This is certainly the topic of the month. So--Let's talk about these. They have been made for many years first appearing in the 60's I believe. The first ones though, were solid backed-not hollow in any way with no markings and no studs and quite heavy. They also had a dull gray finish or no finish. They were probably cast in sand from the imprint of an original. This was easy although some bought them thinking they were original.

Now we seem to have a new batch--but these are a lot different in that they have hollow backs and markings and some seem to have seams and some kind of hash marks. In addition-there are not that many around. I go to a lot of shows and have never seen one. Strange-one would think they would be everywhere.

There are a lot of questions here and I think many would like to know. Where do they come from? Who is making these? When did they first appear? What would be the expense involved in making a two piece mold? Why are they not everywhere? Why would they pick an obscure maker? -if they could make a two piece mold -they could make a good repro. What are those hash marks? Why are the studs on the backs of some tapered-while others have bolts?

????????????????????????

Ca'mon now-Do you want to talk relics or just want to bash someone? How do we even know these hollow backs are fake? What is the basis for this idea? Is this just opinion? What do we KNOW?

It would be interesting to display these repros side by side with a known good example at the SOS. I certainly understand the points JR has made as to how to identify these but I'm wondering just how much difference there is in quality here.
Jim

I think we have all seen differences in quality according to maker and in late vrs. early items. Is this difference in quality the only basis for this repro label? If so IMO this is NOT conclusive. Come on-what other proof do we have? Is all this controversy really justified? What do we KNOW?

I have a big ? If a original Wehog has not been found how can we call the ones today fake ?

They are saying look at the casting flaws,well I'm looking.And all I see is different quantity with the casters.

Tommy

Houston,

We know they existed in the period, we know there were several manufacturer's and different sizes, as well as stud placement's. There are varying degrees of casting quality per maker. But reference allthough more than we had is still not fully developed. The recast versions are just cheesy looking, and hold the same characteristic's as it's original maker to it's fake counterpart in regards to its form.

Even though there is new reference some birds do deviate in size and stud placement even under the same maker mark.

The bird in question is no doubt a reproduction, however I have seen 2 original 15 inch specimens that have been copied excessively and have been written off as fakes all together.

Information is limited, but what is currently available is decent, but as they continue to be studied, I see issues, as they do vary. And there will be arguments over legitimate and bogus eagles.

How hard is it to make a mold? well, I have 2 birds with one of the best machinists in the country at this very moment, and he is going over them, to see what degree of difficulty is involved in casting an undetectable fake, includeing the lugs.

The consensus on the cone shape pieces is that they were never tapped, these would also make casting a fake bird easier, as anybody can tap it with the proper equiptment.

As the reference on these continue, there are bound to be some mistakes as they are aluminum cast, but I shopped them for several years before I bought my first and it was hands down far superior to the one that has caused the melee in the community forum. Anyone can spot that bird, but then again? I guess not.

Kris

Kris:
This is one of the most interesting post I've read on this topic. I await further development on this issue from the caster.
Jim

Here is an eagle, although not WEHOG, I purchased sight-unseen. As soon as I received it, I was suspicious because of the lack of quality. After sending pictures to JR, he confirmed my suspicion and I immediately purchased his book. I was lucky enough to have dealt with someone who followed through with their guarantee and received a full refund.

Pic 2

Pic 3

Pic 4

Pic 5

Pic 6

Pic 7

Pic 8

Pic 9

Pic 10

Pic 11

Pic 12

Pic 13

Jim,

Yes, but let me clarify, he currently has the bird's to assess how hard it would be to do as close to a clone as possible. When I initially explained to him how they were made, the gentlemen's response was $30,000 to make the proper mold.

So, I bought the birds to him and showed them to him and explained that I wanted to know what technique would be necessary, what would it really cost? and can you get them to a degree where you cant tell the difference?. I also gave him Jr's book as a guide.

Obviously, if the cost is prohibitive, given the size's, makers, quality deviations. Then to recover that said amount would require throwing up a flag to recover the cost of just one mold,
one bird, in one size, and one maker, you would have to sell 100 at 300.00 a piece to cover that one mold as reproduction's. But only 20-30 as real. A lot of work for little return.


If it can be done? well there wont be a need to own a real one.

And the one above is horrible, no offense.

Best,

Kris

Fake, 15 incher, circa 1980s

I certainly agree that the quality is bad on that one--but as you say-given the difficulty and expense in making a mold-can we be sure it is a fake?-- And the quality does not seem to be related to the mold but rather possibly to the type of material used or the heating of it. Why? It would seem that anyone capable of making the mold would know how to make a proper casting?????-and what are those hash marks? I guess that another possibility is that these are being made improperly using original molds. I wonder if they have been seen in Europe? -and not coming from outside Europe?

reverse.

The one by Gaspare is really bad-obviously a different mold and it certainly looks fake but possibly some others are being made improperly from original molds. Tommy says his looks good however although it has been labeled a fake. We need more photos of some of the better ones that are suspect.

Kris, You are doing a great job on this topic.

Could you explain the original process they used to make the Rail Eagle ? What I'm asking is,was it sand casting or maybe mold injection process ?

On the above eagle w/the pot holes I think the casters just had a bad day.I can just hear what OC had to say about.

Keep up the good work.

just 2 more random shots..

I mentioned 1980s,probably 1986. but it was hanging in a club house for at least 10 years so manufacture around 1970s..

quote:

Originally posted by Houston Coates:
I certainly agree that the quality is bad on that one--but as you say-given the difficulty and expense in making a mold-can we be sure it is a fake?-- And the quality does not seem to be related to the mold but rather possibly to the type of material used or the heating of it. Why? It would seem that anyone capable of making the mold would know how to make a proper casting?????-and what are those hash marks?

Houston,

When you handle them you know, first of all, each maker depending on size, has individual characteristic's in the wreath,claws,beak etc etc. So one maker who let's say made a 24" a 27" and a 28" each one is different. So one maker used multiple mold's. That would mean 7 or 8 manufacturer's could have used up to 24 molds.

This is just is not cost efficient for someone to do as a repro artist, not now and not in the 50's. It would not of even been necessary.

There are period picture's, which is more than some other items in itself, the quality although it varies from maker to maker is far superior than the reproductions on the market. These were cast and hand finished, so they can vary. But they dont look anything like the fakes. The fakes just dont compare unless you place them amongst thier fake partners.

I can have them cast in sand, but they wont look great, and then your subject to the original as well, which is one of the reasons that alot of the fakes are so easily detectable, as they have partial lugs or connecting devices contingent on their original use, so when their recast? you can spot them as not only are there remnents of those devices, they are cast remnants.

Now, my previous post's in regards to casting these, is a minefield as not only to they have to be the proper size, you need a clean original and even after you cast it, its going to need some form of hand fitting and finish. And even if you get it right the first time?.

Then lets say you do get it right? its got chemical components other than aluminum, based on the periodic tables on the rear of the bird, its a cookbook, which could also have a lot to do with how the cast comes out, as its not just aluminum, its a mixture or an alloy if you will?.

This could also be the reason why some of these cast so poorly, but ones made of other materials such as brass and bronze come out beautiful, its the elements. I dont think you can use pure aluminum casting, or they would have used it. They were mounted flat for the most part, so they did not need the added strength of magnesium.

Why Magniseum or silicon? what do these properties add to the process in getting the finished product?. Silicon allows for expansion and Magnesium burns hot and has been an additive to aluminum for years, the high intensity burn when combined with aluminum and Silicon, could easily explain why they cant be recast well in Aluminum alone.

You want to confirm that bird is a fake, everyone kick in and I will have it cut in half, and I bet it is pure aluminum.

K

1

2

3

4

[QUOTE]Originally posted by T E:

Could you explain the original process they used to make the Rail Eagle ? What I'm asking is,was it sand casting or maybe mold injection process ?

Tommy,

I would say these were cast, I just think everyone is looking in the wrong direction,its the components, and that is the problem.

Best,

Kris

To sum up then-are you saying that some of the fakes are made from molds fashioned from original eagles? and the poor quality is due to improper material or heating?-If so which makers have you seen? Gaspare's is different-do you think this is a total fake-not made from any original? This leaves the question of the hollow backs which seems to indicate a great expense-but perhaps not-maybe you will find it is not so much? This hollow back thing is what I have difficulty understanding if in fact it is a lot of money.

quote:

Originally posted by Houston Coates:
To sum up then-are you saying that some of the fakes are made from molds fashioned from original eagles? and the poor quality is due to improper material or heating?-If so which makers have you seen? Gaspare's is different-do you think this is a total fake-not made from any original? This leaves the question of the hollow backs which seems to indicate a great expense-but perhaps not-maybe you will find it is not so much? This hollow back thing is what I have difficulty understanding if in fact it is a lot of money.

Houston,

Now im going to have to speculate, the only bird seen with a raised logo is a Wehog, which to me would mean that if a real one was found, the logo would be recessed, as no real Wehog has been seen, so the mold is unique.

I have seen most of the maker's, but until you get a comparison piece of the same manufacture on an item that no one has really studied, combined with the maker differences, it has been hard to call over the years, I think I sent back 2 good ones. .

I dont want to misquote JR and I dont have his word's on hand, but I believe he is of the opinion that the 15 inch eagle that Gaspare has posted are all fake. This is not true, as I personally have inspected 2 that were direct veteren items, however there was a unique marking to the rear of the bird on both piece's that I have yet to see at a show. It most probably is cast from a real eagle or a cast of a cast, as some are worse than others.

I would have to say that the repro's for the most part are in fact cast from original birds, its common sense when you reference the stud casts. But I guess a real mold could have survived.

And hollow backs?, I am not sure what you mean?
Real or fake? or the cast itself?

In regards to the bad casting, yes I am of the opinion from the look and feel and lack of continuity, that it is a chemical compound issue. I think they are aluminum or a failed attempt at a chemical balance. It just makes sense to me.

K

I sold one to Tom Caroll, it was supposable a repro of a wehog but it didn’t say wehog anywhere maybe Tom can post the eagle, I still may have pictures if he can’t post. But there was plenty of casting flaws which lead me to believe it was a repro it also was a hollow version but it did have large nubs sticking out where some have bolt sticking out? Maybe it was a unfinished original. May never know for sure. This topic is interesting!!

Houston,

I think I understand your hollowback question, it would have to be done with either an original 2 piece mold, or by taking an original bird and makeing 2 half cast's to manufacture a 2 piece mold, which would also explain why a lot of the hollow backs show more casting flaw's notably to the rear where the detail was less to begin with. Most likely a non original mold.

A hollow cast does not have to be that expensive, I gave the guy guidelines, to try and pinpoint the process. This is where the cost was. But it would show in the quality if you took shortcuts. Which is basically what we are looking at with these reproductions.

Kris

quote:

There are period picture's, which is more than some other items in itself, the quality although it varies from maker to maker is far superior than the reproductions on the market. These were cast and hand finished, so they can vary. But they dont look anything like the fakes. The fakes just dont compare unless you place them amongst thier fake partners.

Lets put Kris L to a little test since the fakes are easy to discern. You're up to bat, and you make the call.

Test 1

Test 2

test 3

test 4

test 5

test 6

And the last one, test 7

It's really nice to see all these types-real or fake as you just don't see that many around. No one has said how long these better fakes have been around but if they were made before the price went up ( they used to be about $250- and were for a long time )it is amazing that someone would go to such trouble--and not just make one kind-but several. Just finding that many different originals to make the fakes must have taken years. Very strange indeed

JR,

You be a funny man! What is the question?. Surely your not asking me to authenticate these with photo's?. Even you stated you cant do that.

My advice would be to send yourself a check for 50.00 a bird and do it yourself. I mean that's what this is all about right? $$$$$$ .

Kris

But,

Send me the ones your not sure of and 100.00 per bird and ill send you a COA.

Btw,

As a discount, keep #5 there I dont care for that one, and ill take #7 for myself even with the hole's in the wing.

Take care Bird Man

The ballpark cost Kris is being given of $30,000 is in line with the quotes a friend has received to make the mold for a new product he's bringing to market. Simple math tells you the breakeven point is around 100 at $300 per eagle. A reproducer would probably make far more then that.
The confounding point to me, and Houston alluded to it above, is these eagles are scarce. If several hundred had been made and sold I think you would see a lot more of them available.
BTW JR: You really should have bought the model train with the eagles on it I found last year!
Jim

And especially if reproduced in that number, we know that they would have been pushed in the collectors market so were are the numbers? We know that they can't be hidden away, I sure they wouldn't have been sold to the non-collecting community.

There is still another explanation as to what these eagles that have casting flaws really are. This is Tommy's info-and it makes a great deal of sense. I just can't accept that new repro two piece molds were made in a number of slightly different styles with different markings at what most say would be in the $30,000.00 range each. No, I don't think this is in the realm of even remote possibility.

Where is this bird, as I had trouble with the question, what do you mean hollowback? Specifically. And if they were made in the 30k range, they would obviously be much better.

K

When I say hollow back I mean that the back is recessed not flat. IMO-not knowing much about casting- this would require a two piece mold probably of steel to withstand the heat. To make the mold I would guess it would take a lot of setup/programing and machine time which would have to be expensive. How else could it be done? Also-you indicated the poor quality had to do more with materials and processing not the mold. A simple lack of ideal materials during wartime could explain that-and as I said Tommy has found out some additional info which indicates a very good possible explanation as to what these are. I hope he will post it soon. If not -I will.

Another related eagle that we have not discussed is the smaller one-probably not a Railroad Eagle-about half the size-hollow back with two large V's cast in the back. These eagles have been around as long as I can remember and are a bit scarcer than the large ones. The detail is not as good and the head is more like the one shown by Gaspare. Any opinion on these? I also wonder if all these eagles are in fact Railroad. They could be wall eagles too. If not-why not?

quote:

Originally posted by Houston Coates:
When I say hollow back I mean that the back is recessed not flat. IMO-not knowing much about casting- this would require a two piece mold probably of steel to withstand the heat. To make the mold I would guess it would take a lot of setup/programing and machine time which would have to be expensive. How else could it be done? Also-you indicated the poor quality had to do more with materials and processing not the mold. A simple lack of ideal materials during wartime could explain that-and as I said Tommy has found out some additional info which indicates a very good possible explanation as to what these are. I hope he will post it soon. If not -I will.

Houston,

When I stated reference to poor quality as an indicator of reproduction and materials used in construction as a possible reason for such, I was using it as only one of the facets that could contribute to identifying a reproduction, and was baseing the material aspect on opinion based on what I have seen, and limited knowledge on metalwork.

But the lack of quality in most cases is also found in conjunction with other inconsistancies such as mounting configuration, malformed casts and the list goes on. And to try and contribute it to late war does not fly with me personally.

Were talking about a formula molded cast, the quality would remain, if anything there would be a lack of finishing, not a loss of quality. Example would be the cone shaped devices to the rear of the bird, which were never used to mount the bird. But their quality is the same.

And to give credit where it is due, JR has done a fine job on his reference, and I am certain he has opinion on this as well. I just wish he would express it rather than throwing me pop quiz's.

Give me a few with this hollowback issue.

Best,

Kris

I've noticed that on Aaron's eagle as well as Kris' the insciption below lok is BEL were as on mine (I'm pretty sure it's a good one,Don't know for sure now) it is BERL. could this be a red flag on fake eagles?

2

Houston,

Ok, I fed myself and feel better now. I think you confused what I meant, or I confused what I meant. Either way. I would imagine original bird's were made from 2 piece mold's, they had to be, as they are definitely cast and they have hollow backs. I think cheap hollow backs can be made, but they can be spotted and are being spotted for various reasons. The bulk of the fake's however look like the one thats posted on the Jerry Springer show in the community forum.

Post what you have, and we can go from there.

Reds,

I dont know, post the front and rear of the bird as best you can, and we can look at it.

Best,

Kris

Wehog Eagle

I spent some time at a mold casting company here in Tulsa.I showed engineering in the tool&die shop a Wehog eagle,ask them how it was made.

They said it was made with a two piece steel mold.The cavity (front side of the eagle) was fill with the Gal Mg Si.They then place the back side on and squeeze together under pressure.

Today the cost of making one mold would be about $25000 and you could kick out about 40 eagles a day.But out of that 40 you would end up with about 35, OC has rejected 5 of them ( poor quantity )

Maybe the Wehog we see today are rejects from the past but still original ?

Hollow-Back being concaved

Anyone that is interested w/Rail Eagle needs to get J.R. Reference Book.

With the Wehog molds (backside)the toolers did not spend time with details,The backside was never seen.

25k for tooling,,o.k. but there are cheaper ways to reproduce and the piece comes out good also..I've seen a centrifugal rubber mold for wax that made flag pole tops, after a casting of it the piece looked great, 3D and needed little hand finishing, very simple and inexpensive..

Gaspare-You are saying you can pour molten aluminum alloy into a rubber mold???????????.
I think what Tommy said about the "reject" thing is a very good possibility. this would answer many of the questions about these. Tommy did not mention that at the foundry they said that some of the production would be rejected for poor quality for various reasons. They also said the mold must be cleaned and prepared properly each time or slag would stick in it damaging the next one-this would account for the rough backs and the partial cone casting on some of these so called fakes. Consider--

This would answer the question about why there are so few around. Most rejects were probably melted up but some may have been taken home by workers.

It would also explain the rough backs-partial cone castings,bubbles, etc. and the lack of proper finishing. Rejects would not be finished.

It would also explain the number of different ones-rejects would occur in all the different places they were made.

This seems much more likely to me than multiple expensive molds. So -is there any real reason this could not be the case?

No sir. Wax goes into the rubber mold. The wax then gets cast as in lost wax process. You make a bunch of wax models. Inspect them,,anything you don't like can be smoothed out OR detail added, then cast in what ever metal you desire...

Pole tops..

Yes Gaspare you could repop these eagles inexpensive by useing a vacuum blow mold.The cost on one vacuum mold would be about $6-7000.

But we are back to the Wehog eagle that everyone is talking about.The Wehog we are seeing today were made with a two piece metal mold.

The front of a Wehog has detail,but not as nice as others.And the toolers spent some time with a whetstone hand finishing the molds.

Well,

A vacuum blow sounds like a pleasent enough process, but, show the front and rear of the entire eagle. I know there are other reasons I did not take a shine to these. What is the mounting configuration? There would have to be one, and I cannot remember one Wehog that was set up for it.

Best,

Kris

Kris, Please take time and look in J.R. reference book on a Wehog repop.You should get a good ideal what a Wehog looks like.



Best, Tommy

Tommy,

Then there is really nothing to talk about, I dont know where they came from, but none have any mounting hardware, they are all cast with it missing. But I dont have the book in front of me.

A 2 part mold does not mean 30k. And a lot of wehogs out there.

Best,

Kris

Sorry Kris I was thinking you had J.R. reference.

But the ? is why has the Wehog been label fake ?

Tom,

Its a good question, and I honestly dont know. Maybe JR will dig one up or one may pop up somewhere. Whoever made them did ok, but they vary in their own make. I dont understand them personally. I think I only took interest with them about 5 years ago and handled many of them. I would like to see an answer as well on these Wehogs. My question is? can you certify originality based on the process of manufacture?. If some guy in the 60's decided to knock off Wehogs in his garage, he would have needed a bird, and that bird or bird's had attaching studs of some form as there are remnents of them. But then there are different sizes?. I can only speculate that maybe someone banged these out off one bird, I must admit the pics you posted are better quality than some of the one's I have seen.

As far as the processes discussed, the 2 piece mold is key I think, I called today to find out what this guy thought and have yet to hear back. I dont think anyone is going to have any success in a perfect reproduction without serious out of pocket costs and work. But they do make nice display and I like having them around.

Best,

Kris

TE, that large rubber centrifugal mold cost well under $1000 to make.....the detail they have on large or small pieces can be excellent...

This was for reproducing ghetto coins..They had excellent detail and when artificially aged / worn they fooled many for years..From what I had heard these were first done in Poland around 1992...
but lets get back to the eagles,,,,


JR, how were these eagles originally made?

*

Here's a 16" example that was recently sold by Collectors Militaria:

Obverse: Any opinions or comments?

I've read w/interest about the WEHOGs and 16"er above. I have one of each if someone would like to buy them. $200/inch, but SUPER rare. The original manufacturers of these items when contacted, replied that they don't remember, but could have made them, AND in fact they did make 'em! Absolutely Sterling provenance. My wife also told me they were good although I will admit to not inspecting them after that. You'll be getting something that AJAX won't take off and I'm sure you'll love 'em (if you have those maso type feelings).

I make no guarantee nor will I refund your money on these items in 5 mins, let alone a year. They are what they are.........and if you buy 'em, you might as well adopt that attitude.......

Denny

Denny, I would like to buy one of those eagles but my wife thinks she sold it before to your wife but she dosen't remember as she sells sooo many of them. Maybe if I can get her permission, I can move forward, but she sleeps in the other end of the house and stays completely separate from me. I only see her now and then...no set schedule. She has her own money and just hangs out here...I'm SURE you understand. You know the type.


Mark

Dang I am generally closer with my girlfriends!! Damn if you can do that to your wifes, I guess I am doing something wrong

Any opinions on the one that was sold on Relics of the Reich Paul Jarvis site?

Are this then just Railway eagles or where thes same eagles also used for buildings? Would be nice to see some period pictures from the Railway. And which "Loks" got them in which time frame.

kinda looks the same as my small repro...

I have a Wahog almost identical to T E's, only my raised code is GAL-MC, being one letter different. It is 28" across, and shows considerable detail on the back, though nothing like the front.
It is a hair over 28" tip to tip, and has tapped holes in the wing lugs.
This one shows a ton of quality for a 'reproduction' piece, and in all reality appears to be a period item.

If anybody has what they think is a legit WEHOG rail eagle, put it on here as we would all love to see it.

Here's what I have

The head:

...and the makers marks. Scroll up a little ways to T E's and you will see there is a difference in the markings, but only one letter.
This is pretty detailed for a repro.

Mounts?

Sorry I see your trying to post them.

If you need to shrink these, e-mail them haydes@comcast.net

K

The Swazticker

No real mounts. Just the lugs I see in most of the rest. The top 2 lugs in the wings are drilled and tapped.

I tried to send them large for detail, but this is slow on the dial up I'm stuck with here in the middle of the woods...

Cant tell anything from the front really, its ok, its the lugs on the rear that need to be seen. But otherwise looks like another Wehog. Im starting to wonder if there was even a Wehog manufacturer.

K

...and the back with the makers marks again. It seems the first one is too large and I had to shrink it. If they both post, sorry for the double...

Ju88.

Your wehog looks to have the same characteristic as a original eagle.

But there is a wehog out there ,that has
very poor workmanship.J.R.reference shows photos of it.I believe it to be a reproduction.

Maybe J.R. will post some photos of the reproduction eagle on here.

Tommy

JU88, your Wehog eagle is a post war reproduction. The stud portion of your eagle isn't necessary to determine this fact.

As far as a proper finish to the obverse, this is the best Wehog "reproduction" that has come along. But the rest of the features didn't hold up to what you would expect of an original.

In retrospec of all that I have seen, this could have been a legit Wehog that has been post war altered.

One thing to be taken into consideration regarding all of the eagles out there to be reproductions is if that were the case, where are the real ones?
I mean, if GIs brought home flags, daggers, rifles, helmets, etc..., there has to be someone out there who brought home these duffle bag sized really cool interesting, and durable souviners. Esp when the available supply of flags and more desirable items ran out.
Picture yourself on the spot, of course not realizing the full potential of certian items, but as a GI with an interest in collecting. Esp if you were in occupied Germany a few months into the occupation when these items were being dismantled. There had to be literally stacks of then, and not only in Germany, but everywhere a train was abandoned or destroyed.
I'm not necessarily claining mine to be authentic, but it would stand to reason that there should be enough in this country as to run into one every now and again.
One more point before I shut up, is that, just as in the case of daggers, different makers, the rising, then declining need for these items, as well as compounded hardships on the manufacturing plants during the course, many discrepencies would show up over the period of manufacture.

Tommy E has the real ones stashed in his sock drawer !


Removed last name at the individual's request.

Seems to me that if someone talks about a repo long and hard enough, that it will eventually be accepted as fact and will have been intergrated into the pile of "good" stuff that is easily determined to be real. I've seen the same thing w/daggers. We see an obvious, to me anyway, repo and chat about it to the point that it gains supporters and is accepted by much of the collecting community due to different reasons. 1st reason may be that owners don't want to believe their stuff is not good. 2nd may be that dealer/s want to sell these items as real and realize a nice profit and a "market for repos", in the future.

Before very long, the items have a following and are bought and sold as the real deal when in reality they are post-war. They have become intergrated into the community of good stuff just as some post-war items made in the early 60's have done already.

THEN we see prolonged arguments years later as to the authenticity of such items and we end losing perspective and eventually as the "nay sayers" die off, are unable to tell the good from the bad.

Quite a mess as it turns out.....

I harbor serious doubts on some dagger maker marks that I feel were started with the same misguided approach and made to flourish by a lack of knowledge on the part of the owners and a somewhat selfish attitude from some dealers (to make easy money).

My opinion anyway.......

HERE we have the opportunity to keep that from happening as we either listen and learn from JR's experience and expertise OR we believe anything and accept some dubious goods into our community.

Denny

Guys, I have no eagle here,the ones I get in are sold to either J.R. or Denny.J.R is just pulling your leg,so please no e-mails about eagles.

Thanks, Tommy

I have a question for JR. I noticed a preiod picture of a RR eagle on Johann's site and the swaz's appear to cut out or the surface around them darkened. Have you ever come across any like this?

I don't see much proof here. Several educated opinions-Yes. But no one has said WHY these can not be rejects. IMO A poor quality reject is almost as unwanted as a poor or even a good fake-maybe more so. So-why are we afraid to say this COULD be the case. Will everyone then want one of these poor quality eagles? I think not. Are we afraid to admit we could be wrong? IMO there is still the question of the high cost to reproduce these??? OR-PROVE IT !-How do we KNOW they are fake??? Is the reject concept absurd? WHY?

quote:

Originally posted by Houston Coates:
I don't see much proof here. Several educated opinions-Yes. But no one has said WHY these can not be rejects. IMO A poor quality reject is almost as unwanted as a poor or even a good fake-maybe more so. So-why are we afraid to say this COULD be the case. Will everyone then want one of these poor quality eagles? I think not. Are we afraid to admit we could be wrong? IMO there is still the question of the high cost to reproduce these??? OR-PROVE IT !-How do we KNOW they are fake??? Is the reject concept absurd? WHY?

Houston,

If Wehogs are rejects, then every single one is a reject, they vary in every way shape and form.
There is no consistancy at all, so I always look at the back and for some sign. Did the company or maker set out to make rejects? They must have, because they are all screwed up in one way or another. You can have one that looks like melted Pepsi cans and popped out of a mold, and another that looks pretty good but is cast poorly in another manner. So if you want proof your going to need a proper mounting setup.

But since those cones were not usually tapped on the legit bird's, someone will eventually figure it out.

K

Is it the case that some people who have contributed to this thread believe that the Wehog eagles we see were rejects and that the manufacturers allowed their employees to take them home.? I just want to know if thats what some posters here think, because if that is the case for some or all of these Wehog eagles are in existance today I'm sure none of these guys have ever worked in the manufacturing industry. The chances that any item would have been allowed to be removed from the premises and not re-melted and used again is in my opinion very slim and certainly not in the many instances it would have to have been, any large manufactuerer would have some kind of quality control, this guy is not some kind of menial labourer, he would be in charge of making sure nothing slipped through the quality net, he would not be allowing sub standard articles to be removed from the factory. I'm sure that most guys who have worked in the manufacturing industry would concur, some small items are definately removed from the factory by unscrupulous employees but not given away as freebies. No way in the amount we see them.

My opinion, feel free to tell me I'm talking out my ass, and yes I have first hand experience of the manufacturing industry.

Gary

Oh yes. EVERYBODY continue to call a/o eMail Tommy as he is being modest. He has quite a stash of the Rail eagles......

T E just talked w/me and told me he wants to hear from anybody that is after rail eagles......

Especially the "WEHOG" version. He's overstocked........

Denny

Houston,

There is a bunch of info that is just not out there on these birds, one of the biggies is those cone shaped extensions to the rear of the LOK birds mainly. Those birds were not finished or mounted. And the cones serve several purposes, not only do they aid in easing the casting process, but they serve as a mounting system and were used in several different ways.

The first was they could be tapped down and bolted, but even with that, it would create a stress point, and aluminum is not all that strong so although it was done, its not the the way most were configured for heavy mounting.

The way they were mounted, and I mentioned this to JR a month ago and he did not seem to be aware, as he questioned it. The cones were cut to down to just above the surface of the bird, then they cored out a hole and cemented or affixed steel bolts and set them into the rear of the bird. This would have been for a heavier application. Take a look at the pictures of my bird that I posted, and you can see the adhesive or material between the bolts and the rim of the original aluminum mount. These are the Rail Eagles. This has been noted on just about every large bird that I have seen that is found with the larger bolt setup.

The bolt's were also tapped and then tapped through the center of the bolt, why this is I dont know, as if you tapped the lug, why center tap the lug for a screw as well? you cant use both at the same time on a single surface. So these in some case's were cut down and used with a screw mount, it was dual purpose. And to back that intent, a lot of the lugs that were done in this manner were not tapped all the way to the base, why?, the steel bolts were. But they could cut the bolt at the base of the thread and utilize a screw mount and the bird would sit close to it's perch. Did they tap them as a guide for a cut?.

So yes, you can tell a WEHOG without seeing the mounts as it is poor, but in order to answer your question?. If so much thought went into the mounting then why do the WEHOGS all have these cast over and poorly applied mounts, or no mounts at all?. Thats not a factory reject, its a fake.

K

I don't know what KL is talking about, but the stud / cone configuration on the back of an eagle determined what the application that it was going to be used for. Certainly many eagles didn't go on train engines, nor coach car and were used on barracks, train stations, government building etc.

S2

S3

JR,

Obviously you did not read my post, or you would know what I was talking about as you just posted the pictures to confirm it. And pic #3 was not mounted, it was never finished.

K

This is a steel bolt!

Its in your book.

http://daggers.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/760095573/m/2890021704/p/2

Obviously you are not looking at the photo or you would see the hole where the steel pin was driven through the center cone.

quote:

Originally posted by JR:
Obviously you are not looking at the photo or you would see the hole where the steel pin was driven through the center cone.

No! I dont think so

See this arrow ? ??? This is where there is a hole through the cone. Get the picture ?

Most likely post war to hang from a wall, no other reason for that placement for mounting, where are the other bolts on that bird? are they all center drilled?.

K

Well throw the pics up, if they are its a one in a million screwed up mount, as usually only one if any are center drilled in that fashion.

K

You jest Kris, I'm sure, Post war no way, four holes are drilled through the side of the train car or whatever it was hung from to take the lugs, the ends of the lugs with the holes are then inside the train car, a pin, probably split is then put through the hole which then holds the eagle in place, hence I should think that no damage was done to the lugs when it was removed.

Gary

Well if you can not explain it's a repop.

Kris,The cone shape stud in J.R.photo,cannot be threaded with a die.This was used in a different application.

You can not thread a cone shape object.

They drilled them, they plastered them, they pin them,and they safety wired them. What don't you understand ?

quote:

Originally posted by Baz69:
You jest Kris, I'm sure, Post war no way, four holes are drilled through the side of the train car or whatever it was hung from to take the lugs, the ends of the lugs with the holes are then inside the train car, a pin, probably split is then put through the hole which then holds the eagle in place, hence I should think that no damage was done to the lugs when it was removed.

Gary

Gary, All 4 lugs would need to be drilled, thats all im saying.

quote:

Originally posted by JR:
They drilled them, they plastered them, they pin them,and they safety wired them. What don't you understand ?

I dont understand where the pics of the other lugs are. What dont you understand?

quote:

Originally posted by T E:
Well if you can not explain it's a repop.

Kris,The cone shape stud in J.R.photo,cannot be threaded with a die.This was used in a different application.

You can not thread a cone shape object.

Tommy,

Did not say it was a repop, said the vet may have wanted to hang it.

Kris, I.m assuming all 4 lugs are drilled, I don't know, but even if it was only one , there would be no problem, that lug could have been in a unaccessible place for a scredriver/spanner, it might have been the only way to hold it on the side of the train car, there are many reasons for the hole other than post war.You can't assume it's post war just because you cannot understand why it was there in the first place.

Gary

quote:

Originally posted by Baz69:
Kris, I.m assuming all 4 lugs are drilled, I don't know, but even if it was only one , there would be no problem, that lug could have been in a unaccessible place for a scredriver/spanner, it might have been the only way to hold it on the side of the train car, there are many reasons for the hole other than post war.You can't assume it's post war just because you cannot understand why it was there in the first place.

Gary

I am just applying logic, as there are 3 or 4 bolts. If only one is drilled, the others would hinder a flush mount, or leave the bird pinned by one lug.

Sorry Kris,I read it wrong,I interpret that you were saying JR EAGLE was post-war.You was saying the hanging application was post war.

Tommy

Here's the same set up on mine. Only one lug drilled

2

3

Kris, this is the back of your eagle. I think that you may want to throw a blanket over that hog !

Kris, I'm not saying that the other 3 lugs are not fixed, I'm saying that one lug at the top was probably in a difficult place to get to for fixing and it was fixed with a pin, the other 3 lugs could have been fixed in the normal way, with bolts or nuts, just as JR has shown in his pictures. I see there's another one pictured now, is that post war drilled as well.

Gary

you'd have to machine that cone first to get rid of the taper then put a die on it,,not cost effective! As mentioned it probably went thru something then washer and pin to affix.....

So 2 different attachment shapes, cone, that could be tapped OR drilled for pin,,, and a stud that could be threaded.

JR, you've studied these things and have written a monograph on them.You are the 'go to' eagle guy...How were they originally made? Have you had the material tested on the better of the fakes?,are they just aluminum? , thanks, G.

quote:

Originally posted by JR:
Kris, this is the back of your eagle. I think that you may want to throw a blanket over that hog !

John,

LOL!!!!!!!! It was not a hog when you wanted it or put it in your book .

Reds,

These are found both way's, and is mere speculation as to whether it was mounted by one lug. Could it be done? sure it could. Could a veteran drilled it to hang, sure he could of.

Tommy,

That bird is right as rain, and the mounting issue is conjecture in this one case.

Best,

Kris

Not to stir up any crap, but the wehog that I posted pictures of is as good or better quality than any that I have seen on this post, and has 3 mounting lugs in approximately the same places.

We're all anxiously awaiting those photos, Sir. Can you send them or post them ? You may very well have the first legit one and the stud configuration on the back will indicate this.

I know that there is a legit Wehog RR Eagle out there. I know that it probably is going to be the 28 inch version. You perhaps have it. . The obverse of you eagle is not what one would expect as far as the texture goes, but I have seen weathered eagles that have lost the normally seen smooth finsh.

If the lugs are turned down, cut off, broken off, sawn off, this is a good indication. If the lugs on yours are a cast over nub, this is an indicator that it was cast from an original mold that had the same.

And guess what ? We can put yours in the reference as an official maker.

quote:

Originally posted by Robert H.:
Are this then just Railway eagles or where thes same eagles also used for buildings? Would be nice to see some period pictures from the Railway. And which "Loks" got them in which time frame.

I was just reading Kershaw's "Hubris" last night and in it there's a photo of a Mercedes-Benz's showroom with two similar designed eagles mounted on the wall. Their sizes appear somewhat larger, if my guess-timate is correct, compared to the the Railroad ones shown in this thread. Besides the difference in size, I also noticed the shape of the chest of each eagle is more covexely shaped than the Railroad types with each of the eagle's head shown facing to the right of the viewer as opposed to the left. I'll be happy to post a scan of the photo as soon as my scanner gets to warm up and works correctly.

quote:

Originally posted by Baz69:
Kris, I'm not saying that the other 3 lugs are not fixed, I'm saying that one lug at the top was probably in a difficult place to get to for fixing and it was fixed with a pin, the other 3 lugs could have been fixed in the normal way, with bolts or nuts, just as JR has shown in his pictures. I see there's another one pictured now, is that post war drilled as well.

Gary

Gary,

Not to beat a dead horse, but I was watching the race and missed your post. There is a 3 Lug and a 4 Lug that show this cone design, the 3 lug has no lug on the rear of the breast, one on each wing and one on the swaztica. But you never see a 3 lug with 2 drilled holes in the wing mounts, which would be necessary to level the bird. And on the 4 lug access to the center lug is obviously there and access to the wings is even easier. Obviously JR's bird was vet aquired because he mailed it to himself.

If you look at picture S2 you can clearly see that as Gaspare stated, they were machined from a cone or wider piece of aluminum from the original mold for whatever is was to be mounted to. The picture above that, shows an untapped and center threaded assembly for a screw mount.

I personally have never seen a combination of a cone and any other type of bolt configuration on an individual bird.

In my opinion, there is no way in hell, that these were mounted in that manner except for maybe a wall, the most durable configuration is the steel bolt recessed and set into the bird, this setup would be applied in my opinion to an item that required a heavy duty mount. Namely a train. And until someone walks in to these forums with a picture of cones sticking out of the rearside of a boxcar, my opinion is not going to change, because a book says thats the way it was. The majority are not drilled, the minority has one single hole in the breast. Its logic.

Best,

Kris

quote:

Originally posted by Ju88:
Not to stir up any crap, but the wehog that I posted pictures of is as good or better quality than any that I have seen on this post, and has 3 mounting lugs in approximately the same places.

Ju88,

The bird looks ok mounted to the door, but unless its the camera, the upper wings deviate in the cast, they dont conform. The finish in that picture looks good, however the second pic does not, and since there are screws in the wings, and it appears flush with the door, there is little chance for that bird, if there is any chance you need to flip it over. And to be frank, pictures are decieving and when you see these bird's that have been posted as originals, you would immediately notice they are superior when in hand.

Best,

Kris

Here's the photo I mentioned in my previous post above from "Hitler: 1899-1936 Hubris" (2001 ed.) by Ian Kershaw, illustration plate # 54:

They have to be 6-7 feet wide I would think.

Great picture!! Thank you!.

Kris

If I'm understanding this ..you gents are saying that the cone shaped extensions on the back of the Eagles were never intended to be "turned down" (cutting of the excess alum and making an even/perfect stud) and then threading that Alum stud for a nut ? You're saying that the threaded stud is actually a Steel Bolt that has been somehow glued to the back of the Eagle ? Does anyone have a close up shot showing a steel threaded stud glued into position on the back of an Eagle? I've never seen one like this ...I only remember them being solid Aluminum and those "cone shaped" parts being turned down and threaded for a steel nut.
I only own 2 Eagles ...I'll post them.
My first is an HE ,27",4 threaded Alum studs with the Steel nuts.

#2

#3

#4

MM

Fantastic picture!

The picture of the bird mounted was from the person I bought it from, just to clear the air that I wouldn't do that in that fashion.
The top of the wing on the left side (looking at it) right above the screw hole is a little bit flawed, a very little bit but highly accentuated in the photo.
Both of those 2 holes are tapped, and the lug on the reverse of the swaztika is not drilled.
The lugs stick out nearly 1/4" from the back, and are not ground, but are as cast.
This bird sits very evenly on all 3, and does not teeter at all when placed on them.
The pics of the obverse are on my office computer, hence the delay in posting them, but I will later tonight or tomorrow.

Bear in mind that I am not fighting for mine to be authentic just so someone will agree with me for a 'feel good', but more so I can understand why such workmanship would be put into such a little produced fake.

It is always possible the faker destroyed his equipment either accidently or otherwise befor its full potential was realized, but otherwise, it just doesn't make sense.
Being in the industrial metal trades, I understand the work involved.

Notice how those large eagles are facing to the right....

BTW, Mike, nice eagle.

Thanks JU88 ..here's my other one. It's a "PS Wagen 600" 23-3/4" with small Alum studs drilled through for a cotter pin?

back#1

Back#2

Back #3

Mike,

Have not seen that second bird with a rear like that. Its got a WEHOG style interior chest area!. .

Send it out to me

Kris

quote:

There is a 3 Lug and a 4 Lug that show this cone design, the 3 lug has no lug on the rear of the breast, one on each wing and one on the swaztica. But you never see a 3 lug with 2 drilled holes in the wing mounts, which would be necessary to level the bird.

And KL, please give us your explaination on the one that Mike Peters just posted, with the 3 lugs that are drilled in the wing mounts.

JR,

Simple, their not cones!!

Why dont you answer Gaspares question that he has asked you twice? Or are you too busy taking information from the topic to explain it?

How many books will you sell off this thread?

K

Here's a chest close up ...no markings

You humor me. How many eagles have you owned, any how ? I did email Gaspare on his inquiry.

Why e-mail? You have nothing to add to the thread?

And dont worry about how many I have owned, its not relevent.

K

Mike, You have some nice birds there ! Tommy

Mike,

Yeah they are nice one's, very nice, I wish I would have seen the back of that little one while I was there, I would not have left without that one.

Best,

Kris

Thanks guys , glad you like them. No where near "mint" like some of the ones you've all posted ...You're right Kris ,we should have taken them down to check them out. Funny how these birds have been overlooked all these years and now ..look at all the attention.
I wonder how many of them were brought home

Mike,

Mine is perched, and I keep having to sell all the others to pay for the goodies. But I keep the one.

Best,

Kris

I still waiting for some comments/opinions on the 16" example I posted several pages back. What say ye?? Good or Bad?
Jim

Jim,

They are heavily faked, but I have seen 2 originals. They look O.k, but a lot of them out there. So, I dont want to make the call, for whatever that is worth.

Kris

I spose if I hang my wehog up, no one can see the back...

All kidding aside, what price ranges do these command? All I really know is what mine cost me, which was fair even if it is a fake. I would really like to get an idea from you guys who know.

Thanks..........tj

As a side note, I've written up and added 2 new makers in the reference, Railroad Eagle's of the 3rd Reich. It consists of 4 pages that details the description of these 2 newly discovered makers, plus the maker marks, and 5 nice large photos. They are done in the same format and in the plastic sheet protectors, so you can just pop them in your book. If you need a copy of these updates, please contact me and I'll either send them out or you can pick them up at the SOS. Like most things, there is a small charge involved. Thanks, JR

Finally, here is the back of my eagle.

More

And last. The top 2 lugs are drilled and tapped, metric, and the bottom is untouched. They are as cast, and have not been altered or ground on in any way, other than, of course, the drilling of the 2.

....tj

Ju88, the back of your eagle is typical of the wehog eagles that I have inspected. A poor cast nub that shows that there never was the 2 1/2- 3 inch cone/stud that all others were found with or evidence that they at least started out this way.

Your eagle only has 2, approximate 1/4 inch holes drilled through the wings with perhaps a metric 6-8 mm bolt inserted. The boss at the bottom of the swastika was never even drilled. I ask the question, other than the sheet rock in your living room, what other possible application would this eagle be able to hold fast to ? If a legit period eagle were in fact cast that way, the uses would be entirely limited, and not like the others that started out with a hefty cone stud and could be cut down for any application. The Wehog that you show wouldn't make sense to manufacture in this fashion, because it would lend itself so limitedly.

Now take your hand and run it around the circle that the swastika and wreath are in. I'm willing to bet that the wreath is so jagged that it would cut your hand with just a little amount of pressure. Every railroad eagle that I've ever owned or inspected, is nice and smooth and hand finished in this wreath area. And as a matter of fact, all of the edges on these birds are hand filed and deburred.

Lastly,take a look at the top edges of the wings on that Wehog. I bet that there are file marks that are in the casting, and not something that was done to finish the bird after it was cast. Another indication that the piece is cast from a mold that used a real period Wehog to make the reproduction.

If in the end you're still not convinced, send your eagle directly to Tommy, as he is buying all Wehog eagles for top $$$

Here is a photo from my files that either show your eagle or another identical Wehog made with the cast over lower nub. Real ? Or reproduction ? How many collectors want a Wehog for their collection now ? As I said before, there is a legit period Wehog 28 inch eagle out there somewhere...............but I haven't seen it yet!

Good point on the lugs. Mine actually is smooth around the wreath. I see a similiar mark in the same place as the one you just posted, but I don't think it is the same piece.
Once again, what is a realistic price for an authentic eagle in roughly the same condition?

Thanks for all of your help on this matter,

....tjp

Your's is jagged around the wreath, Sir, I can see it in your photo. When you finally get to inspect a period eagle, you'll know what smooth feels like.

Ah, yes, I see what you mean now. Daddy always said "Son, you may be slow, but you'll catch up".

I got Roy's wehog and it conforms to all the criteria JR pointed out. A very nice display piece, but not near the fine finish of the APAG real one I own. The wehog is much heavier as well.

Mark

Mine's up on the wall now, where it looks as nice as a counterfiet Rembrant....

Some info on Wehog Eagles:

http://daggers.infopop.cc/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=42090573&f...060089174#2060089174

That link takes me to the General interest page.

I would like to see this information.

Thanks.....

what about those smaller aluminium version Houston mentions (well) above.
With the V's on the back.
They seems to be around from in the beginning.
Are the early repros?
I do not think that this has been answered, but I have some trouble opening all the pics of this post.

If period correct, what are this smaller eagles worth?

backside , no markings at all except the "V" s.
The head may be lacking the detail of the big ones, but I must say I like the straight lines of the swastika.

I am in the sand casting business and this sort of thing is easy to copy from an original at low cost. Every time a copy is made from an original, detail and size is lost. If you have no original I can make them from your new wood carving.
Ed