke of, would be very interesting - I hope...

Best regards,
Dierk


_________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hello Dierk,

my opinion is that both '30 and '40 pattern were made by stamping in a die, because at the beginning anyway some dozens of SSHr were requested......I suppose.

'30 pattern had a less tridimensional looking of band reliefs, so they needed to highlight them by hand finishing and that was a time consuming step. Then to answer to a drammatical increase of SSHr demand, Gahr started production of the so called '40 pattern that didn't need hand finishing of band because of a more tridimensional looking of band reliefs.

Ric
Originally Posted by 12472
Hello Ric,

But - in the beginning Gahr probably didn't know how many rings there would be in total. Initially it was only a small number as a gift from Himmler planned. A complicated die would not have been worthwhile? I don't know...

Dierk


_______________________________________________________________________________________________________


Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
......because at the beginning anyway some dozens of SSHr were requested......I suppose....

Ric


_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Dierk,

if you're referring to SSHr 24.XII.33 or/and 24.12.33 dated, they appear to be like '30 pattern.

Ric
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/24/2020 05:17 PM
Hello Ric,

good, but one does not know whether the company Gahr had all the necessary machines for this work. We won't get this out, so we won't get any further here.

Let's stick to the obvious differences. Especially with the 40s rings, because they show less traces of rework. There are clear traces where the skull is soldered, I try to show it on a photo. You can see clear score marks, as they are typical for an engraving tool. But in the other parts of the ring (where there are differences) the traces are anything but typical. There is still no reliable explanation here.
That the leaves vary can be explained by different dies, OK, consent.
But for these sloping, jagged surfaces, as shown by Antonio in the picture on the right:

http://phpstack-500133-1583587.cloudwaysapps.com/~germand2/ubbthreads.php/ubb/download/Number/194150/filename/Leaves_Comp12.jpg

I find no explanation that fits the work step "die strucking" or engraving. But I know such surfaces from castings. What do you think about this particular point?

Best regards,
Dierk

Attached picture Vergleich2.jpg
Die or Cast..

This might be a dumb question?

But could they have produced rings both ways?
Originally Posted by 12472
Hello Ric,

good, but one does not know whether the company Gahr had all the necessary machines for this work. We won't get this out, so we won't get any further here.

Let's stick to the obvious differences. Especially with the 40s rings, because they show less traces of rework. There are clear traces where the skull is soldered, I try to show it on a photo. You can see clear score marks, as they are typical for an engraving tool. But in the other parts of the ring (where there are differences) the traces are anything but typical. There is still no reliable explanation here.
That the leaves vary can be explained by different dies, OK, consent.
But for these sloping, jagged surfaces, as shown by Antonio in the picture on the right:

http://phpstack-500133-1583587.cloudwaysapps.com/~germand2/ubbthreads.php/ubb/download/Number/194150/filename/Leaves_Comp12.jpg

I find no explanation that fits the work step "die strucking" or engraving. But I know such surfaces from castings. What do you think about this particular point?

Best regards,
Dierk


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Dierk,

Arthur Meyer & Heinrich W. Schild titled their well known book : "Otto und Karolina Gahr - Die Silberschmiede der NSDAP und der SS" , then can we really doubt that Gahr Company hadn't all the necessary to satisfy Himmler requests ? I sincerely don't

You will frequently find traces of hand finishing where cross bones border with leafs, probably to take out remans of soldering and to make the skull look like one piece with the band.

Anyway, if you want to make your own opinion wether SSHr were made by stamping or by casting, you need a mint one to study not a ground dug ring neither a worn one.

Looking at ground dug rings or worn ones, you probably see details deformations on band that can drive to a wrong conclusion, while if you look at SSHr's in mint condition, crisp details may help you to better understand.

I will add that also a strong magnification under microscope can drive to wrong conclusion, because you will see "obvious" casting details where they are not (as already explained many times and not only by me to Antonio).


Ric



Originally Posted by johnnyrocket
Die or Cast..

This might be a dumb question?

But could they have produced rings both ways?


________________________________________________________________________________________________


J.,

rings made by casting show differences if compared with rings made by stamping...if collector eyes are trained enough.

Because in most cases originality determining is question about manufacturing method, if you will be able to identify a ring made by casting you will avoid to waste your money purchasing a fake ring

Gahr Company produced SS Honor ring by one way only, this debate is attemping to determine which one : casting or stamping ?

Ric

Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/24/2020 10:03 PM
Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari

Anyway, if you want to make your own opinion wether SSHr were made by stamping or by casting, you need a mint one to study not a ground dug ring neither a worn one.

Looking at ground dug rings or worn ones, you probably see details deformations on band that can drive to a wrong conclusion, while if you look at SSHr's in mint condition, crisp details may help you to better understand.


Hello Ric,

Of course. I also refer more to all the photos Antonio showed in the WAF. I found the photos very convincing and it is worth discussing them.
My ring is unsuitable here, it has strong signs of wear...

Then I'm really looking forward to the photos of an unworn one.

Best regards,
Dierk
[quote=12472]Hello Ric,

Of course. I also refer more to all the photos Antonio showed in the WAF. I found the photos very convincing and it is worth discussing them.
My ring is unsuitable here, it has strong signs of wear...

Then I'm really looking forward to the photos of an unworn one.

Best regards,
Dierk
[/quote]

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Dierk,

I was also referring to Antonio photos posted on WAF, when I said :

"I will add that also a strong magnification under microscope can drive to wrong conclusion, because you will see "obvious" casting details where they are not (as already explained many times and not only by me to Antonio)."

Actually you don't need a magnification stronger than 20x to distinguish a ring made by casting from one made by stamping : by such magnification a rings collector is able to distinguish a good ring from a repro one (made by casting)....if experienced enough.

Ric

Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/25/2020 06:35 AM
I've been in contact with Hapur. He's been very busy but said he will eventually look in..

Dierk. Thanks for the engraving info/photos. Yes a tool that hasn't changed in many years!!

OK, so we know only a few things for sure!
There were 2 patterns.
Observing wear characteristics, tone etc. we can tell the material was not exactly the same alloy in the 2 patterns.
The skull is a separate piece affixed on later. - Really,,,thats all we know for sure!

The more photos I'm seeing here and around the more I believe there was not one die nor was it pressed. Hapurs rings come out perfect seem like they need little hand finishing.. Evgeniys also don't look like they need to much finishing. But the lost wax cast of back then is not what we have now....

Magnification is good.. Extreme mag can be tricky. Sometimes needing much experience to interpret it.

Die casting isn't really ideal for silver. Sure it was done. I'm sure Gahr could have simply had a die cutter cut a master die and then make working dies to make the rings. But I don't think that was the case. Himmler wanted something special. And I do know of other period jewelers that experimented with different unorthodox manufacture procedures. I'm betting the HR is something unorthodox. Hopefully we will come to some conclusions eventually!
G.,

an interesting opinion from a very reliable source.

Since we have now all positions on the table, let's try to decide, by a serious investigation, which one is closer to the true.....

Ric
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/25/2020 11:15 AM
Hello,

thanks to everyone involved, especially for the (largely) friendly discussion process.

Let's wait for more information. Detailed photos of an unworn ring, x-rays or other things that help us.

I'm really curious!

Best regards,
Dierk
Posted By: JR Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/25/2020 06:46 PM
With the totenkopf ring, there are literally a dozen or more inherent flaws which are very obvious when just observing the 5 rune panels alone. I'm speaking specifically to the 40's style rings, and referencing a mint example which has little or no wear to erode the flaws. Here are just a few, but certainly not all which will be present on every 40's ring band when observed closely that I'm aware of.
Let's just look at one example, that of the swastika panel. This runes is loaded with so many flaws it's unbelievable. If you have the opportunity to compare 2 different mint 40's rings side by side, these flaws become undeniable. As they are part of the master mold from which rings were made.

Would you truly see this many flaws from a ring that was die pressed or struck to produce such a design?

Attached picture !5 (Custom).jpg
Posted By: JR Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/25/2020 06:56 PM
This portion circled in white can be explained by the fact that the liquid silver in the cast did not flow evenly into it, and left this void in the border of this panel.

Attached picture !5 (Custom) (Custom).jpg
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/25/2020 07:36 PM
I can add more strange point in ur rings

Attached picture ??????.JPG
Posted By: JR Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/25/2020 07:48 PM
As mentioned, these rings are so loaded with flaws, that casting is the only reasonable technique that can explain their manufacturing process. In my opinion.
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/25/2020 08:16 PM
Good to see you here again JR....

OK, I know you like to start with this particular rune panel... So, can you or another tell me.. Do ALL the 2nd pattern HRs in this great condition display these same exact faults?
Posted By: JR Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/25/2020 08:33 PM
Gaspare,
Though I've not compared every ring in existence, my study of this particular panel reveals these flaws time and again. Here are 2 others in comparison to judge for yourself. Though minute, you can still make out several of the flaws that I speak of, which consist of left over material. Those specks and deformities are in the actual master cast.

Attached picture FR2a (Custom).jpg
Posted By: JR Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/25/2020 08:52 PM
On a side note, those who live in Italy where beautiful jewelry making goes back centuries, take your TK ring into an old time establishment. Ask the jeweler who has been in the business for years and passed down through his family, what was the method that was used to manufacture your SSTK. And report back here your findings.
I'm no jeweler, but I have owned several SSTK's over the years. And have identified telltale "fingerprint" flaws inherent to the 40's style of rings. Because of what was left in the cast and carried over to additional rings made from the same mold.
Originally Posted by JR
As mentioned, these rings are so loaded with flaws, that casting is the only reasonable technique that can explain their manufacturing process. In my opinion.


______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________-

Hello JR,

I have to disagree, because you can have flaws in a female die for stamping like in a mold for casting, flaws alone do not lead to a way of manufacture or another.

While I can notice that constant presence of flaws in many rings could suggest they were made by stamping, because to take off flaws from a die for casting is for sure less expensive than from a die for stamping.

Ric
Originally Posted by JR
On a side note, those who live in Italy where beautiful jewelry making goes back centuries, take your TK ring into an old time establishment. Ask the jeweler who has been in the business for years and passed down through his family, what was the method that was used to manufacture your SSTK. And report back here your findings.
I'm no jeweler, but I have owned several SSTK's over the years. And have identified telltale "fingerprint" flaws inherent to the 40's style of rings. Because of what was left in the cast and carried over to additional rings made from the same mold.


_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Unfortunately all jewelers who worked in '30 are passed away and young jewelers don't believe that at the time almost all rings were stamped under a press....already verifed by myself.

Ric
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/25/2020 10:25 PM
Hello JR,

thanks for the photos!

Maybe a detail photo (sideview) from the flank could help? It would be interesting if the surface is jagged and/or falls inclined inwards.

Best regards,
Dierk
Posted By: JR Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/26/2020 02:42 AM

"I have to disagree, because you can have flaws in a female die for stamping like in a mold for casting"

Ric,
Can you show us an example of a 3rd Reich item which is stamped or die struck, that exhibits the multitude of flaws that an SSTK shows? Any badges, awards, metal cap insignia, links on an SS chain dagger, anything at all that you can think of, manufactured by pressure, that is loaded with flaws?
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/26/2020 03:10 AM
,, you've not compared every ring in existence!, dam man,,disappointed in you grin wink

You've seen a lot of HRs.. We got to keep it together.. Lets stick with the 2nd pattern for now.... Would be great to compare a bunch of 2nd pat HRs all the same year. But a year + or - should be enough to see.

For me now I see they can not be from a single press of a die.. JRs photo is even more telling and we're just looking at one panel! See yellow and blue..

Something else going on with them..

Attached picture SWAS.jpg
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/26/2020 09:09 AM
BTW ur ring look like debatable ring of Frank
this is + to original of Frank ring IMO

Attached picture 60908534_333888697295556_4751891647543152489_n.jpg
Originally Posted by JR

"I have to disagree, because you can have flaws in a female die for stamping like in a mold for casting"

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ric,
Can you show us an example of a 3rd Reich item which is stamped or die struck, that exhibits the multitude of flaws that an SSTK shows? Any badges, awards, metal cap insignia, links on an SS chain dagger, anything at all that you can think of, manufactured by pressure, that is loaded with flaws?


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hello JR,

any die struck item (private purchase rings, SS cap skulls, SS cap eagles, ecc.) may show flaws, but it's not the amount of them (few or a dozen) to help us to determine the way they were made.

Presence of flaws on a die struck item may depends on many reasons : a worn die, damnaged die, even some dirt in the die may cause flaws on a die struck item.

I also collect SS cap skulls and eagles even if it's not my field and we both know that WAF archive is plenty of discussions showing 100 % original items like mentioned ones showing flaws.

Ric

P.S. in the case our friend Chris (SScollector on WAF) could post here some examples ?
Judging rings by pics alone may drive to wrong conclusions/opinions and rings collectors know it very well.

For example : if I have to judge Frank ring by JR's photo, then I tend to agree with implied question raised by G's yellow circle, but if I have to judge the same ring by Evgeniy's photo (taken by the same position), I do believe an uncorrect burnishing, that partially cover swastika arm, may explain the supposed cast issue.

Of course I'm arguing by what my screen shows and sometimes screens do not show one thing the same way.

Ric

Attached picture SSHr-FrankRing.jpg
Attached picture SSHr-FrankRing1.jpg
Originally Posted by Evgeniy
BTW ur ring look like debatable ring of Frank
this is + to original of Frank ring IMO


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I'd also suggest to use another mint ring like benchmark.

With all due respect for parts involved, Frank ring was papered bad by Don Boyle :

http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=353133&highlight=frank+ring&page=56

Don's opinion apart, Frank ring raised a lot of questions many years ago.

Ric
Posted By: JR Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/26/2020 02:59 PM
Ric,
I base my evaluation of SSTK being cast on the fact that they come no where close in perfection, compared to an item that is die struck or manufactured using pressure and weight. We can actual see this visually with the way that liquid silver fills the void of the mould in different way, on different rings. Antonio furthers his assessment backed up by scientific evidence pointing to the conclusion that these rings are in fact cast. If I may ask, what evidence can you point to that you base your " die pressed" theory on, in regards to the manufacturing process of these rings? Is it just a guess, or do you have some actual evidence to back that up with ?

P.S If you're still riding that train with the implementer of ring COA's, you may want to think about stepping off. That train derailed a long time ago.
Posted By: JR Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/26/2020 03:19 PM
Gaspare,
You are absolutely correct in noticing that though the leaves and the borders of the rune panels show that the liquid flowed into a mould, there is one thing that doesn't change. And that is the very small flaws that I've pointed out with swastika panel, on 3 separate rings. If pressure or striking were the manufacturing process, the leaves in the band would be more uniform and exact as some of the colleagues have shown on the rings that they have manufactured.
Posted By: JR Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/26/2020 04:34 PM
With that I yield back to my colleagues who have a much more profound and actual knowledge of the scientific study of these rings, than myself.

JR
Originally Posted by JR
Ric,
I base my evaluation of SSTK being cast on the fact that they come no where close in perfection, compared to an item that is die struck or manufactured using pressure and weight. We can actual see this visually with the way that liquid silver fills the void of the mould in different way, on different rings. Antonio furthers his assessment backed up by scientific evidence pointing to the conclusion that these rings are in fact cast. If I may ask, what evidence can you point to that you base your " die pressed" theory on, in regards to the manufacturing process of these rings? Is it just a guess, or do you have some actual evidence to back that up with ?

P.S If you're still riding that train with the implementer of ring COA's, you may want to think about stepping off. That train derailed a long time ago.


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hello JR,

like thread title suggest, there is no certainty about how Gahr made his SSHr, differently we shouldn't debate the matter.

To begin with, we need to compare a ring (made by casting) with a ring (made by die strucking) to understand which are the differences, not a ring with an insignia because jewelry is a field not comparable with others.

Antonio offered his theory mainly based on observation under microscope that show obvious (in his opinion) casting flaws , I did reply that's a wrong way to investigate because strong magnification may deceive observer, showing "flaws by casting" that actually they are not.

Antonio furtherly researched about ring content (metals involved and their percentage) , but such info is worthless in order to confirm or not casting theory.....just it tell us what kind of silver alloy Gahr used.

Now my position :

if almost all private purchase rings were made by stamping under a ton press a thin foil (neusilber/alpacca, brass, silver, zink foil....it doesn't matter), why Gahr needed to invent a unorthodox, new, revolutionary system to make them ?

Gahr probably invented a way to stamp several rings at one time, so to allow many dies working contemporarily, increasing production as requested by Berlin.

That would explain why we notice on '40 ring bands differences (leafs distance from band edge, ecc.) : because those ring bands come from different dies.

May we consider that Gahr needed a new way of production to obtain a superior quality ? I do not think so, because comparing the best SSHr repro made nowadays by casting (Evgeniy's for example) with original ones, quality of details on original ones is still winning. (I made a comparison under 20x magnification, because I sincerely doubt jewellers at the time used a microscope in their job).

In conclusion, even if to nowadays casting can use ultra performing tools, unavailable at Gahr time, Gahr's rings still show a superior quality : why ?

My explanation is : because they were made by stamping !

Ric








Originally Posted by JR
Ric,....
.
P.S If you're still riding that train with the implementer of ring COA's, you may want to think about stepping off. That train derailed a long time ago.


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

JR.,

I'm not able to start a "Frank ring originality debate" because I hadn't it in hands to make my own opinion, furtherly that's not the subject of thread.

I only suggest to discuss any other mint ring, but Frank one.

Thank you

Ric
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/26/2020 06:36 PM
I would like to express my thanks for all new inputs, in particular to JR., since I do not have mint 40's ring in my hands.
Posted By: JR Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/26/2020 06:55 PM
As a note for those interested, here is kind of an explanation of the terms related to manufacturing processes discussed in this topic:


Die casting is when molten metal is injected into closed dies, which are opened after the metal has cooled.


Die forging is metal heated to a plastic, malleable state and pressed into the die. When cooled, it is removed from the die.


Die striking is when a FLAT sheet of stock metal is struck by a heavy die press, forcing the sheet metal into the die. It may use cut to shape planchetts or it may just strike pieces on a sheet which are cut later. Coins and hollowback badges and pins (tinnies) are commonly die struck.


Investment casting (AKA lost wax casting) has been around for many hundreds, if not thousands of years. Today, it is the most common form of cheap jewelry making. Do a search for investment casting patterns and you will find many thousands of wax models that can be used in the investment material. That method is simple: you take the wax model and attach a sprue (another long piece of wax from which to hang it in the investment material). You mix the investment material into a crucible (disposable), you then stick the wax model into the investment material, leaving the end of the sprue exposed. The entire crucible should then be placed in a vacum chamber to remove any air bubbles from the investment material or stuck to the wax model. When the investment material is dry, you place the crucible into a furnace, upside-down, and melt out (burn away) all the was, which runs out through the hole left by the sprue. Once the wax is gone, you proceed to pour your silver into the sprue hole to fill the mold. The silver has replaced the 'LOST WAX' and you have a perfect copy, although slightly smaller from the shrinkage of of silver as it cools. You must make your wax model slightly larger (5 to 9%, depending on the silver alloy) to get a casting of the correct measurements. It is a simple process and has been used for years. I have seen demonstrations, using antique casting equipment, where a piece of wet leather was pressed over the sprue hole, after the silver was poured. The steam created, on the hot investment material, drove the silver down into the casting cavity to better fill the cavity. Once the mold has cooled, the investment material is broken away (it is brittle after the heating) and "voila' out comes the object of the casting. A little pickling, polishing and burnishing, and a thing of beauty is finished.
Posted By: JR Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/26/2020 07:10 PM

Here is another minty 40's style of ring. Anything look familiar with the other examples I've mentioned in regards to the minute die flaws associated with this second style of band?

Attached picture FR8.jpg
Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari


Hello JR,

any die struck item (private purchase rings, SS cap skulls, SS cap eagles, ecc.) may show flaws, but it's not the amount of them (few or a dozen) to help us to determine the way they were made.

Presence of flaws on a die struck item may depends on many reasons : a worn die, damnaged die, even some dirt in the die may cause flaws on a die struck item.

I also collect SS cap skulls and eagles even if it's not my field and we both know that WAF archive is plenty of discussions showing 100 % original items like mentioned ones showing flaws.

Ric

P.S. in the case our friend Chris (SScollector on WAF) could post here some examples


__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hello,

since Chris (SScollector on WAF) is not allowed to post here, I post his comment (received by PM on WAF) on behalf of him :

"As for my thoughts on the ring discussion, (and you may share this part of my message on GDC, if you wish);

Whatever flaws that are found on originals TK rings, are there because those flaws were left on the dies when they were finished being created. Not to suggest either a casting or striking process at this time, I do believe that it is safe to say that those flaws were left in the dies either way, and the fact that their creator(s) left such flaws in the finished dies would suggest human error, and perhaps the fact that the Gahr jewelers either could not, or did not cut the TK ring dies with the same level of perfection that is mostly seen on other items, such as cap badges, (which also show minor flaws when closely examined). So, IMO, the flaws seen on TK rings are simply a part of the artwork done by the die engravers, and also could be partially due to the methods used to create the actual dies.

We know that Gahr was a rather small jewelry company in comparison with a company like Overhoff & Cie., for example. Also, they speciallized in silver. Who knows exactly what they came up with to produce so many TK rings for the Third Reich? I do not believe that the die flaws have anything to do with determining whether they were struck or cast. The flaws are just there, within the dies. These are my thoughts at this time. I could spend a day pointing out die flaws found on various cap insignias, but I do not think that this would be much useful, as each item is it's own work of art.

Hope this helps in some way.

Thanks!

Chris"
Posted By: JR Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/26/2020 09:43 PM
"My explanation is : because they were made by stamping ! "

Ric

So for clarification of the above statement, which of the methods shown below describes your hypothesis of ring manufacturing?

A. Die Cast
B. Die Forge
C. Die Striking
D. The Ferrari Method :))
Posted By: JR Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/26/2020 09:57 PM

"Not to suggest either a casting or striking process at this time, I do believe that it is safe to say that those flaws were left in the dies either way"

Honestly this statement doesn't help your cause, Ric. Chris is a friend of mine who I've known personally going back a slew of years, when he was in his teens. Where we were all led to believe that SSTK's were manufactured in a certain way that utilized pressing or striking, new evidence has shown differently. And even Chris who once subscribed to these old theories put forward, has now opened the door to suggest that casting may well indeed be the method of manufacturing of these rings.
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/26/2020 11:16 PM
Hello!

Animated by Gaspares first post in this threat (he showed pictures of the old goldsmith newspapers there) I looked for literature from that time. I found the book "Diebeners Handbuch des Goldschmieds", which was printed in many editions from 1910 to at least 1998. It is "the" textbook of the goldsmiths.

I bought the 1929 edition, because it is closest to the production of the skull rings. On 631 pages all works, performed by goldsmiths, will be described. Casting, forging, soldering, making rings, chains, bracelets, engraving, damascening and much, much more.
A "new" way of casting, centrifugal casting, has also been described.

But interestingly, there is no mention of die strucking at all. With no word.
I find that remarkable. Apparently this work was not common at goldsmiths.

The question arises to me: worked the company like a goldsmith?, or like a big company that made beltbuckles, badges or things like that?

Best regards,
Dierk

P.S.: Here are a few impressions of the book...

Attached picture 001.jpg
Attached picture 004.jpg
Attached picture 005.jpg
Attached picture 006.jpg
Attached picture 007.jpg
Originally Posted by JR
As a note for those interested, here is kind of an explanation of the terms related to manufacturing processes discussed in this topic:


Die casting is when molten metal is injected into closed dies, which are opened after the metal has cooled.


Die forging is metal heated to a plastic, malleable state and pressed into the die. When cooled, it is removed from the die.


Die striking is when a FLAT sheet of stock metal is struck by a heavy die press, forcing the sheet metal into the die. It may use cut to shape planchetts or it may just strike pieces on a sheet which are cut later. Coins and hollowback badges and pins (tinnies) are commonly die struck.


Investment casting (AKA lost wax casting) has been around for many hundreds, if not thousands of years. Today, it is the most common form of cheap jewelry making. Do a search for investment casting patterns and you will find many thousands of wax models that can be used in the investment material. That method is simple: you take the wax model and attach a sprue (another long piece of wax from which to hang it in the investment material). You mix the investment material into a crucible (disposable), you then stick the wax model into the investment material, leaving the end of the sprue exposed. The entire crucible should then be placed in a vacum chamber to remove any air bubbles from the investment material or stuck to the wax model. When the investment material is dry, you place the crucible into a furnace, upside-down, and melt out (burn away) all the was, which runs out through the hole left by the sprue. Once the wax is gone, you proceed to pour your silver into the sprue hole to fill the mold. The silver has replaced the 'LOST WAX' and you have a perfect copy, although slightly smaller from the shrinkage of of silver as it cools. You must make your wax model slightly larger (5 to 9%, depending on the silver alloy) to get a casting of the correct measurements. It is a simple process and has been used for years. I have seen demonstrations, using antique casting equipment, where a piece of wet leather was pressed over the sprue hole, after the silver was poured. The steam created, on the hot investment material, drove the silver down into the casting cavity to better fill the cavity. Once the mold has cooled, the investment material is broken away (it is brittle after the heating) and "voila' out comes the object of the casting. A little pickling, polishing and burnishing, and a thing of beauty is finished.


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Hello JR.

thank you for posting above manufacturing processes that help to understand commentors opinions.

I personally believe that die casting and investment casting were not the way used by Gahr to produce SS Honor rings.

Die forging has a chance while die striking is the way used by Gahr IMO

Ric

Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/27/2020 07:20 PM
JR, glad your participating.. For those not here long ,,years ago JR and I were co moderators here at the 'Don Boyle Honor Ring forum. I want to thank you as you were here longer at the time and knew the guys. It was a troublesome period and I always appreciated the help, Thanks. ..


Best for the discussion here would be to use for comparative purposes 2 or 3 HRs of the same date [if possible]. But at least lets stick to the 2nd pattern for now..

As far as die cast.. Please read link. True silver is a non ferrous metal [not magnetic] die casting really isn't good for silver. But,, I have been told by some oldtimers that in the 20s-40s they experimented with everything they could..
Nowdays the die mold has a vacuum pulled 1st then the molten metal was injected in [again that link!],, there is also a cold method.. * We don't know for sure exactly what they were doing during the 3rd reich. IF they were playing around with a die cast for the HR it would come out perfect every time. Same flaws on one would be on all the others. Every ring would look the same ,,those of us in the US can remember or 'Hot Wheels' cars,,every one the same. Nice detail etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_casting


* One other thing. Back then and now,,die cast pieces are porous! I've seen plenty of broken intake manifolds from the 40s/50s and inside you could see the porosity..,
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/27/2020 07:30 PM
As for die pressing/struck: During the 3rd reich period and before,,commercial firms all had at least one die cutter [and apprentice] on staff. They all had a die room where the masters were kept sometimes under lock and key. Working dies were exact, exact duplicates of the master die.. when a worker got worn, or broke,,another was made from the Master.

IF there was a flaw it could not be repaired as the Master was super hardened,,and the worker would soon fail at the spot that was tried to be corrected. So every HR would be exactly the same as it came out of the die. Very little if any correction would be needed. Now IF you wanted to do some embellishing yes that was possible. But the photo above of the Swas panel,,one ring has a cut in it and another doesn't and the cut does not look hand done..
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/27/2020 07:41 PM
and considering lost wax cast back then,,,, Please,,check the link:

https://en.wikipedia.or/wiki/Lost-wax_casting

Those 12 steps,,are for a mass produced and a one off ring. They could have used a 'Tree' bit still the steps had to be done!... and check what still had to be done after this tree was made!!

My 2nd photo of mold/wax ring... First you had to have a model. Sometimes plaster, sometimes metal.. You make the mold first from vulcanization. Then cut it in half.. The wax gets poured in and you end up with this photo . But it just the beginning!!! Can you imagine a few 1000 HRs made like this!

Remember,,no mater how special the HR was,,it was a mass produced piece.. We are missing something guys! Maybe the HR is multi piece, multi method [?]

Attached picture spures-1 (1).gif
Attached picture 014 - Copy.JPG
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/27/2020 08:57 PM
This is really annoying, pretty do not understand, why the pictures have to be resized to too small files and that all in 2020 ... .

I have pic of mint 44 swastika panel, but I have to destroy the pic to resize it or continue at WAF ... .
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/27/2020 09:00 PM
GIES

21.6. 44

Attached picture rsz_giespanel.jpg
Posted By: JR Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/27/2020 09:44 PM
The photo is very telling, and thank you! It shows that though the oak leaf band is affected by how the liquid silver flows in the mould, the panel and runes are un-altered. Thus revealing the exactly flaws associated with this very symbol voiced several times.
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/28/2020 04:35 AM
Lartiste ,,there are ways to resize and not lose detail and size.. It is posted in the help forum. Seems you have done it as your photo is fine. Thank you.


1,,seeing that photo is very telling.. So is that considered a 'Good' HR? Agreement by most anyway? For me not knowing,,I would say absolutely that it is not a die pressed piece...
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/28/2020 08:10 AM
Originally Posted by Gaspare
So is that considered a 'Good' HR? Agreement by most anyway?


You will find the same "mistakes" on the swastika as in the other rings shown - blue dots show two of them . And it is certainly 7mm wide if Lartiste shows it here...




Attached picture TKR HK.jpg
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/28/2020 10:58 AM
Originally Posted by Gaspare
Lartiste ,,there are ways to resize and not lose detail and size.. It is posted in the help forum. Seems you have done it as your photo is fine. Thank you.


1,,seeing that photo is very telling.. So is that considered a 'Good' HR? Agreement by most anyway? For me not knowing,,I would say absolutely that it is not a die pressed piece...


This is ring from former Martin Toman's collection. More photos of the ring here: GIES RING
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/29/2020 04:34 AM
I see his HRs have Dons paper.. Is Martin of the opinion that they are die pressed?

If you know him well maybe forward his this discussion. He of course is more than welcome to join in here as it would be great to read his opinions..
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/29/2020 09:12 PM
Originally Posted by Gaspare
I see his HRs have Dons paper.. Is Martin of the opinion that they are die pressed?

If you know him well maybe forward his this discussion. He of course is more than welcome to join in here as it would be great to read his opinions..



Martin described both methods in his book and says that he is open to arguments. But his conclusions are that most probably the method is lost wax casting (trees). He was demonstrating the fact e.g. on ADAMIK ring saying, that in his opinion the ring in question lacks the depth of detail from the beginning and jeweler had to heat up the ring hand finished the detail. He is showing few more rings to demonstrate heavy hand tooling.

Also he is showing further deformations and is saying that it is the result of wax deformation before it was attached to the tree. He does not think, that it is possible the same with the die, but is careful to dismiss the theory straight away. Saying, that it is low probable.

Attached picture rsz__vyrp11_72.jpg
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/30/2020 11:03 AM
yes, these marks of cutting, with characteristic notches are present in my opinion on all the rings, I thought these tracks were already seen by everyone and paid attention to them
it is these traces that speak in favor of manual completion of all rings !
Posted By: wotan Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/30/2020 08:00 PM
Sorry gents, I can t hold back any more. Imho there is so much ignorance, misinterpretation and overlooking of facts in these TKR-manufacture threads that it is simply breathtaking.

Eg. the "signs" in post #345525 do show -by experts and skilled workers- well known "Tremblieren" (this is a technical term from engravers) which either can be done by purpose or develops by chance and has not the least to do with a casting process.

One of the cadinal errors for sure is to know much too few about the certain time and it s sense and the philosophy of producers but try to tear out conclusions to find facts about the production process by interpreting certain traces - commonly on an at least slightly up to heavy worn rings which leads to glaring misinterpretations.
I know, original and truely unworn rings are not to get on each street corner. But only such ones can possibly give the CHANCE to study what exactly has happened with a piece during production and how it has been delivered.
I wonder how much of you all ever has seen the noninterchangeable ring wrapping paper unique by the Gahr firm. Or have had in hands the paperbag in wich a ring has been delivered by the Gahr firm and which datas are mentioned on such a bag.

I do really like those collectors/experts who yesterday did stand for a kind of die stamping, today represent the opinion of a casting proces and tomorrow think of any unrealistic centrifuge, galvanic or multiple part manufactring process. Yes, we all do learn every day and knowledge can expand and nothing is written in stone! But I for myself do ask how hard such experts truely did/do examine and understand the TKRings therefore to be able to change their opinions in such a drastic way. And I wonder what will come next.
I would not write this all if imho there would not be a certain danger in and behind these disorientations: To scatter uncertainty so that good done fakes which appear on the stage could be looked as originals.

Just my 2 ct.

Regards,
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/30/2020 08:44 PM
Antonio even went out of his way in the WAF.
Only the politeness was missing more often.
I found his results very conclusive.

Reasonable doubts outweigh old dogmas.

But everyone can believe what he wants.

It doesn't matter how something was made. Counterfeits do not get any better and they are not difficult to identify if you know the originals.

Suum Cuique ...
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/30/2020 10:20 PM
Wotan, I did not get the meaning of your comment. You can see more what I showed here: THE RINGS WERE WAX CASTED theory. It is the theory of Martin Toman, fellow collector who self published extensive book with many photos of 26 or how many rings.
Posted By: wotan Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/31/2020 11:44 AM
Hello 12472 and lartiste, thank you for your comments. Unfortunately I am not able to lead lenghty debates with a lot of special technical expressons as English is not my first language!

@ 12472: It is my point too that everyone can believe what he wants and as said, we learn each day and everyone of us can make discoveries or mistakes. But ignoring facts perhaps is not so wise...
Contrary imho it is VERY important how such an item is made. If we do accept eg. a casting theory we also have to accept ALL casting traces on a ring - and these are, to my best knowledge up to now, more the traces of fakes. How could we say/detect "this trace is a manufacture casting trace" or "this trace is a fake casting trace"??? How could we differ a monday morning GAHR production from a possible superfake?

@ lartiste: Owning 26 rings or more is no real qualification if you can drew the wrong concusions out of one ring and out of 26 rings if you see what you want to see.

As said just my 2ct and like 12472 states, everyone can believe what he wants.

Regards,
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/31/2020 12:27 PM
Originally Posted by wotan
Unfortunately I am not able to lead lenghty debates with a lot of special technical expressons as English is not my first language!


Is also very difficult for me. Are you the "Wotan" from the Militarafundforum?

Originally Posted by wotan
But ignoring facts perhaps is not so wise...


I agree!
Until about 2015, I assumed that these rings had been pressed because I had blindly relied on the general opinion.
It was only through Antonio's pictures and explanations that I came to the conclusion that these rings show clear traces of casting and that there are not even two rings of the same type.

Originally Posted by wotan
Contrary imho it is VERY important how such an item is made. If we do accept eg. a casting theory we also have to accept ALL casting traces on a ring


No way!
It is not the point that they were cast. it is the point of how they were cast. Copying this 1: 1 is anything but easy.

Originally Posted by wotan
How could we differ a monday morning GAHR production from a possible superfake?


It may be that there are rings that are not as successful as comparison pieces. Maybe this applies to the "Achaz" ring?
The source is very important to me personally.
I do not trust her and there are reasonable doubts - I do not buy there!
I don't trust her, but there is no doubt about the originality - I might buy.
If I trust the source, for example because I excavated the ring myself, I can tolerate any doubts.

Regards,
Dierk

Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/31/2020 01:32 PM
Some good comments Wotan... I for one will say outright,, That at one time I believed the HR was die stamped. While admiring them I did not collect them nor did much research if any in to them.. 30 years ago we had Don.. Like Wittman&Johnson for daggers, Stump for awards,Hritz for SS cloth and etc etc.

What changed my opinion recently was a few things. 1. being some of the articles I saw in the period trade guild booklets. 2, then really taking a look at one on a cheapie [but effective] pc microscope. 3, exchanging some emails with Antonio.. I will admit,, I don;t know exactly how the HR was made. But I'll tell you for sure they weren't made from one die chocked up in a press!

So now its 2020. We are global,,scientific research is just a click away.. *Wotan if I think I;m understanding you correctly is: What is our standard! Are we researching in to a HR to determine how its made while it being a SuperFake?! Provenance,provenance provenance!

I would really like to thank you all for participating. We really are truly global, different languages,dialects,cultures,,,,and we're doing good brothers!

I do look forward to new postings here. Everything has been very interesting!!.,G.
Posted By: wotan Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/31/2020 03:19 PM
Originally Posted by 12472
Are you the "Wotan" from the Militarafundforum?

Hello 12472, simply "no". Not all what is nicknamed "wotan" IS truely wotan wink but I think to remember having been the first one grin.

Regards,
Posted By: wotan Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/31/2020 03:40 PM
Generally, concerning the ring manufature debate: I have the feeling (corresponding with my personal observations and the announcement of collectors) that the casting ideas (and all following ideas) were mainly upcoming because of unlucky (I don t assume that it is done by purpose) misinterpretation of traces on TKRs. Unfortunately -so this could happen- on worn and heavy worn rings.
Eg. I have had the luck to own and examine a ring with a die press failur (yes, I am a follower of the die press/stamp manufacturing proces, not without reason) - I have not seen another one up to now. Concerning the failur you could clearly see with a magnifying glass (no microscope needed) that such failur could only occur due to a die press process and there was proof(!) that it did occur in the GAHR firm.
Regards,
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/31/2020 03:54 PM
Originally Posted by wotan

Eg. I have had the luck to own and examine a ring with a die press failur (yes, I am a follower of the die press/stamp manufacturing proces, not without reason) - I have not seen another one up to now. Concerning the failur you could clearly see with a magnifying glass (no microscope needed) that such failur could only occur due to a die press process and there was proof(!) that it did occur in the GAHR firm.
Regards,



are there still photos of it?

Would certainly be more convincing - then we could continue to discuss this object.

Regards,
Dierk
Hello everyone!

First, I would like to say thank you to those who invited me to this discussion.
If I may offer my opinions on this subject, (I am a supporter of die striking, although I personally believe that they were "pressed" in such a way that would be more like a forging, or perhaps an in-between, stamping/forging type method). I do not believe that the originals were made from liquid metal casting. The major problem with this whole debate, imo, is the lack of proper evidence. All of the best fakes out there are absolutely cast and these high end fakes are everywhere. So, if we are examining fakes to start with, thinking that they are original, then we will of course, come to believe that they are all cast because 99% of all TK rings out there are cast, and are of course, fake. Most of you would be surprised as to how many fake rings there are that were shown as original in books, posted on websites for sale, and come with COAs, etc.

Anyway, over the next few days, I would like to try to take some better photos of my vet aquired original near mint TK ring and post some comparison photos here along with some of these high end fakes that I have mentioned. Hopefully, this might help in this debate in some way. Again, thanks for the invite, and I hope that we can all have a friendly and productive debate here. I am not a fan of how rude people are in other forums over this topic, but this forum seems to be calm and friendly. I am open minded and I do read and respect everyone's opinion, whichever side you are supporting.

Thanks again!

Chris
Posted By: Dave Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 01/31/2020 11:11 PM
Well, hello again, Chris,

Welcome back. It's been a while.

Regards
Dave
Thanks, Dave!

Chris
Hello Chris,

glad to read you here on GDC, I'm sure that friendly environment guaranted by our mod Gaspare, will help us to improve our knowledge on such Amazing subject.

Ric
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/01/2020 03:35 PM
Originally Posted by wotan
Hello 12472 and lartiste, thank you for your comments. Unfortunately I am not able to lead lenghty debates with a lot of special technical expressons as English is not my first language!

@ 12472: It is my point too that everyone can believe what he wants and as said, we learn each day and everyone of us can make discoveries or mistakes. But ignoring facts perhaps is not so wise...
Contrary imho it is VERY important how such an item is made. If we do accept eg. a casting theory we also have to accept ALL casting traces on a ring - and these are, to my best knowledge up to now, more the traces of fakes. How could we say/detect "this trace is a manufacture casting trace" or "this trace is a fake casting trace"??? How could we differ a monday morning GAHR production from a possible superfake?

@ lartiste: Owning 26 rings or more is no real qualification if you can drew the wrong concusions out of one ring and out of 26 rings if you see what you want to see.

As said just my 2ct and like 12472 states, everyone can believe what he wants.

Regards,


Owning 26 rings and provide to public detailed photos of all of them is more than anyone else did for this hobby. May be Crag Gottlieb did similar job, but the photos are less detailed and mostly there is less photos.
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/01/2020 03:38 PM
Originally Posted by wotan
Generally, concerning the ring manufature debate: I have the feeling (corresponding with my personal observations and the announcement of collectors) that the casting ideas (and all following ideas) were mainly upcoming because of unlucky (I don t assume that it is done by purpose) misinterpretation of traces on TKRs. Unfortunately -so this could happen- on worn and heavy worn rings.
Eg. I have had the luck to own and examine a ring with a die press failur (yes, I am a follower of the die press/stamp manufacturing proces, not without reason) - I have not seen another one up to now. Concerning the failur you could clearly see with a magnifying glass (no microscope needed) that such failur could only occur due to a die press process and there was proof(!) that it did occur in the GAHR firm.
Regards,


Can you provide photos of the ring or at least to mention name and date mentioned on the ring?
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/02/2020 04:56 AM
Good to see you Chris,,been a long time!

"The major problem with this whole debate, imo, is the lack of proper evidence. All of the best fakes out there are absolutely cast and these high end fakes are everywhere. So, if we are examining fakes to start with, thinking that they are original, then we will of course, come to believe that they are all cast because 99% of all TK rings out there are cast, and are of course, fake. Most of you would be surprised as to how many fake rings there are that were shown as original in books, posted on websites for sale, and come with COAs, etc."

Chris,,this is what I was mentioning,,,where is and which one is the true standard?

Wotan,, is it a early or late pattern.?

Those that go for the die pressed method can any explain the photos I added to on page 10?
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/02/2020 09:54 AM
Originally Posted by Gaspare
Good to see you Chris,,been a long time!

"The major problem with this whole debate, imo, is the lack of proper evidence. All of the best fakes out there are absolutely cast and these high end fakes are everywhere. So, if we are examining fakes to start with, thinking that they are original, then we will of course, come to believe that they are all cast because 99% of all TK rings out there are cast, and are of course, fake. Most of you would be surprised as to how many fake rings there are that were shown as original in books, posted on websites for sale, and come with COAs, etc."

Chris,,this is what I was mentioning,,,where is and which one is the true standard?

Wotan,, is it a early or late pattern.?

Those that go for the die pressed method can any explain the photos I added to on page 10?



The problem of this is that there is no ring with absolutely clear provenance. Maybe there are some in archives (e.g. confiscated to those sentenced to death) but who knows whether there are still the same rings or someone changed them in all those years ... .

In general provenance is always question of trust. And without the clear provenance there is no proof that the ring in question is good and majority of rest is bad (or how otherwise do you want to prove that)?
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/02/2020 01:17 PM
Hello!

A question arises anyway (but I am afraid we will remain in a state of stagnation):

Are there any traces of processing - that allow the conclusion that the Totenkopfringe was pressed?
And if - what could they look like?

Some arguments have been shown that they were cast:

- There are no two completely identical rings, even if they are from the same year
- The edges of the leaves, the runes etc. are very jagged under enlargement
- Pores and blow holes for which there is no other reasonable explanation
- Casting is a common practice for goldsmiths at the time. German textbooks for goldsmiths do not mention the method "die strucking"

The previous arguments for the method "die strucking":

- It's faster and cheaper to make the rings like this
- The industrially manufactured "PP" - rings were manufactured in this way
- Don Boyle believes this
- The ring collectors have agreed on this


Are there any more tangible arguments, any very clear sign?

Best regards,
Dierk
Posted By: ed773 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/02/2020 01:19 PM
Lartiste

Your statement is very true.
But not just for rings.
Every item in our collection falls in the same realm.
If they made them 80 years ago, they can make them today.
Thank you gents for a great study,
Ed

PS. GO CHIEFS!!!
Posted By: wotan Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/04/2020 03:38 PM
Originally Posted by lartiste

Can you provide photos of the ring or at least to mention name and date mentioned on the ring?


Hello, I did own the ring long time ago therefore unfortunately no relevant pics. But I did study the ring excessive and there is no doubt this trace could ONLY be caused by a cold die stamping process. A part of one of the runes symbols had been really torn out (obviously when the die had been withdrawn). The metal structure of the remaining base material and it s surroundings, studied with a 10 times magnificent glass, did let no other conclusion. This certain failur in all it s structure could happen NO WAY by any casting process. And as said, the origin of the ring (out of the family of the former wearer), the whole condition (really! unworn) and especially the exeptional finish did show that the failur did happen "in house" at GAHR. As I did own the ring for several years and I did study it again and again you can take to the banc what I stated. Or simply leave it.

Also @Gaspare: It has been a ring from 43 therefore very late. Overall it has been a "textbook" (how I hate this expression, especially in the connex with TKRs) ring with no other abnormalities.

Regards,
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/04/2020 04:40 PM
yeah Ed they did it!, and after 50 yrs and playing like that they deserve it!

OK, some really good observations and questions.. Wotan,,yes 'textbook' no longer is!. Wotan, even a not so good photo,, maybe something showing even one of the rune panels!

Sticking with the 2nd pattern HR, lets start with *what is not a provenance:
" I bought it at a flea market 20 years ago"
"Never seen a copy as good as this"
Dug. Ground dug is not a provenance.
"Got it in a grouping and everything else was good"
A Detliv Nieman ,D. Boyle, C. Gottleib, etc. Authentication. Sorry, mean no disrespect while maybe good years ago there seems to be problems with them now.

Anyone have another 'not a provenance' please feel free to add here..

Harder still is: *What is a good provenance.
Acquired directly from a German Vet who had received one. [chance of being fake[?]]
A traceable 'Captain Black' ring.
Acquired from a Allied Vet [or the family] thats traceable back to the 50s.

hey I'm running out of [goods]!! Wasn't there an example of a couple 2nd patterns that belonged to a infamous personality that came in a grouping from the family a few years ago??

Members please add to either or..., Thanks ,G.
Posted By: JR Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/04/2020 04:54 PM
From the nephew of the SS officer, comes this group.

Attached picture SS Officer's Group 2.JPG
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/05/2020 06:05 AM
nice! , So from a German vets family, they always had it and hopefully not too many middlemen..

* Would you mind letting us know year,, posting some photos of the rune panels, seam, bit of engraving.. We really got to establish a standard. This could be a start for its date ..
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/06/2020 03:26 PM
Originally Posted by wotan
Originally Posted by lartiste

Can you provide photos of the ring or at least to mention name and date mentioned on the ring?


Hello, I did own the ring long time ago therefore unfortunately no relevant pics. But I did study the ring excessive and there is no doubt this trace could ONLY be caused by a cold die stamping process. A part of one of the runes symbols had been really torn out (obviously when the die had been withdrawn). The metal structure of the remaining base material and it s surroundings, studied with a 10 times magnificent glass, did let no other conclusion. This certain failur in all it s structure could happen NO WAY by any casting process. And as said, the origin of the ring (out of the family of the former wearer), the whole condition (really! unworn) and especially the exeptional finish did show that the failur did happen "in house" at GAHR. As I did own the ring for several years and I did study it again and again you can take to the banc what I stated. Or simply leave it.

Also @Gaspare: It has been a ring from 43 therefore very late. Overall it has been a "textbook" (how I hate this expression, especially in the connex with TKRs) ring with no other abnormalities.

Regards,


Do you remember name and/or date, please? I would like try to find out photos of the ring to understand properly what are you speaking about.
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/06/2020 04:31 PM
Originally Posted by Gaspare
yeah Ed they did it!, and after 50 yrs and playing like that they deserve it!

OK, some really good observations and questions.. Wotan,,yes 'textbook' no longer is!. Wotan, even a not so good photo,, maybe something showing even one of the rune panels!

Sticking with the 2nd pattern HR, lets start with *what is not a provenance:
" I bought it at a flea market 20 years ago"
"Never seen a copy as good as this"
Dug. Ground dug is not a provenance.
"Got it in a grouping and everything else was good"
A Detliv Nieman ,D. Boyle, C. Gottleib, etc. Authentication. Sorry, mean no disrespect while maybe good years ago there seems to be problems with them now.

Anyone have another 'not a provenance' please feel free to add here..

Harder still is: *What is a good provenance.
Acquired directly from a German Vet who had received one. [chance of being fake[?]]
A traceable 'Captain Black' ring.
Acquired from a Allied Vet [or the family] thats traceable back to the 50s.

hey I'm running out of [goods]!! Wasn't there an example of a couple 2nd patterns that belonged to a infamous personality that came in a grouping from the family a few years ago??

Members please add to either or..., Thanks ,G.


Let me be devils advocate and also to offer other point of view. First of all it is way more complicated then Vet bring back is provenance and dug out is not provenance.

First of all I would like to offer short history introduction. I live in Czech republic, one of the latest places to be liberated by allies and in addition place where also was stick line among western allies and Russians. The only goal of all Germans in the territory was to escape to western allies, therefore they were trying to fight their way to west or simply they were trying to escape. Latest bigger fight ended on May 12, 1945. Also please note, that nearly any and all German nationals were displaced to Germany after the war. This all means that in April/May Germans were throwing away all property which could connect them with party, different organisations and army.

I can offer simple statistic of the appearance of these magic rings. During past 25 years I am aware of 40 - 50 rings appeared in the Czech republic of which 2 were attic finds, 3 were accidental finds from late 40?s, early 50?s and all remaining are dug out rings.

I understand that it is difficult for you to trust to dug out rings. I remember that 10 or so years ago someone played a game with members of this board and was trying to ask for verification of alleged dug out rings which were in fact cheap polish copies.

But Vets bring backs? I was always suspicious concerning Vet bring backs. May be because it is unnatural in here. And even you had to see alleged Vet bring backs which were at least partly infected. I do not see many ways how to verify it properly.

In both instances you have to understand the topic to avoid to be burned.

But to avoid sceptical conclusion, I would like to point out model provenance of the ring and it is Schwarz?s ring provenance, which is well known and even confirmed by previous owner here.



Jan
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/06/2020 07:08 PM
Hello!

@ lartiste: absolute approval!

I have complete trust in things that I have dug up myself, especially when the other things that have been found also fit.
But I don't expect everyone else to trust it - you have to be there when the ring is dug up.


In Germany there have been cases where high-quality medals and badges were secretly exchanged that were still in the possession of the respective soldier or relatives.
This can also have happened with things that were captured and came to the USA. 75 years is a long time...


I think the ring has to speak for itself. There is no origin that will be universally recognized.

Best regards,
Dierk
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/08/2020 05:36 AM
The treasures ring [Schwarz] is a 1st pattern, which I believe is a separate animal completely..

As far as Allied Vet provenance at least one is fully documented. A Sgt Black and his unit was stationed at Wewelsburg directly after the war and found a large hoard of HRs. He gave one out to each man until he ran out.... There are also more than one photo of a US vet wearing a HR... Something like JR explaining his ring came from the family that also had the mans awards and personal effects and there weren't any middle men is also fine.

As far as a dug HR. I mean no disrespect and don't want to get in to it here but my wifes cousins were some of the 1st diggers the very first year the USSR broke up, and I have been with them many times,,and I'll repeat,,a HR being dug is not a provenance in by itself.. I'm not saying its not possible..- We all like to say the piece must stand on its own.. And it should..

SO, ok,,,,this is open to all - , lets skip a year or so to make it easy,,can someone show a good condition HR a 42, or a 44 that can be considered a standard that others can be compared to?

To those that have a lot of HRs,,or have had a lot,, You have Dons CoA,,,he states they are die struck,,but many display differences within the same year, AND some display cast characteristics and some do not!
I'm beginning to see that the 2nd pattern is a problem. That unless we have a standard members we are going in circles..

Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/11/2020 06:45 AM
* Members, I'd like to publicly thank 'lartiste' [Jan] for a very nice act of kindness he did towards me.: Thank you kind sir..

Next I have had the opportunity to check out a book our member 'Equirhodont' [Martin Toman] from the Czech republic wrote in 2017 called 'SS- Totenkopfring'..

A huge undertaking and a gigantic book. Hardcover, with wonderful glossy high res photos so clear it feels you can jump right in.. He shows HRs from every year. In great detail.. He discusses the cast vs die pressed method, shows documents, boxes everything. Written in Czechoslovakian but even someone like myself who's barely proficient in the English language wink can get the grasp of whats going on it it!I am still digesting it and wlll review more of it here for the membership soon. Martin , it would be great to hear from you here..

- So, are we really at a standstill? I am for sure , not sure of anything at this point. So lets continue to keep it with the 2nd pattern HR for now.

Something I've always noticed as I'm sure many of you have..
Looking at the skull,,the Sig rune to the left. This rune has the famous 'die flaw' at the bottom... Is it safe to say these 2nd pat HRs , 41 to 44,,,they ALL have this flaw..
*So,,if this is a lost wax investment cast,,,how come it wasn't fixed with the next batch of rings!!. It would be easily done!

please, I invite all the membership whether you own a HR or not to participate, come in with your own theory, answer a question, ask one, make a statement!
Thank you...., Gaspare
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/11/2020 11:09 AM
If question about wax model - IMO answer very simple: just was made many more wax models at once and molded rings (for example 20-100 rings with the same deffect), then was made other part of was model(where may be was fix it deffect)
Posted By: JR Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/11/2020 02:42 PM
The rings are small to begin with, and the flaws even smaller yet. On top of that, imperfections were easily covered up by the burnishing process. Only a collector looking at these SSTK's 80 years later with a loop, would it become obvious to. To Gahr, and certainly the recipient, it was a non-factor to go in and fix the irregularities with in the mould. That rune which Gaspar speaks is loaded with the most flaws of any of the other panels. There are probably 10 flaws on it alone, that can be viewed to different degrees according to how the liquid silver flowed into the mould and were picked up by each ring that was made.
Posted By: 12472 Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/12/2020 03:49 PM
Hello!

Originally Posted by Gaspare

Looking at the skull,,the Sig rune to the left. This rune has the famous 'die flaw' at the bottom... Is it safe to say these 2nd pat HRs , 41 to 44,,,they ALL have this flaw..




I think that just shows that the wax models for the 40s rings were all casted from one mold (rubber or metal).
They are similar in many respects, but never as identical as two coins to each other.

Silver is very soft. It should be possible to emboss a large number of rings before a die is worn out. But there are not even two identical rings.

Best regards,
Dierk
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/13/2020 09:11 AM
Originally Posted by 12472
Hello!

Originally Posted by Gaspare

Looking at the skull,,the Sig rune to the left. This rune has the famous 'die flaw' at the bottom... Is it safe to say these 2nd pat HRs , 41 to 44,,,they ALL have this flaw..




I think that just shows that the wax models for the 40s rings were all casted from one mold (rubber or metal).
They are similar in many respects, but never as identical as two coins to each other.

Silver is very soft. It should be possible to emboss a large number of rings before a die is worn out. But there are not even two identical rings.

Best regards,
Dierk



that is why I came to the conclusion that the rings were cast, not stamped

just look at this shot
in the skull we are can see many holes, they are only possible with the casting method


Attached picture 21950948_10214364846857181_5905763019867678382_o.jpg
Hello Evgenij,

with all due respect, I've never checked an original ring in hands showing such porosity??.

Ric
Evgenij,

btw, I was looking forward to have your nice repro in hands also to compare it with a SSHr original and after comparison I confirm my opinion : Gahr didn't make them by die casting.

Ric
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/19/2020 10:18 PM
I agree , I've only seen 10 or so HRs close up,,,but I too have not seen a skull with big porous opening like that..
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/21/2020 01:23 PM
Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
Hello Evgenij,

with all due respect, I've never checked an original ring in hands showing such porosity??.

Ric


My friend!
I have other shots of this ring and they are very convincing in terms of originality smile
This is original ring and I have shot of onother early ring (style 30s) wher in skull too present the same holes
Posted By: Mikee Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/21/2020 07:09 PM
I'm sure a lot more interested members would purchase this book if it was in English. I know I would.
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/24/2020 04:58 PM
- Evgeniy, imagine that ring shown even 5 years ago,,no one would have considered it! How is the seam behind skull?

- Mikee,, your right ,,,but even though not in English its a very good book with a lot of interesting HRs in it,,,Sepps, Wolffs, the 'Diamond Head' Schwarz ring that Craig restored and many others..

Really, it should not be here. I will start its own topic and take the above post away in a couple days...
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/25/2020 08:15 AM
seam behind skull - not 100% garanty about original ring
My rings not all have seam, but everyone gathers as it should, by shortening the leaves under the skull and soldering on top of the skull, I just have a cleaner solder and after polishing, it is not always visible, the Germans obviously did not solder in silver, in general this is not proof at all, you need to look comprehensively and not cling to the little things
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/25/2020 11:25 PM
E. , no no,, just wondering about the seam,,,seems nothing is 100% with these rings anymore... There are HRs out there now that would have never passed years ago..

So as it stands,, here we have no real clear consensus.. - For me where is the standard?, Which ring? We have been sticking with the later pattern.. Can anyone pick a late pattern [2nd type], any year,,and say this is a no brainer,,a HR that others can be measured up against?!
Originally Posted by Gaspare
* Members, I'd like to publicly thank 'lartiste' [Jan] for a very nice act of kindness he did towards me.: Thank you kind sir..

Next I have had the opportunity to check out a book our member 'Equirhodont' [Martin Toman] from the Czech republic wrote in 2017 called 'SS- Totenkopfring'..

A huge undertaking and a gigantic book. Hardcover, with wonderful glossy high res photos so clear it feels you can jump right in.. He shows HRs from every year. In great detail.. He discusses the cast vs die pressed method, shows documents, boxes everything. Written in Czechoslovakian but even someone like myself who's barely proficient in the English language wink can get the grasp of whats going on it it!I am still digesting it and wlll review more of it here for the membership soon. Martin , it would be great to hear from you here..



Hi Gaspare, nice to hear you received the book (thanks to Jan "Lartiste"). I?m open to discussion on HR rings. In my book you can find all answers, but in Czech, so you can?t understand...

SS Totenkopfrings were 100% die casted. In my book you can find, how it was done. There is also die struck method in the book, but just for the sake of the fact that this method is being discussed.

The furrow under the Sig rune is not casting flaw. It is a trace of the modification of the matrix (master piece) from 1938-1940. Let me tell you a little secret.
The model from 1938-1940 is mistakenly called the transitional type. But that's not the case! This is the same pattern as 1940-1944. Only the matrix was modified in 1940 by an engraver.
This modification, which aimed to deepen and sharpen the details, created a typical groove under the Sig rune. I compared many rings from 1938-1940 with rings from 1940-1944 and differ
only in microscopic detail - pebble background Sig runes, groove, etc. In my opinion, an engraver who repaired a matrix (probably bronze) had cut his tool too deep . It would be very difficult to create
a completely new matrix (which of course would look completely different, because at that time could not make an identical copy), therefore, at Gahr decided to ignore the groove and rings from 1940-1944
were already with this cosmetic defect.
The Sepp Dietrich ring gave me proof that the matrix was being modified over the years (see below). It bears the date 1933, but was cast from the matrix, which was used also later, in the years 1934-1938.
But there is little difference! On the Dietrich ring there is a spot that is missing on the later rings! Otherwise the design is 100% identical! How is it possible? The matrix was modified in 1934 and the patch was removed.
Here is an overview of dates when the matrix was tampered with or completely new:
1933 - Ring Schwarz + Bach Zelewski
1933 - Ring Dietrich
1934 - 1938
1938-1940
1940-1944
I have all the evidence for my claim and present it in my book. I studied the 26 rings (almost all published dates), which I had in the collection, then many rings of other collectors.

I do not think that my conclusions would help persuade the stubborn supporters of production by struck, because this debate has been going on for years
and they are still unwilling to accept any evidence of casting. However, it is my duty to publish my conclusions.
Thank you,
Martin Toman
author of the book "SS-Totenkopfring Himmleruv prsten cti"




Attached picture spot1.jpg
Hi guys, let me please summarize some points (I don't go on personal attacks, because they worth nothing):

we have here guys that studied these rings for years and never noticed
- the distance between leaves and band edges are different,
- that mixed up die stricking with die pressing,
- that mixed up bijouterie production with jewelry production,
- that never shared a single evidence,
- that invented some totally absurd production methods (of course not present in period documents like the ?multiple dies of Gahr?!!!!),
- and that never read any period magazine.


I think If we want to talk about a period production the first thing we should do is to study period documents and understand the production methods.

So, for those believing jewelry was die struck, can you show us period documents talking about this process? If this process is not present, that is for sure a bad news for you...

Otherwise we have tens of articles talking about casting methods (several and different). I can report some words from one talking about casting of rings that litterary says: "with impeccabe results". That is for sure disturbing for die stricking supporters to know the germans called ?impeccable? something... it means ?perfect?.

Anyway I think, too bad, that they never post any article or anything period related to the die stricking production... And this means they haven't any period document.

Furthermore there are tons of questions die stricking supporters cannot answer, since they are totally uncompatible with that kind of production preocess.
Here are some:

1) Why there's no one '30 style ring without hand finish? But all, ALL, '30 style rings show so much hand work?!? Anyway you can find them in almost all the '40 style too, see pictures.
So, why do rings show hand finish (scooping marks, file marks...) if they were die struck? A die struck item no need so much hand work after it was struck. This is totally uncompatible.

Attached picture 67_33_1.jpg
Attached picture 67_1.jpg
Attached picture 67.jpg
2) Why is the distance between leaves and band edge always different? (in die struck rings it is impossible, you can clearly see it just comparing serveral Hapur rings; I did it, and all them are exactly the same).
Another uncompatible point with the die stricking (and no, Gahr didn't invent any fantasy multiple dies machine as Ric suggested ? the die used from 38 to 44 is exactly the same, as correctly suggested by Martin, and in a precise date, ecxactly on 9.11, it appeared some flaws on the die ? and this means the die used was only one, and at the same time, dismisses Ric's fantasy theory, that of course has no evidence and no period documentation). PICTURE 1

Not only a different distance, but there are also minor variations in the shape of the external designs. Of course this is absolutely uncompatible with a die stricking production. PICTURE 2

And what about the picture 3 where is the "?" ? Different distance and different shapes...

Attached picture 68_0.jpg
Attached picture 68_Vari.jpg
Attached picture pict_3.jpg
3) Why each ring shows unique features (casting flaws) and Hapur die struck rings show exactly the same features? PICTURES 1 and 2

Have you ever asked why mint rings show the flaws on PICTURE 3, 4, 5? Of course a die struck ring don't show all those flaws, they are totally uncompatible with the production process; on die struck items you can find some flaws due to the dirt, to a small movement of the die, but of course not something like that!

Attached picture 69.jpg
Attached picture 69_0.jpg
Attached picture 69_3_1.jpg
Attached picture 69_5.jpg
Attached picture 69_6.jpg
I would add some more questions, even much more interesting of these, but they would reveal too much about these rings, and I prefere to keep the big surprises for the upcoming future... ;-)
Anyway, if someone supporting the idea these rings were pressed or die struck is able to explain, showing period documents and pictures and comparisons, all these questions, I will add some more questions...


It would be nice to see posted some real evidences, some photographic replies, something we can believe at, but, too bad, in these years we clearly understood a thing: is under everyone's eyes that die stricking supporters only have words to spend, but no one evidence to share. And what they cannot explain, they simply ignore it.

Of course the train of die stricking theory is derailed in the same istant someone doubt about this theory, because there's nothing, nothing supporting it. All is against it, from a simply analysys, to period documentation. Anyway, as always, I'm open to change my mind.

Food for brain guys.
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/28/2020 12:27 PM
2 equirhodont
thx you for sharing to us this interesting information!!!
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/28/2020 01:06 PM
Martin if not secret where from you take so detailes about matrix
I correct understand you, that always existed one matrix , from 30s year , that was then in 40s modified ?
Posted By: wotan Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/28/2020 02:25 PM
Hello, TO ALL those casting-theory followers (I too don't go on personal attacks, because they worth nothing). I can tell you that you are -unfortunately- on the wrong way. The wrong way especially because you do open gates for fakes which are always cast as no other process than casting can produce good (but still no perfect) fakes (which in a funny way is itself a proof for that the rings are die struck).

Only same few points:
You all still do compare well worn rings with more or less wearing and time traces, even ground dug and even ugly and without skills restaurated, against each other.
You all still ignore the obvious and most logicical needs of the manufacturer and the rings itself.
You all still don t understand the fundamental jewellry manufacturing processes.
You all still don t see and compare the most obvious analogies and disparities.
You all still can t and don t understand the myths and thoughts of the era the original rings have been manufactured.

You can take it or leave it and I in no way want to support any author in writing a crude theory book and make money with my personal knowledge by prooving the facts each of us could reveal by doing CAREFULLY the NECESSARY HOMEWORK (each collector of items should do their own homework, it is fundamental to differ FAKES from ORIGINALS and CAST honor-death-head-rings are ALWAYS FAKES).

A very nice proof for totally misunderstanding of a manufacturing process is eg. concerning the description of CIT. -created a typical groove under the Sig rune?.. In my opinion, an engraver who repaired a matrix (probably bronze) had cut his tool too deep . It would be very difficult to create a completely new matrix- CIT END. The really obvioulsly misunderstanding is the mixture of negative and positive forms. The GROOVE in the RING indeed is a BAR in the FORM which could have been EASILY removed eg on a bronze form - IF it would not have been in a special steel hardened die struck form(!).

I will take only one of the fundamental ignorance you beat like a death horse and which shows me the totally lack of fundamental knowledge on jewellery generally and death-head-rings in special, by giving a simple hint (yes I still do no proof although I could, make your homework, find it out yourself!): CIT. -the distance between leaves and band edges are different (in die struck rings it is impossible- CIT END. Where is the superfluous material by a ring after the die struck process??? ? (which is, if you know and understand, a proof for that the rings are die struck in itself).

Imho the somehow aggressive form of detailed developing and defending the -casting theory- against obvious facts serve two directions: The making money with -the new theory- and finally making money with fakes that suddenly became originals due to the settlement of the crude casting theory.

Furtunately the crude theory obviously is not able to gain ground between SERIOUS collectors and experts, that is what I am told by what is going on behind the curtains. But the danger is that unexperienced collectors will loose a lot of money (death head rings are not among the cheap collector items) and truly original/period rings will loose worth because of an insecured mass of collectors.
All this said this is my only fact comment here because I did not write for the matter of discussion, as said, I don t want to give away knowledge on this matter for free. Hopefully you take it (and understand it) or leave it.

Regards,
Originally Posted by wotan

Only same few points:
1) You all still do compare well worn rings with more or less wearing and time traces, even ground dug and even ugly and without skills restaurated, against each other.
2) You all still ignore the obvious and most logicical needs of the manufacturer and the rings itself.
3) You all still don t understand the fundamental jewellry manufacturing processes.
4) You all still don t see and compare the most obvious analogies and disparities.
5) You all still can t and don t understand the myths and thoughts of the era the original rings have been manufactured.


1) I posted a couple of pictures taken from untouched TK rings, complete with their documents, their Gahr paper with the diameter written by hands on it, delivered to the owner. I handled and personaly exhamined rings from ground dug to untouched.

2) The manufacturer methods are described in period magazines. an you show us some articles about the die stricking process? I promise I will show 2 about casting for each one you post.

3) Manufacturing processes are described in period magazines and also in jewelry manuals (that I read several in these years!). Again, you are talking about something without any proof.

4) ?1?

5) If you know how original rings were manufactured, why don't you show us some period papers about that manufacturing process? Or why don't you answer my questions?


Originally Posted by wotan
A very nice proof for totally misunderstanding of a manufacturing process is eg. concerning the description of CIT. -created a typical groove under the Sig rune?.. In my opinion, an engraver who repaired a matrix (probably bronze) had cut his tool too deep . It would be very difficult to create a completely new matrix- CIT END. The really obvioulsly misunderstanding is the mixture of negative and positive forms. The GROOVE in the RING indeed is a BAR in the FORM which could have been EASILY removed eg on a bronze form - IF it would not have been in a special steel hardened die struck form(!).


This is something of course wrong, but it is not my statement.

Originally Posted by wotan
I will take only one of the fundamental ignorance you beat like a death horse and which shows me the totally lack of fundamental knowledge on jewellery generally and death-head-rings in special, by giving a simple hint (yes I still do no proof although I could, make your homework, find it out yourself!): CIT. -the distance between leaves and band edges are different (in die struck rings it is impossible- CIT END. Where is the superfluous material by a ring after the die struck process??? ? (which is, if you know and understand, a proof for that the rings are die struck in itself).


I showed not only the distance, but also the shape of the designs changes. And in die stricking process the female die already has in it the complete band engraved. So it is not possible to produce different distances or "move" the design.
Furthermore I posted a couple of pictures where you can clearly see casting flaws. If they are not casting flaws, can you show us how it can be possible to obtain them in a die struck ring?


Originally Posted by wotan
Imho the somehow aggressive form of detailed developing and defending the -casting theory- against obvious facts serve two directions: The making money with -the new theory- and finally making money with fakes that suddenly became originals due to the settlement of the crude casting theory.


Of course, when you have nothing to say you must go into personal attacks... making money.... sell fake rings... Blah, blah, blah. Actually until today I'm the only one that spent so much money in scientifical tests on these rings, that I should sell several fakes for many thousand $ just to have my money back... But sorry, I no need them. I spent my money just to let collectors know how many lies, without any proof, few guys told us in all these years. I have no interests, just want to find out the truth and let collectors free from few guys use their brain to find out a fake from a real TK ring. And facts are under everyone's eye: no one of you die stricking supporters has EVER, EVER, EVER showed anything interesting. You have no answers for my questions, and they are only the beginning, the BIG SURPRISES are yet to come.


Originally Posted by wotan
Furtunately the crude theory obviously is not able to gain ground between SERIOUS collectors and experts, that is what I am told by what is going on behind the curtains. But the danger is that unexperienced collectors will loose a lot of money (death head rings are not among the cheap collector items) and truly original/period rings will loose worth because of an insecured mass of collectors.
All this said this is my only fact comment here because I did not write for the matter of discussion, as said, I don t want to give away knowledge on this matter for free. Hopefully you take it (and understand it) or leave it.

Regards,

Can you tell me who are the "experts" and the "serious collectors"? I know many serious collectors that stopped believing the fake die stricking theory (it has of course no one evidence!) and only a handful still believing on it, but I know no one "expert", except you and Don...

I'm very sorry to say all what you wrote, too bad, is an empty post that doesn't answer to any of the question I made, and support what I said: you have nothing supporting all your statements. Nor period documentation, nor the possibility to explain ANY of the details I posted.

Another time is under everyone's eyes, the total failure of the die stricking theory in this field. And this is only the beginning.
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/28/2020 07:11 PM
First I'd like to thank everyone for participating, you are all gentlemen and good members.
- It is frustrating as we haven't period documents,drawings and actual dies like we have for PP rings.. Hopefully progress will be made..

So we have Germany, English, Czech Rep., Italy, Russia all present here and with this much info we must make sure we are all on the same page with terminology..

*- Martin, Just to make sure I and the others are understanding.... - You believe the HR is Die Cast:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_casting


Basic die cast animation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1543I_5XMJo

Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 02/28/2020 07:49 PM

Antonio,,
In this photo you've shown,,,, Original HR on right,,and is that Hapurs HR on left?

Attached picture 69.jpg
Originally Posted by wotan

The really obvioulsly misunderstanding is the mixture of negative and positive forms. The GROOVE in the RING indeed is a BAR in the FORM which could have been EASILY removed eg on a bronze form - IF it would not have been in a special steel hardened die struck form(!).


Looks like you don?t understand casting method. There was ONE BRONZE MATRIX (with deep groove).
From this matrix was RUBBER FORM made. From this RUBBER FORM was WAX RING casted - you can cast 50-100 pieces from 1 rubber form. First wax rings are sharp, laters are not sharp and you need to hand finish them by tools.
From WAX RING was SILVER RING CASTED. See images...
There were 1.500 rings casted per every year - 4 rings per day. Very easy...






Attached picture IMG_20200301_135906.jpg
Attached picture IMG_20200301_135945.jpg
Attached picture IMG_20200301_135951.jpg
Attached picture strome?ek.jpg
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/01/2020 06:13 PM
Martin, "There was ONE BRONZE MATRIX (with deep groove)."

Just to keep everyone with same terminology. In the above answer to Wotan your referral to 'MATRIX' here in the U.S. is called a 'model'. Some steel, brass etc. and were used to make another rubber mold when one worn out or got ruined..To keep items looking consistent this model usually didn't change but could be if needed..

A good animation on the investment cast process. Lots of work and time... This is NOT die cast process - [refer to animation in my above post]:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4WuKJF_76c
Posted By: JR Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/01/2020 08:12 PM
Excellent information, Martin. Thank you so much.
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/02/2020 10:19 AM
))) nothing news
hi evegenly
nothing news is the right words a waist of time all the men that worked for gahr could have answered all these questions but in reality thier lips are silent they all are dead but guess some of the members here just wont say hey guys this hunt for the real truth is over caput finiga last american its over thanks for nothing accomplished andy militarynut
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/07/2020 09:33 PM
Originally Posted by SScollector
Hello everyone!

First, I would like to say thank you to those who invited me to this discussion.
If I may offer my opinions on this subject, (I am a supporter of die striking, although I personally believe that they were "pressed" in such a way that would be more like a forging, or perhaps an in-between, stamping/forging type method). I do not believe that the originals were made from liquid metal casting. The major problem with this whole debate, imo, is the lack of proper evidence. All of the best fakes out there are absolutely cast and these high end fakes are everywhere. So, if we are examining fakes to start with, thinking that they are original, then we will of course, come to believe that they are all cast because 99% of all TK rings out there are cast, and are of course, fake. Most of you would be surprised as to how many fake rings there are that were shown as original in books, posted on websites for sale, and come with COAs, etc.

Anyway, over the next few days, I would like to try to take some better photos of my vet aquired original near mint TK ring and post some comparison photos here along with some of these high end fakes that I have mentioned. Hopefully, this might help in this debate in some way. Again, thanks for the invite, and I hope that we can all have a friendly and productive debate here. I am not a fan of how rude people are in other forums over this topic, but this forum seems to be calm and friendly. I am open minded and I do read and respect everyone's opinion, whichever side you are supporting.

Thanks again!

Chris


So what? That's all?
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/07/2020 09:39 PM
Antonio, if this is only advertisement on your upcoming book, then just please inform us when the book will be out and when and if you are willing to provide your answers to questions you raised. Otherwise in my humble opinion this discussion does not make any sense.
Posted By: Tanker Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/07/2020 10:41 PM
Chris
Welcome aboard and I agree with your assessment. This is one of the few forums I still follow because of the environment. Thanks to Gaspare and Mike, they do a great job!.
Ron

Originally Posted by lartiste
Originally Posted by SScollector
Hello everyone!

First, I would like to say thank you to those who invited me to this discussion.
If I may offer my opinions on this subject, (I am a supporter of die striking, although I personally believe that they were "pressed" in such a way that would be more like a forging, or perhaps an in-between, stamping/forging type method). I do not believe that the originals were made from liquid metal casting. The major problem with this whole debate, imo, is the lack of proper evidence. All of the best fakes out there are absolutely cast and these high end fakes are everywhere. So, if we are examining fakes to start with, thinking that they are original, then we will of course, come to believe that they are all cast because 99% of all TK rings out there are cast, and are of course, fake. Most of you would be surprised as to how many fake rings there are that were shown as original in books, posted on websites for sale, and come with COAs, etc.

Anyway, over the next few days, I would like to try to take some better photos of my vet aquired original near mint TK ring and post some comparison photos here along with some of these high end fakes that I have mentioned. Hopefully, this might help in this debate in some way. Again, thanks for the invite, and I hope that we can all have a friendly and productive debate here. I am not a fan of how rude people are in other forums over this topic, but this forum seems to be calm and friendly. I am open minded and I do read and respect everyone's opinion, whichever side you are supporting.

Thanks again!

Chris


So what? That's all?

Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/10/2020 01:21 AM
Guys,,there are a lot of things happening around the world right now.... Hopefully we'll hear back from everyone..

For me,,I would be happy to see a 'standard'... A later type HR,,, that is what we would ALL agree is a one looker!
A HR that even if we took just by the ONE year and date that could be the 'measuring stick' so to say,,,the standard which others can be measured of that year and date...

Any HR,, from 41 to 44 lets say.... Anyone own one? or have good photos from your files/the net?
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/10/2020 04:23 AM
standard - what do you mean ?
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/11/2020 05:11 AM
A HR that everyone would agree on is 100% authentic. A later type/ 2nd pattern,,pick a year and date..
A comparison HR to compare other HRs to of similar year and date.

Wouldn't the same year and date HR be exactly the same as others of the same year and date? , [other than different size size]
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/11/2020 11:36 AM
need ask them , who have mint condition rings
but what do you wanna do with this shots ?
all rings have a little differents in all elements, comparison with other rings, too almost imposible
plz explain
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/11/2020 10:17 PM
E. , yes there should be some little differences.
I'm thinking lets say a 9/11/43 in very good condition should be very similar to another of the same date and year,,again, yes some minor differences but still should be basically the same..

So, you produce a excellent copy HR by casting. You see how Hapur makes his ring,,and, you own a HR... After seeing all this what do you think? Cast or pressed?
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/12/2020 10:22 AM
he makes a fantasy ring, which och remotely resembles the original ring.
We all saw minor improvements on all the rings, these are usually the cut edges of the leaves, the differences in turtles are small. All this suggests that the rings were completed manually, but we know that such improvements would not be necessary if the ring comes out of the press. therefore, my conclusion, it was casting, I was convinced of this when I got a 44-year-old ring and when I created a copy of it, I was able to study it very carefully. I also noticed that some types of rings wandered from one year to another, for example, I saw a ring of 43 years old, completely identical to my ring of 44 years old, which says that there were several models of skulls (because usually the rings differ in different skulls). The method of casting for me personally is still open. Because There are definitely differences between the original rings and my copies. So the casting method itself was not casting using wax (as I do). By the way, from those rings that I saw in discussions and sold on the Internet, I saw 3 rings (2 rings - 30s and one 40s) that have defects (either bubble or even large non-spilled areas), which again speaks about the theory of casting, otherwise they would not exist (I personally have not seen stamped rings with similar defects). But as I wrote, it seems to me that Garr had his own way of casting, I think it can be understood if you read the literature of that time about the methods that existed then. Just as it seems to me there is a difference in the production of rings of the 30s and 40s.
Originally Posted by lartiste
Antonio, if this is only advertisement on your upcoming book, then just please inform us when the book will be out and when and if you are willing to provide your answers to questions you raised. Otherwise in my humble opinion this discussion does not make any sense.

This discussion doesn't make any sense simply because you are not able to answer to my questions or what?

IMO this discussion perfectly shows the actual knowledge of the "old guard" and the die stricking supporters on this field: ZERO.

Have you ever seen a real evidence about the die stricking production? Any period documentation? Any comparison? Of course not.

So, why is this discussion without any sense if revealed some important details and so much important questions never raised before?
Maybe because it was better to have only few "experts" that decide what is good or what is bad without any real sense or knowledge?

Very nice to see the "Experts" confusing production processes, being speachless in front of evidences, inventing new impossible production techniques, having nothing to show... This is what happens when you close your mind and trust a "revealed" (fake) truth.

Finally, this is not an advertising for a book, I no need to advertise anything. If you don't understand that making a book, a serious one, costs MUCH MORE than what you'll ever earn from the sales, then it is clear you know nothing in this field too. I make research simply because I can, I have time to do it, and I try to give collectors some help. I will never get back all the thousands $ I spent to make analysys, buy period documents, find sources, and all the years I spent to study these rings.



PS:
One important thing: during the Third Reich they never used rubber molds, they only used plaster molds and investment materials.
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/14/2020 03:32 AM
Antonio,, well Martin [Lartiste] and Evgeniy both believe the HR is cast. Just not exactly sure.
It is not a standard investment cast for sure..Die Cast [ sometimes called Permanent Mold] is a possibility. What ever it is it is unorthodox, unique..

For the die struck/pressed guys.. We know PP rings were mainly pressed. But the HR isn't a PP ring for sure,,but it was mass produced.. IF anyone would like to show or explain why they believe they are/were pressed please go ahead and post here. No opinions/beliefs will be suppressed here. It is all interesting and we all learn one way or another....
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/14/2020 05:09 PM
Originally Posted by Antonio Scapini
Originally Posted by lartiste
Antonio, if this is only advertisement on your upcoming book, then just please inform us when the book will be out and when and if you are willing to provide your answers to questions you raised. Otherwise in my humble opinion this discussion does not make any sense.

This discussion doesn't make any sense simply because you are not able to answer to my questions or what?

IMO this discussion perfectly shows the actual knowledge of the "old guard" and the die stricking supporters on this field: ZERO.

Have you ever seen a real evidence about the die stricking production? Any period documentation? Any comparison? Of course not.

So, why is this discussion without any sense if revealed some important details and so much important questions never raised before?
Maybe because it was better to have only few "experts" that decide what is good or what is bad without any real sense or knowledge?

Very nice to see the "Experts" confusing production processes, being speachless in front of evidences, inventing new impossible production techniques, having nothing to show... This is what happens when you close your mind and trust a "revealed" (fake) truth.

Finally, this is not an advertising for a book, I no need to advertise anything. If you don't understand that making a book, a serious one, costs MUCH MORE than what you'll ever earn from the sales, then it is clear you know nothing in this field too. I make research simply because I can, I have time to do it, and I try to give collectors some help. I will never get back all the thousands $ I spent to make analysys, buy period documents, find sources, and all the years I spent to study these rings.



PS:
One important thing: during the Third Reich they never used rubber molds, they only used plaster molds and investment materials.


Dear Antonio

you raised two interesting questions:

1. why the distance between leafs and edge differ; and
2. why massive hand tooling was not necessary in respect of 40's rings.

to be honest I would like to know the answers ... .

I never said, that you need to advertise the book and that you will get rich. wink To publish a book is definitely not the way to get rich and in this case even to reimburse costs.

I will be happy if you will provide your answer to aforementioned questions and also f you will provide information when your book will be out.



Jan
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/15/2020 04:34 PM


1. why the distance between leafs and edge differ; and


--- everything is very simple I found that there were at least 2 ring shapes,
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/18/2020 05:02 AM
For me I see a distinct difference in shape/form between the early pattern and the later.. Also just by coloring I see there would be a difference in material alloy in the early and late pattern..

Well it seems that a few members believe the HR was cast .. But cast how? Die cast? Investment cast? something else?

- and there are those who believe it is die struck or pressed. Much of the kitsch type jewelry [PP rings] was die pressed .. But other than explanation that it is easier and thats how it was done we really haven't seen much of a good explanation why they think it was pressed [?] IF you have a theory why you think the HR was pressed please make a post here. All opinions welcomed.


. [Sorry for my confusing terminology.. When I was younger I worked in a machine shop. The machine Hapur uses is called a 'Press', thats why I say Die Pressed.
Technically both could be correct.but lets keep it as 'Die Struck'..]


Pictured is Robin Lumsdens old HR.. This piece confuses at least me crazy . This appears to be a one piece band, skull separate. It also looks to be from a solid billet, drawn. And looks like when a struck ring gets extremely worn [smooth] confused Cast pieces usually get a pock mark or three and when worn the marks get bigger.. A interesting HR!

Attached picture IMG_3899.jpg
As requested, here are some photos of my vet acquired TK ring. As I mentioned, most of the rings that are considered original, (probably about 99% of them all), are just high quality casted reproductions that have been changing hands for years. First, notice that the flaw marks within the leaf veins in the first photo comparison, (top ring, from Antonio), do not appear on the original, (bottom ring, top photo). In the second photo, you will see that area in the eye sockets are completely smooth. There are no eye craters on the original, as some books have mistakenly shown as proper. There are tons of differences between original 40's style TK rings, and the other 99% of rings that are shown as original in books and forum threads, that are simply not original. Hope this helps. Perhaps, this is a start.

Chris

Attached picture r1.JPG
Attached picture r2.JPG
Here are some other photos of my ring. I apologize for the quality, but these are the best that I could do with my limited camera.

Chris

Attached picture r3.JPG
Attached picture r4.JPG
Attached picture r5.JPG
Attached picture r6.JPG
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/28/2020 08:27 PM
Dear Chris many thanks for your input! Since my knowledge of English is not perfect and this is difficult topic for me to be discussed even in my language, can you please a bit elaborate what you mean that the eye socket are smooth and that there are no craters? Please refer to particular book if practicable, I keep all of them.

Many thanks!



Jan
Thanks, Jan. The first time I heard of this claim, was in Craig Gottlieb's book on TK rings.
Do you have this book? If so, I can find the page if needed, but it is in there. Then, several others have stated this on other forums and websites. I have never liked nor believed in the authenticity of those rings that have strong craters in the eye sockets, nor would I accept rings that have those sharp vertical lines within the leaf veins as I showed in the first photo. Usually, these two features, (among others, such as sloppy crossbone and skull details), will all be found together on these strange, and obviously cast TK rings. These are my honest thoughts, and in my opinion, like it is with any other rare and expensive SS item, fakes are everywhere and true mint originals are very hard to find.

Chris
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/28/2020 09:04 PM
Hi Chris.,,

2 questions -

1 , what date is your ring?

2 , Do you consider this HR authentic?

Attached picture 21950948_10214364846857181_5905763019867678382_o (1).jpg
Hello, Gaspare!

My ring is dated 21.6.44

As for the ring you posted, I will not comment on it, as I have only studied 40's style rings over the years. I will add that I am in no way trying to imply that I am a TK ring expert because I am not. I have observed several things about the 40's style rings though and have handled several originals other than my own. Also, my comments and opinions are mostly based on my own observations and not just because someone else says so. That being said, my father made some decent cast reproductions a few years ago from dies that he made from scratch, and he has said that after his experience with casting his repros and comparing them with my original ring and other originals, (ones that we both have examined in hand), that in his opinion, there is no way that the originals were cast.

Of course, some details of the originals were done mostly by hand, for example the teeth. My father made his skull die, so that the teeth were nothing but a solid bar on the die. After the skull was cast, he would, by hand, cut the teeth into the teeth bar on the skull. I would assume that this is likely how the originals were done. Regardless, in such areas, you will find slight variations among the originals. However, all of the 40's style originals that I have handled myself years ago were made from the same dies and other than those few areas, they were all nearly identical. One could even compare pebbling behind the rune panels to be identical. It has been years since I have seen one in hand, (Not since Craig's book was released). Anyway, as the years go by, it seems that more and more variations are being discovered and excepted as proper and original, but isn't it strange that all of these variants were nowhere to be seen decades ago? If I were looking to buy another ring, I would safely stick with the standard type, which above all else, are far better in quality and do not show these typical casting signs that we see on these variant types and with the main style, we know these are original by vet acquired examples.

Just my thoughts!

Chris
Posted By: lartiste Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/29/2020 10:17 AM
Originally Posted by SScollector
Thanks, Jan. The first time I heard of this claim, was in Craig Gottlieb's book on TK rings.
Do you have this book? If so, I can find the page if needed, but it is in there. Then, several others have stated this on other forums and websites. I have never liked nor believed in the authenticity of those rings that have strong craters in the eye sockets, nor would I accept rings that have those sharp vertical lines within the leaf veins as I showed in the first photo. Usually, these two features, (among others, such as sloppy crossbone and skull details), will all be found together on these strange, and obviously cast TK rings. These are my honest thoughts, and in my opinion, like it is with any other rare and expensive SS item, fakes are everywhere and true mint originals are very hard to find.

Chris


Chris,

You are correct, the reference to "craters" is in Craig's book, page 21, photos of Brumm ring.
I really don't know where to start from, but I'll try to make another post using common sense and pictures/comparisons against the usual ?unfounded opinions? offered from the other side.

First of all: if you want do discuss an argument you should first answer with documented replies to all the questions raised.
And this should be made using: PERIOD DOCUMENTATION (I repeat: I've never seen any document posted talking about the ?die striking? method in period jewelry magazines...), pictures for comparisons and, if needed, scientifical data.
Of course, until today, nothing was ever answered to, nor posted by those supporting the ?die striking? theory.

Second: when you talk about rings you should at least post good pictures and make comparisons with other rings of the same period or the same production period.

Third: opinions of jewelers, friends, fathers, ?experts?, worth like a piece of used toilet paper. Or we discuss on evidences, or we speculate. And to be honest I really don't care anymore of what you, your father, my father, my friends, my jeweler or myself think about rings. I only want to discuss EVIDENCES. Words/opinions are not, so I'm not interested on them.


Fourth: here we start discussing Chris' ring.

As you can see Chris' ring show a different position of external design if compared with other 21.6.44 rings or other (as he called them) ?standard? (????) rings.

Fig 1: Note the position of the leaves and note the long scooping along the runic panel. As we already know no one die struck item needs hand finishing with chisels or other tools.

Fig 2: Another 21.6.44 dated ring (Voss)

Fig 3: A third 21.6.44 Ring ?Richter?.

Attached picture 1.jpg
Attached picture 2.jpg
Attached picture 3.jpg
Second point: Some problematic flaws visible on Chris ring... Better pictures I'm sure would reveal much more...

Fig. 4, 5, 6, 7

Attached picture 4.jpg
Attached picture 5.jpg
Attached picture 6.jpg
Attached picture 7.jpg
Third point: A very interesting flaw present on Chris ring, and a typical characteristic of casting production. A very small metallic protusion on the upper edge.
This is perfectly matching with the other TK rings, and TOTALLY uncompatible with the die striking process, since this protusion extends exactly in the opposite direction to the direction of die movement.
Of course there is an explanation also for this flaw no one ever noticed in all these decades... Ad of course the explanation has nothing in common with die striking or die pressing production.

Fig. 8 Chris ring

Fig. 9 - Hartmann

Fig. 10 - Reebmann

Attached picture 8.jpg
Attached picture 9.jpg
Attached picture 10.jpg
Fourth point: another very interesting flaw I can notice in Chris' ring. Some small flaws in the internal of the ring... Alse these flaws are matching with cast original TK rings...
So, or Chris ring is a fake (and having no documented provenance it could be...), or it is a prefect fine original, with all the perfect characteristics a cast original TK ring should have.

Fig. 11, 12, 13 Chris Ring

Fig. 14 (Z.)

Attached picture 11.jpg
Attached picture 12.jpg
Attached picture 13.jpg
Attached picture 14.jpg
PS: I no argue about the skull, since it is well known eyes sockets of the skull can show flaws exactly as they not. We have tens of documented original TK rings with flaws on eyes sockets. A personal statement like the one made from Chris on these flaws is only a personal speculation, without any proof and I would say it also is offensive in regards of the documented ones and their stories and of those owning original TK rings with these characteristics. A statement a serious collector would have never written.

Attached picture S7302195_1.jpg
Attached picture S7302195_DUSKOW_1.jpg
Attached picture S7300113_1.jpg
Attached picture r6_1.jpg
Well, we can agree to disagree here, as we all have our own opinions. That is all that any of us have, opinions that are based on facts and observations that we have made over the years of studying them. Unfortunately, we will never reach an agreement on this topic, I'm afraid, but I wish you good luck with your project.

Chris
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/30/2020 08:00 PM
ok,, some photos and theory/opinion!

, Chris don't know if you know the other 21-6-44 rings,,,but would you consider what you see , them to be authentic?

Antonio,, these photos are interesting.. Some who show the real extreme magnification just don't do it for me. But these are helpful.
Gaspare, I don't think that I understand your question. Which rings are you referring to? Thanks!

Chris
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/30/2020 08:55 PM
his photo number 2 Voss and 3 Richter ,,both same date as yours....

Really,, I was hoping to show HR of the same date and condition.. To show a standard.. IF ,if they are pressed from a die they would all be exactly the same with the exception of some small embellishments... Hapurs die struck rings come out of the press needing no work if I'm correct.. Should be the same with these.
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/30/2020 08:57 PM
Photo credit = Martin Toman



Here is another 21-6-44 . Gies ring

Attached picture IMG_20200330_0001.jpg
Attached picture IMG_20200330_0002.jpg
It is extremely difficult for anyone to make an accurate judgment by photos only, especially when they are not of great quality, and even more so, if the ring is worn significantly. I will say that in my opinion, the Gies ring that you posted has a real good chance. I like what I can see and I see nothing wrong with it from those photos. This is my opinion.

Chris
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/31/2020 02:45 AM
Chris,,Members...
See what I'm after is some sort of a standardization [if possible].. If there ever is going to be a big market again for these rings there must be a way for authentication..

What I would say is -

1-,,,there is a big difference between the early and later pattern. Big difference is the shape of the band. Early is flatter,,later, more convex outer shape.
2- that just by coloring and wear characteristics there is also a difference between the material alloy of a early and later pattern.
3 - Both rings appear to be a band with a separate skull soldered on.
4 - The early pattern [33 to 39] does not have the flaw at the bottom of the Left Sig rune. Only 40 to 44 does.
5- The early pattern the swastica has a more squat or elongated appearance.
6- There seems to be more hand work done on the later patterns.

Members whether you want to discuss something else here thats fine,,,BUT, can we at least agree to the 6 points above? And,,if you are aware of other points that should be added please add them here. Thank you..
I agree with all of your points, (except that I can't confirm or deny #2, as I only paid attention to the 40's style rings).

I would add, #7: All original 40's style rings have a sloped/angled skull when viewed from the top or bottom, (ring laying down flat on the table, and you are looking straight down on it).

#8: There were three different engravers that engraved the originals, each having a slightly unique and distinguishable appearance, (sometimes in size), while each engraver still used similar styles of blade strokes to make each of the similar letters and numbers.

#9: Heinrich Himmler is rolling in his grave, due to the fact that all of us are making such a big deal out of collecting his beloved TK rings.

Chris
Posted By: Tanker Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/31/2020 03:14 PM
Gaspare
I agree on the 6 points

Chris
You sure have that right on #9!

I am not sure of Antonio's motives. On the extreme close ups, I think the visual intent is lost. He sure is obsessive in his study of these "flaws". If he has the time and money to pursue this, then go for it. We indeed may never know the true answer on the production of these rings. My own opinion is to enjoy the collecting of them and history associated. What ever your position is, accept it and realize there will be differences of opinions. There is nothing wrong with that .
My opinion for whatever it is worth:)
Ron
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 03/31/2020 06:44 PM
and in early type of 30s , too was many hand works )))
Originally Posted by SScollector
Well, we can agree to disagree here, as we all have our own opinions. That is all that any of us have, opinions that are based on facts and observations that we have made over the years of studying them. Unfortunately, we will never reach an agreement on this topic, I'm afraid, but I wish you good luck with your project.

Chris


Hello,

first my apologies for my absense in a debate that involved myself a lot in the past, mainly on WAF.

I see that positions didn't change, so we still have die cast supporters and die press supporters.

I belong to die press party and all arguments offered by die cast supporters never changed my position.

So waiting for evidences that still I don't see.......like already said by Chris : we can agree to disagree.

Ric





Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 04/04/2020 02:04 AM

Ric,, Antonio posts on the prior page [21] are VERY interesting.

He is showing rings of the same date/year yet there are too many differences to all be from the same die..

I know 100% most PP rings were made from a die. Simple, easy on labor and procedure, less waste, good profits... But the HR IS a different animal especially the later pattern.. Don't think we're going to find period proof the HR was die struck. Mainly because the secrecy involved with the ring and that Himmler wanted something special,,,but we'd all love to see something, anything on them being struck..



Ric., so what do you think about the '6 points' above and the addition Chris added.?


G,

after a debate over the past year, with tons of pics showing casting evidences versus opinions built over the years by comparing original rings with repro ones to support die press theory, I sincerely think that the more we debate arounds microscope pics the more everyone stay on their own position.

I have no reasons to believe to theory that Gahr used a revolutionay way of production dedicated to SSHr just because ordered by Himmler.
In my opinion Gahr made his rings by the way which granted the best quality...so die pressing them.

Ric
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 04/06/2020 01:52 AM
Ric, Thats fine..

Ric, and other members that maybe did not see the post;

what I'm after is some sort of a standardization [if possible].. If there ever is going to be a big market again for these rings there must be a way for authentication..

1-,,,there is a big difference between the early and later pattern. Big difference is the shape of the band. Early is flatter,,later, more convex outer shape.
2- that just by coloring and wear characteristics there is also a difference between the material alloy of a early and later pattern.
3 - Both rings appear to be a band with a separate skull soldered on.
4 - The early pattern [33 to 39] does not have the flaw at the bottom of the Left Sig rune. Only 40 to 44 does.
5- The early pattern the swastica has a more squat or elongated appearance.
6- There seems to be more hand work done on the later patterns.

and Chris /SS Collector added these:
"I would add, #7: All original 40's style rings have a sloped/angled skull when viewed from the top or bottom, (ring laying down flat on the table, and you are looking straight down on it)."
#8: There were three different engravers that engraved the originals, each having a slightly unique and distinguishable appearance, (sometimes in size), while each engraver still used similar styles of blade strokes to make each of the similar letters and numbers."

Members whether you want to discuss something else here thats fine,,,BUT, can we at least agree to the 6 points above? And,,if you are aware of other points that should be added please add them here. Thank you..
G.,

Although debate around "the way Gahr made them" raised a bit of confusion and tend to disorientate new comers on what-to-look-at to distinguish a good one from a repro, I notice that consensus about textbook rings originality is still easily reached by some known SSHr collectors.
On the other end, heavily worn or ground dug rings with erased engraving may represent an issues to authenticators, if they must judge them by pics alone.

I guess that in the future it will happen what already seen on almost all militaria artifacts, textbook rings will have no issues to raise interest, while problematic rings will be discharged.

Of course super fake still remain the actual issue.....because few people had a chance to check one of them in hands.

To end, your six points are absolutely correct and represents a basis knowledge to begin with

Ric
Posted By: hapur Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 04/22/2020 11:17 AM
This discussion like is useless. Every few years shows up somebody why wants to push cast rings as originals and starts new discussion about manufacturing methods. I remember at least three discussions like this here on this forum.

In short - Rule of thumb - Germans at this time frame did not use any other manufacturing method but die striking for mass produced rings, second - Otto Gahr firm did use only die striking (there are no known Gahr's products made by casting.)

Long version - everything in details has been said here in previous discussions here more than 10 years ago.
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 04/23/2020 02:25 AM
I agree 100% As far as most PP rings there is nothing better than a die and a press. Less material waste, better product, less waste of manpower, most efficient..
But the HR for sure isn't the standard PP ring. I'm thinking in the least the 2nd type is unorthodox in some way.. Antonio made some good points in his last posts [pg21]. Guess they were either ignored by most not bothered to be read or there was just no comment..
I think Antonio has found some interesting things hopefully we'll be seeing soon..

I disagree with your rule of thumb. Gahr did cast. Nazi pole tops was but one of their cast items. As far as PP rings,,true most pressed with a die. But there were other unorthodox methods used. These methods weren't popular, didn't last long, some very complicated and soon forgotten but they were tried and rings produced.

Attached picture IMG_20200330_0003b.jpg
Posted By: hapur Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 04/23/2020 08:14 AM
Originally Posted by Gaspare


I disagree with your rule of thumb. Gahr did cast. Nazi pole tops was but one of their cast items.


Casting aluminum is completely different story. Different technology and completely different equipment involved. Still have not seen any cast jewelry piece from Gahr.

Originally Posted by Gaspare


But there were other unorthodox methods used. These methods weren't popular, didn't last long, some very complicated and soon forgotten but they were tried and rings produced.


If you refer to pic you posted in previous post it is not unorthodox process it was common thing for die struck production. I also do use it for some signet ring manufacturing on regular basis

P.S. I would love to learn about "complicated and forgotten methods" smile Please point direction where to look for them.
As usual, nothing new. Many questions, with evidences are posted in this thread, and no one answer from die striking supporters. Of course, ignore everything is not the best way to be believable, anyway you can go on with the head under the sand...

Is under everyone's eyes that they have nothing to say, they simply can't answer in a logic way point by point. And we are not talking about microscopic pictures, we are simply talking about evidences (like distance of leaves-ring edge, hand workings,...) no one has ever pointed out since now. This discussion shows elements NO ONE has ever investigate before. And instead try to understand why, you simply write some non senses. But that's a well known behaviour.

It is clear you don't want talk on ring, simply keep your eyes closed and go on. If you really wanted to discuss this matter, then you should have posted documented answers as I did.

Let me say one think: period sources confirm rings were mostly cast - comparisons show differences totally uncompatible with die stricking theory - hand working is uncompatible with die stricking theory - casting flaws are uncompatible with die stricking theory.

Furthermore: you NEVER, NEVER posted ANY: evidence, period source (I repeat: period sources DON'T show die striking/pressing but almost only CASTING production processes for jewelry and bijouterie).


Below you can clearly see the differences between an assumption of revealed truth (without any document, reference, proof and logic...) and what really period documents say. Be smart guys, if you don't want to live with the head under the sand, open up your eyes!

Attached picture Hap1_0.jpg
Attached picture Hap1_0_1.jpg
Attached picture Hap_1.jpg
Attached picture Hap_31.jpg
Posted By: Tanker Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 04/23/2020 03:44 PM
Antonio Scapini
I wish you would post without the condescending tone/attitude. I know you write a lot in your postings and some may be good but when I see the "holier than thou" tone and unwillingness to see a different side just makes folks not take the time time to fully comprehend your intent.
I may be wrong but this is just my opinion and how I view it.
Ron
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 04/23/2020 04:35 PM
One question to Hapur
How many time you hold in ur hands, original rings ?
IMO no one :)
And I agree with Antonio, you cant give to us any proff about that Otto Gahr made sshr with die struck method, this is just ur own idea without any real facts )))
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 04/23/2020 06:08 PM
- The fact is that Gahr had the capability to cast and did. And, we really don't know what he made. The Gahr silversmith book is not a catalog of his work and erroneously leads collectors to think the SS culture mark is a Gahr hallmark when it is not!

- As far as other methods. The ad I posted produces a hollow band ring, not a standard method.. Antonio shows a hodge podge of methods in his posts including cast ring method. These and more are in the period trade guild booklets for engravers, Goldsmiths/Silversmiths and enamelers...
- It is true though,,most PP rings were done with drawn silver, in a press, with a die,,to me the best,easiest,most profitable method back then.

Something is unorthodox going on at the least with the 2nd type. .
As Evgeniy mentions. To date here or anywhere no one has offered one bit of proof or even a explanation on how the HR was made and why the discrepancies in like rings!. . Antonio has provided something at least..

Opinions are great guys,,and we know most PP rings are pressed. The HR is not PP. Yes mass produced but made for no profit, not advertised, like year rings with discrepancies..
Originally Posted by Tanker
Antonio Scapini
I wish you would post without the condescending tone/attitude. I know you write a lot in your postings and some may be good but when I see the "holier than thou" tone and unwillingness to see a different side just makes folks not take the time time to fully comprehend your intent.
I may be wrong but this is just my opinion and how I view it.
Ron

I'm sorry Ron you read my post in this way.

I simply posted 2 screenshots with categorical sentences: "Made exactly same way as Gahr did" and "All germann WW2 rings are die struck" and one pictures with a "collage" about what really period sources said.
And IMO it is absolutely funny to see someone supporting something without any evidence.
No offence, simply a funny picture to highlight the difference between a nonsense and a real evidence. I don't trust nonsenses, I prefere a solid rock proof. And the evidece says: most of TR rings were cast.
Anyone of us can believe to a theory without any sense and proof, or to start making some questions.

Ask a die stricking supporter to show you some comparisons, and you'll find out he has never made a decent one.

My posts wanted simply to raise some questions, this was the purpose, but you can clearly see the silence, lack of knowledge, of the die sticking supporters. Many questions, no one answer.
The truth is that I have so much data in my files, that I could post them for months. And the way a TK ring is made has really something "unhorthodox" (as Gaspare already said many times), but part of this "unhortodox" method was also used for other rings production... of course everything is written in period sources (and this is important), exactly those period sources the die stricking supporters have never read. They said so much nonsenses, from the elongated symbols due to the rounding of the flat band, to the multiple dies of a die pressing machine. They cannot answer to any question, they have no proofs, but they KNOW (HOW?!?!?!?) TK rings were die pressed (or die struck?).

Posted By: Tanker Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 04/23/2020 10:20 PM
No problem Antonio, I just read it the wrong way. That is the trouble with electronic media. The intent/feelings are difficult to convey.
Ron
Originally Posted by hapur

In short - Rule of thumb - Germans at this time frame did not use any other manufacturing method but die striking for mass produced rings, second - Otto Gahr firm did use only die striking (there are no known Gahr's products made by casting.)

Long version - everything in details has been said here in previous discussions here more than 10 years ago.


3 statements, 3 big falsities.
2 of them dismissed with a simply collage of period documents.
The last fake information is: "there are no Gahr's products made by casting".

Here we go: dagger/sword parts in Silber or Neusilber / Thorhammer in Silber (Guss) - Werkverzeichnis Nr. 16 - / Ehering mit Runen (not the famous TK ring) in Silber / Necklace pendant in Silber or Gold (Gegossen) - Werkverzeichnis Nr. 27 -. (Do you know the difference between "Guss" and "Gegossen"?)
Some reference to my statement can be found in "Otto und Karolina Gahr, die Silberschmiede der NSDAP und der SS".

THIS IS THE WAY I THINK IS THE ONLY POSSIBLE:
Good statement = verifiable proof.
Nonsense = no proof, no reference, no period source.

So Hapur, how can it be possible you made 3 statements and all 3 are falsities? You is one of those repeated these falsities for years and years...
How can we believe what you and the die stricking supporters like Ric say, if you write falsities, nonsenses, totally invented methods, childish mistakes and so on?

Don't you think it is time to move a step back and try have a serious discussion?
Posted By: JR Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 04/24/2020 01:02 PM

Antonio has undertaken a serious in-dept study on these rings, and backed it up by scientific evidence to show the same. Time and again he has demonstrated a multitude of casting flaws and dependencies and explained how each vary, from ring to ring. On the other side of the discussion there has been nothing: no manufacturing evidence, no answers to Antonio's questions when asked, no lab scope study, no ring composition study, no experts in the science world, or no jeweler expertise. The die press proponents have presenting nothing other than: "they are die pressed or die struck, because I said so". OK, show us how these rings can be manufactured under striking or pressing, and explain the reason why every single example is different?
Posted By: Mikee Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 04/24/2020 10:28 PM
JR, I have to agree because of the evidence shown, So far the evidence leans heavily on Antonio side imo..It really does look like these HR rings were NOT struck or pressed. Casted and hand finished, Thanks to all for the discussion and to Antonio. I wont say what type of ring, but I wish I can get my hands on it because it looks like the same or very close to same type of process as the HR. I have noticed it for many years. Best!
Just to update the IMO VERY INTERESTING questions and the answers we got:

1) Which evidences do you have to believe rings are die struck?
(Best answer: there is not, but we think so...)

2) Why there is a so much variable distance between leaves and the edge of the ring band if the dies for the die struck rings are "female" and the distance between leaves and edge of the band in die struck rings is always the same? (see post #345367#345367)
(Best answer: Gahr invented a multiple dies system with multiple die for die stricking...)

3) How can it be possible not only the different distance between leaves and edge, but also some big flaws? (see post #345423#345423)
(Best answer: none)

4) How can it be possible to obtain variations in the external design with the die stricking process? (see post #345798#345798 picture 2)
(Best answer: none)

5) Why each ring shows unique features, while die stricking rings are all, always perfectly matching? (see post #345799#345799 pictures 1, 2)
(Best answer: none)

6) Why mint (or in good condition) rings show big flaws, totally uncompatible with the die stricking production process? (see post #345799 pictures 3, 4, 5) ? (see also the metallic protusions showed on posts #346180#346180)
(Best answer: none)

7) Why so much hand tooling on TK rings if they were die struck? Why Hapur (and all the rest too!!) die struck rings (and not only rings!) don't show ANY hand finish on them? (see post #345797#345797)
(Best answer: none)

8) How many different types of hand tooling we can find on TK rings?
(Best answer: none)
See attached picture: many, many, rings (especially '30, but '40 too!) show hand toolings like those showed on picture. Can Hapur or Ric replicate in a die struck ring this, and explain which tools are needed, the meaning and the utility of a sokind and of so much work? Never seen in all my life ANY die struck item (badge, ring, ornament,...) with scooping marks like those.


I would like you, die stricking supporters, could elaborate and post a serious, documented answer using also PERIOD documentation.
I would be happy simply reading a documented answer for only one of all these questions.
Each one of the above questions is alone enough to dismiss the die stricking theory.

Oh, these are only the beginning, MUCH MORE important questions can follow...

PS: if you say in the past these rings were studied, compared... Why have we never read any answer to all these questions?

Attached picture Tools.jpg
Posted By: hapur Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 05/13/2020 12:28 PM
My last post in this thread

Originally Posted by Gaspare


- As far as other methods. The ad I posted produces a hollow band ring, not a standard method..


Ad you showed does not make hollow ring , it makes heavily "plated" gold ring. Idea is brass core inside, gold tube outside, after die strike we have "thick goldplated" layer arround brass ring which is much more wear resistant than any plating.
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 05/14/2020 01:01 PM
H. , the ad does say on it 'Sole Producer' , 'Only sold to wholesalers'. There were other ways to plate jewelry and there are rings that appear solid that have a hollow band core,,, that was my point really and trying to relate to the Honor Ring and unorthodoxy..

Too bad about it being your last post on the topic.. I'm pretty sure most of us would have rather you to comment on the HR since you make them and make your HRs an old way on original equipment etc.
I'm not taking sides but you offered no theory ,idea etc. only that 'thats how rings were made. In fact in this topic and all others around the internet there is not one person that can offer why the discrepancies in HRs made the same year and even the same date in band!. That is what this topic was for and as much as I'd like to see something about a die and press we see nothing but 'thats how rings were made' by those who like/support the idea.. Antonio right or wrong [we'll see] at least offered photos and explanation,questions to ponder.

Economics,,profit, material, labor saving etc. Yes what our PP rings were made to do,,make a profit for the maker/retailer.... BUT, the HR is not sold, had only one maker. Complexity didn't seem to matter. A few thousand made and given away!,,and IF you wore it out you would get another! Hopefully one day something period will surface or some real scientific research that will explain things..,
Thanks to all who contributed /posted here!.,Gaspare
This thread offered an overview on the TK rings world, where, when you start studying the matter, you clearly understand that ALL what is asserted in this field, is asserted without any proof and without any common sense.
Furthermore it is clear how it is not possible to have a real discussion with the die striking supporters, since (even if they are less than a handful remaining) they have nothing to say.
Sorry, they have something to say, but actually it is something totally absurd and invented like this:

Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
Gahr probably invented a way to stamp several rings at one time, so to allow many dies working contemporarily, increasing production as requested by Berlin.


They really have no idea of what they are talking about:

Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
I do not know the reason why some SSHr show different distance of leaves from edge band, probably because Gahr made different female dies having a different distance of leaves from edge band.


But they know the rings were die struck...

Originally Posted by hapur
Germans at this time frame did not use any other manufacturing method but die striking for mass produced rings, second - Otto Gahr firm did use only die striking (there are no known Gahr's products made by casting.)


How they know this it's a mystery... since period books, magazines, sources says exactly the contrary. But they know that and of course they firmly support each other:

Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
Well, I believe SSHr were made by pressing a blank planchet into a die, the same way Hapur make his SSHr repro.....to be clear.


Why they believe so, is still a mistery.

And when they fall silent in front of evidences and questions they cannot answer to, then or they stop talking, or they try to move the discussion on personal attack:

Originally Posted by wotan
developing and defending the -casting theory- serve two directions: The making money with -the new theory- and finally making money with fakes that suddenly became originals due to the settlement of the crude casting theory.



To be honest at the beginning of this discussion I didn't hope or think we could have an answer from them. We know they cannot answer to any of the previous questions, even if they said they are open to discuss. But there's nothing to discuss if you have nothing to offer but your opinion sold like a revealed truth.

I'll be happy to discuss, but I (and all we reading here) need to know the answers to the questions I made! Otherwise the only thing we can discuss on is: speculation - but an opinion without any proof is not something I'm interested by (especially if they are totally invented ones like those quoted above).

It is clear you have no idea on the manufacturing processes, nor on how they were developed and made during the Third Reich era. It is clear you never read any period document, any jewerly manual. It is also clear you never made any deep comparison between 2-3-4-5-10-10-50 rings! Exactly what I did in these last 3 years.
All what I wrote is under everyone's eye. And that's only the very beginning.

Last thing: I NEVER, NEVER mentioned anything about the production process used by Gahr, I only tried to reason togheter studying the comparisons.
Here I can only say one thing about the process Gahr used: it was NOT die striking, NOR die casting, and the proofs are so much that simply reading the questions I wrote above, both those processes would immediately be discharged even by a child.

At this point for you (die striking supporters) I think now it is not a matter of science or logic, it is not important to really find out the truth for the collectors community, but it is simply a matter of standing on your position until the end, and never accept anything that goes against your opinions, even if they are totally fake, simply because it is too hard to say: "I was wrong" or "Antonoio's questions have something we never investigate before, let's open our minds!". I know you don't like me, but this is NOT MY OPINION, these data I show are real, solid evidences everyone can search, see and find by himself!
Anyway this means if the TK rings will turn out to be cast, they will be clearly not able to distinguish a cast from a die struck piece... Very sad conclusion for such kind of ring experts.

Anyway, if you still want to have a serious discussion, I'm still here, ready to read serious answers and ready to share some more interesting things.
Posted By: wotan Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 05/20/2020 02:48 PM
Hello Mr. Antonio Scarpini!
I did not intend to write any more in this thread but as you do cite me and especially as you do see this as a personal attack I feel the necessity to react. First I want to apologize for the cited passage written by me! Due to certain actions in different forums I did have this personal impression but finally no proof for it. In the meanwhile I think these are fair-minded attempts fom you due to you personal observations and personal interpretations. Anyway this was really no acceptable kind of communication from my side, so again I apologize.
Perhaps the wrong impression did arise as it looks like you also don?t read well meant hints or even explanations to at least one of your questions. Proof: In my post #345528 I clearly did refer to (and explain) what you now again show in your post #346563 (cit. post #345528: Eg. the "signs" in post #345525 do show -by experts and skilled workers- well known "Tremblieren" (this is a technical term from engravers) which either can be done by purpose or develops by chance and has not the least to do with a casting process.).

I am pretty sure if we could lead a discussion face to face, show in hands by certain rings what we are meaning, what experiences we have made and how the one and the other question can be answered we would not lead such a lengthy written, immobile discussion but would very quick come to a result.
I am not the one to educate or convince you or others, each collector has to make his homework and draw his own conclusions. Even more -imho- it is not good to write all down in public as the fakers do read with us.

But be sure there is at least one counterargument/explanation against each question you arise or each argument you set for another kind of manufacturing than die stamping. Eg. the -for you- ongoing and unanswered question -why there is so much variable distance between leaves and the edge of the ring band- can be easily explained when you know and understand the whole manufacturing process in it s steps and the tools of the time. But again, I am not the one to educate or convince you or others.

I do not want to get into a further discussion in this manufacturing the TKrings matter because my knowledge of the English language is not good enough to lead such discussion in technical matters. Btw, this might be also the reason for the fact that there is not much response to your long contributions and questions, not the lack of knowledge, argument or proofs. But I keep my personal standards to distinguish between original TKrings and faked ones.
Regards,
Glad you wrote and I'm absolutely ready to take your apoligize.
I prefere discuss as friends instead start useless wars.
That said I agree a discussion face to face would be much more easier and faster, but we can't...

About your answer on post #345528 (Eg. the "signs" in post #345525) I disagree. The reason is quite simple: show us another die struck ring, with all those scooping marks. They (scooping marks) are totally useless, and they need an enormous waste of time to be made. Furthermore the hand finish on rings is sometimes so deep, that with a hand burin would take really an incredible waste of time. And this is absolutely a nonsense if you made a die struck/die cast piece! Die stricking, as die casting, are made to have a finished item in hand, not an item that needs hours and hours of work! Those hand made scooping marks were made for another reason, and you can find the answer ONLY and EXCLUSIVELY if you find a '30 style ring without any hand working on it. If you see it, then you immediately understand when and why those scooping marks were made. And the answer is: they were not made by a burin, nor "Tremblieren" as you said (anyway feel free to post a "Tremblieren" engraving on a ring like those we see on TK rings, so we all can see what you mean).
I can also add another thing: the analysys made with SEM clearly indicate those were NOT burin/chisels scooping marks made on metal. And this is another important point.

About the answers to the questions I made I'm 100% sure there are no explanations that fit with the die striking/die casting theories.
I know the methods used the Third Reich era, they are all written in period sources (as I showed when I replied to Hapur and his stattement about "the only method used by germans"). Die striking and die casting used female dies that have an unvariable width and thickness. It is totally uncompatible with cutting a part of the external design (leaves and runes) as we see in some rings.

Exactly as it is absolutely impossible to obtain round flaws, or round protusions where the die hit the metal straight (and "cut" it). This is very simple to uderstand.

See the following pictures: what you see is impossible to obtain with a die struck process. Otherwise I'm ready to see other die struck items with round protusions like those I showed.
Usually if we see flaws like those in a ring, we would immediately say "cast fake"!

And believe me, this is only the very, very beginning. There is so much info I can't share here, that only half of them would be enough to dismiss EVERYTHING we thought to know about these rings.


I also think collectors should know how these rings were made and that is correct to share the new discoveries.

Attached picture Senza titolo-2_1.jpg
Attached picture 31958403_1859337854109774_370277750587523072_n1.jpg
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 05/20/2020 08:00 PM
We are men here, language barriers sometimes get taken as insults. Sometimes it is just frustration that leads to not being able to explain and it seems like an insult..
I have great respect for Wotan and Antonio,,,and the rest of the members here. This can be tough camp. We can be opinionated but like I said we are men and can take it. We all have the same passion here,,collecting 3rd reich jewelry..

- OK,,We have a problem with the HR. For many YEARS Don Boyle has said they are die struck. For years he's said he'd never certify a HR without seeing it in hand.. The 2nd we know,,he has certified HRs without seeing them in hand. The first,,it seems he has certified HRs that are not die struck. Dons book was revolutionary for the time and still has some great info in it but clearly we need something to go with the new generation of collectors.

Most aficionados go with,,'hey most 3rd reich rings were from a die and so why not the HR'. Well, JR, our CZ Rep members, Antonio and others believe they are not die struck. And,,Antonio has been going to great lengths to explain without giving away his work from his book project. There are still questions. but so far only Antonio has been trying to show why his opinion is the way..

Guys,,I know the counterfeiters read these forums. It doesn't mean we stop,,it means we get better. IF no new info about the HR comes out the market will be dead. No one will want these things. There will be HR with Dons certs that look struck and HRs with certs that the Hr is obviously cast. Things must change if the market is ever to be trusted again. Antonio has just shown some interesting photos. His last group of photos also interesting. So far no one is stepping up to explain or refute with any kind of proof. Time will tell gentleman...,G.
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 05/22/2020 09:13 AM
I think rings was made something like mine rings , here https://youtu.be/aIHF9P-9fwU
stages of my production (casting in the mold is not removed, because it?s very inconvenient to remove, but I?ll remove it later too)
Idiots setuation, I cant correct insert link, just make copy and past link
Evgenyi, that method cannot explain many points I already mentioned. One for example is the famous distance between leaves and ring band edge.

Anyway, please pay attention of what follows, I'd like to share a couple of other interesting points that were never investigated before (actually nothing on these rings was ever investigated to be honest!).

We know the famous "flaws" on runic panels.

1) Focus on the "Sig" runic panel, where, under the rune is "missing" a piece of metal. We know this flaw "appeared" in 1940 (I know the exact date when it appeared). We know the die used was the same from 1938 to 1944. So: if the ring was die struck or die cast, how can it be possible this?
Here's Hapur video on making a die struck ring. The die is "female", and a protusion on the die makes a recess on the ring (like the one under the "Sig" rune). Very simple.
But if we know the die used was always the same, you clearly understand it is not possible to add any piece of metal on it to generate a protusion on the die with the aim of creating a recess on the ring.

2) Another point: look at the pictures below, smudges are visible even in worn rings. But if these rings were die struck, who was that idiot engraver that made a steel die with all those useless smudges (typical of casting process), instead making a well made (and much more easy to do!!!) design (like Hapur did for example!)?
Have you ever seen a die struck ring or badge, or item, with those smudges? If you have, please, show it to me too.

Food for brain guys... If we really want investigate these rings, we have to stop thinking as we did before. wink

Attached picture 31958403_4.jpg
Attached picture 31958403_3.jpg
Attached picture 31958403_2.jpg
Attached picture 31958403_5.jpg
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 05/23/2020 07:49 AM
my video shouldn?t explain anything, it?s just information, for those who do not particularly understand or have not seen this process, I?m not going to wonder how and what was done until there are documents on how it was done, the production nuances will remain in doubt, but I I?m sure of one thing that it was a casting method, so far I see the arguments in favor of this method and the most important one is that all rings and skulls have differences, traces of manual refinement are visible, which are not possible in case of ring champagne
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 05/25/2020 06:27 PM
Wow, all I can say is that IF, if that '43' ring shown right above was shown around there wouldn't have been one person that would have said it was authentic!!
My have things changed! . Really hoping Antonios project will put some conclusions out there!

Evgeniy,, your reproduction HR is a beauty.. So is Hapurs in its own righ..t. 2 really nice looking copy rings [probably the 2 best out there!] and both made totally different!

* Have a good Memorial Day guys!!!!, fly those flags!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Originally Posted by Gaspare
Wow, all I can say is that IF, if that '43' ring shown right above was shown around there wouldn't have been one person that would have said it was authentic!!


I agree with you my friend.
But actually one person at least said that is possible to obtain a result like that with die striking: Ric Ferrari.

Just for fun I post a screenshot of a 2 years ago discussion.

I would like to read some Ric's answers again...

Attached picture SnapCrab_NoName_2020-5-27_16-30-41_No-00_1.jpg
Originally Posted by Antonio Scapini
Originally Posted by Gaspare
Wow, all I can say is that IF, if that '43' ring shown right above was shown around there wouldn't have been one person that would have said it was authentic!!


I agree with you my friend.
But actually one person at least said that is possible to obtain a result like that with die striking: Ric Ferrari.

Just for fun I post a screenshot of a 2 years ago discussion.

I would like to read some Ric's answers again...


Hello Antonio,

thank you to promo my position by quoting all my past statements.

I appreciate your effort to prove casting theory is correct, but it seems many collectors disagree with you and they still consider it absurd (me included).

So far nobody is able to definitively prove the actual way Gahr produced SSHr, but if flooding Forums with tons of microscope pics, Xray analysis, lab reports, ecc. may help you to promo your theory?.that's fine with me, but I still remain on die press theory.

Ric Ferrari
Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
Hello Antonio,

thank you to promo my position by quoting all my past statements.

I appreciate your effort to prove casting theory is correct, but it seems many collectors disagree with you and they still consider it absurd (me included).


I've never mention anything about "my" theory (that, I repeat, is not "my", it is simply what real data say).
Many? You and Hapur it's not so "many".... It's only two, and two that posted nothing but invented methods or fake statements (see posts above). Not really something "serious" or believable.

Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
So far nobody is able to definitively prove the actual way Gahr produced SSHr, but if flooding Forums with tons of microscope pics, Xray analysis, lab reports, ecc. may help you to promo your theory?.that's fine with me, but I still remain on die press theory.
Ric Ferrari


So far YOU are not able to tell a single word about your theory.

At the beginning of this discussion you said:

Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
two opinions/theories (stamped or cast) are still on the table and no definitive proofs supporting one of them have been provided.
That being said, the discussion is still open to any serious contribute.....


Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari
I accept your offer of a serious discussion


So far you NEVER replied to any question. Which kind of serious discussion is this if you don't answer anything?
There are tens of evidences posted in this thread that are uncompatible with the die stricking /die casting theories. Tens you ignored (just to mention one the BIG flaw under the Sig rune, but also this, this, this and much much more - and they are no microscopic pictures, no x-ray, no lab reports - in the case you didn't notice it, they are simply normal pictures and normal questions...).

All these evidences are totally uncompatible with the die striking/die casting theories. And if they are uncompatible, logic and common sense tell us the method used was nor die striking, nor die casting. Quite simple, or not?
But if you think they are compatible, can you tell us how?

You asked for a "serious discussion", so when do we start it?
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 12/18/2020 06:36 PM
Link credit WAF:

Well Antonio has found something interesting.....

https://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/fo...rum/11992216-the-totenkopfring-big-fraud
Originally Posted by Gaspare
Link credit WAF:

Well Antonio has found something interesting.....

https://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/fo...rum/11992216-the-totenkopfring-big-fraud

Very interesting, been following that ,

So can we now say Antonio is now the ‘gold standard’ / Authority when it comes to Authenticate honor rings ?

I feel he is , too many doubts and evidence to unfortunately show DB has been authenticating fake honor rings ,

For a ring worth thousands of dollars..
Posted By: Gaspare Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 12/19/2020 05:56 AM
well, can't speak for him,,but,,I don't think he's doing it to be a authenticator.... It is correct a wrong assumption..

The late great John Pepera also disagreed with Don .. John [with another member] had started his own research by doing metallurgical analysis of the HR. . Unfortunate the affordable 'science' we have available now wasn't there or affordable back then. That and John had other nazi regalia interests so he didn't get much further before he sadly passed away,,but he would have loved all this!..

We'll see what develops and maybe Antonio can give us an update here..
Posted By: Evgeniy Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 12/19/2020 09:34 AM
People are always prone to mistakes, it is better not to set idols for themselves, so as not to be disappointed later, the collective opinion (of experts) is always better (as it seems to me) in determining authenticity, so it is better not to elevate someone to the rank of "god". As we say, do not make yourself an idol. It is always better to do your homework and study the subject of purchase before buying something, and not spend money you do not know for what.
I like to give credit where credit is due , Antonio has so much for the Hobby , and sacrificed friendships for the cause ,

Of course I agree , We should all study these rings with what evidence has been put forward , and our own observations,

And acknowledge the individuals who have made not moved with the times ?
Thanks "The_Collector" for your kind words, really appreciated, but, as I always said, I don't want to be an "expert".
The best way is everyone of us can reach his own knowledge, that until today was (even if a total fake one!) "owned" by few, the "Gods".
When everyone has his knowledge, then we can discuss togheter, and that's the target of my efforts. Discuss togheter, where no one is more important than another. If there are no "experts", the knowledge is democratic. And this is the real victory.

If you simply read this thread you can clearly see there is no "discussion", because those following the "Gods" learned from them to obey, and the result is they are not able to put toghether a logical explanation and they need to invent absurd theories. This happens because knowledge was not democratic.

For those interested in TK rings I can tell you what I did: I applied the reverse engineering after I collected the first data obtained with comparisons - then I made some deep analysys.
But you no need microscopes or high technologies, you simply have to compare rings. This is the most basical procedure, but no one has ever made it. In decades I've NEVER seen a comparison made in a decent way. Have you ever asked yourself why? Because if you start to study and compare rings, in few days you can dismiss everything what the "experts" told you about them. The answers of the "experts" in this thread are the best proof.

And yes, I sacrificed friends, but I'm happy with this, since they clearly were not friends. A friend is open to discuss, an "enemy" doesn't want to do it. A smart guy is open to change his mind, an "expert" not, because he should admit he was wrong and if he was wrong, he was not an "expert".

Have a great Christmas guys!
Posted By: Dave Re: SS Totenkopf Honor Ring manufacture Debate - 12/20/2020 04:47 PM
Thanks, Antonio

Happy Christmas to you too.

Having a flexible mind - the ability to question and to evaluate new info - is necessary.

Dave
© Your new forums