Translate German to English - Click here to open Altavista's Babel Fish Translator Click here to learn about all those symbols by people's names.

leftlogo.jpg (20709 bytes)

Upgrade to Premium Membership

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
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



Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
1
Offline
1
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
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

Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
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

Last edited by Ric Ferrari; 01/21/2020 07:47 PM.
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
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

Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
1
Offline
1
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
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

Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
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

Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
1
Offline
1
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
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

Last edited by 12472; 01/22/2020 10:42 AM.
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
1
Offline
1
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
Hello again,

sketch to clarify what I mean...

Best regards,
Dierk

IMG_0002.JPG (45.4 KB, 268 downloads)
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
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

Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
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

Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
1
Offline
1
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
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

Last edited by 12472; 01/22/2020 11:52 AM.
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
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

Last edited by Ric Ferrari; 01/22/2020 12:14 PM.
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 152
Likes: 14
A
Offline
A
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 152
Likes: 14
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.

6.jpg (55.28 KB, 343 downloads)
0.jpg (67.62 KB, 345 downloads)
1.jpg (57.68 KB, 341 downloads)
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 152
Likes: 14
A
Offline
A
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 152
Likes: 14
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.

Senza titolo-2_1.jpg (64.3 KB, 346 downloads)
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 152
Likes: 14
A
Offline
A
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 152
Likes: 14
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...

Leaves_Comp12.jpg (67.04 KB, 341 downloads)
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
1
Offline
1
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
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

Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
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


Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
1
Offline
1
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
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

Img_0002 (1).jpg (19.24 KB, 329 downloads)
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 55
L
Offline
L
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 55
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.

Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 55
L
Offline
L
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 55
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 ... .

Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
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



Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,100
Likes: 275
G
Gaspare Offline OP
OP Offline
G
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,100
Likes: 275
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..

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,100
Likes: 275
G
Gaspare Offline OP
OP Offline
G
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,100
Likes: 275
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..

Last edited by Gaspare; 01/22/2020 10:55 PM.
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
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

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,100
Likes: 275
G
Gaspare Offline OP
OP Offline
G
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,100
Likes: 275
, 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?



Last edited by Gaspare; 01/23/2020 03:10 PM.
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
1
Offline
1
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
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

Stichel 002.jpg (63.67 KB, 252 downloads)
Stichel 001.jpg (41.83 KB, 252 downloads)
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
1
Offline
1
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
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

Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
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



Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
1
Offline
1
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
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

Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
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.



Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,423
Likes: 61
Online Content
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,423
Likes: 61
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.

Last edited by Evgeniy; 01/24/2020 09:26 AM.
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
1
Offline
1
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
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

Last edited by 12472; 01/24/2020 10:12 AM.
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
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

Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
1
Offline
1
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
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

Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
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

Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
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

Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
1
Offline
1
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
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

Vergleich2.jpg (60.29 KB, 186 downloads)
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 126
Offline
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 126
Die or Cast..

This might be a dumb question?

But could they have produced rings both ways?

Last edited by johnnyrocket; 01/24/2020 05:54 PM.

Natural Born American Citizen
American Patriot
U.S. Army Vet. 1969-'71 Spc.5 Field Artillery Crewman
Sworn by oath to support and defend the "CONSTITUTION" of the United States against all enemies, "FOREIGN" and "DOMESTIC"!
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
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




Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
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


Page 2 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Moderated by  Stephen 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Popular Topics(Views)
2,261,625 SS Bayonets
1,760,346 Teno Insignia Set
1,128,797 westwall rings
Latest New Threads
Luftwaffe Swords
by Tanker - 03/27/2024 07:29 PM
Paul Weyersberg Heer
by Tanker - 03/27/2024 07:13 PM
HJ Fahrtenmesser,
by OWN - 03/27/2024 07:05 PM
Wir fahren gegen Engelland - Battle of Britain
by Stephen - 03/27/2024 10:06 AM
Hiddensee brooch
by benten - 03/24/2024 04:13 PM
Latest New Posts
Luftwaffe Swords
by Luftbud - 03/29/2024 09:21 AM
Paul Weyersberg Heer
by Luftbud - 03/29/2024 09:13 AM
Personalized reproduction honor ring source?
by Evgeniy - 03/29/2024 09:02 AM
F Dula with a twist
by C. Wetzel-20609 - 03/28/2024 09:29 PM
HJ Fahrtenmesser,
by OWN - 03/28/2024 06:18 PM
Forum Statistics
Forums42
Topics31,652
Posts328,714
Members7,502
Most Online5,900
Dec 19th, 2019
Who's Online Now
12 members (Documentalist, Simone, RookieSA, Baz69, Vern, Stephen, Luftbud, The_Collector, Browning1900, Evgeniy, Gerrit1963, Rainer S), 574 guests, and 139 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5