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 3 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
1
Offline
1
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari

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

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


Hello Ric,

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

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

Best regards,
Dierk

Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
[quote=12472]Hello Ric,

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

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

Best regards,
Dierk
[/quote]

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Dierk,

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

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

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

Ric


Last edited by Ric Ferrari; 01/24/2020 11:24 PM.
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099
Likes: 275
G
Gaspare Offline OP
OP Offline
G
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099
Likes: 275
I've been in contact with Hapur. He's been very busy but said he will eventually look in..

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

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

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

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

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

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

an interesting opinion from a very reliable source.

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

Ric

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

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

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

I'm really curious!

Best regards,
Dierk

Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
JR Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
With the totenkopf ring, there are literally a dozen or more inherent flaws which are very obvious when just observing the 5 rune panels alone. I'm speaking specifically to the 40's style rings, and referencing a mint example which has little or no wear to erode the flaws. Here are just a few, but certainly not all which will be present on every 40's ring band when observed closely that I'm aware of.
Let's just look at one example, that of the swastika panel. This runes is loaded with so many flaws it's unbelievable. If you have the opportunity to compare 2 different mint 40's rings side by side, these flaws become undeniable. As they are part of the master mold from which rings were made.

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

!5 (Custom).jpg (101.61 KB, 327 downloads)
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
JR Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
This portion circled in white can be explained by the fact that the liquid silver in the cast did not flow evenly into it, and left this void in the border of this panel.

!5 (Custom) (Custom).jpg (102.75 KB, 327 downloads)
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,422
Likes: 61
Offline
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,422
Likes: 61
I can add more strange point in ur rings

??????.JPG (56.57 KB, 325 downloads)
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
JR Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
As mentioned, these rings are so loaded with flaws, that casting is the only reasonable technique that can explain their manufacturing process. In my opinion.

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099
Likes: 275
G
Gaspare Offline OP
OP Offline
G
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099
Likes: 275
Good to see you here again JR....

OK, I know you like to start with this particular rune panel... So, can you or another tell me.. Do ALL the 2nd pattern HRs in this great condition display these same exact faults?

Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
JR Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
Gaspare,
Though I've not compared every ring in existence, my study of this particular panel reveals these flaws time and again. Here are 2 others in comparison to judge for yourself. Though minute, you can still make out several of the flaws that I speak of, which consist of left over material. Those specks and deformities are in the actual master cast.

FR2a (Custom).jpg (84.63 KB, 370 downloads)
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
JR Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
On a side note, those who live in Italy where beautiful jewelry making goes back centuries, take your TK ring into an old time establishment. Ask the jeweler who has been in the business for years and passed down through his family, what was the method that was used to manufacture your SSTK. And report back here your findings.
I'm no jeweler, but I have owned several SSTK's over the years. And have identified telltale "fingerprint" flaws inherent to the 40's style of rings. Because of what was left in the cast and carried over to additional rings made from the same mold.

Last edited by JR; 01/25/2020 08:57 PM.
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
Originally Posted by JR
As mentioned, these rings are so loaded with flaws, that casting is the only reasonable technique that can explain their manufacturing process. In my opinion.


______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________-

Hello JR,

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

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

Ric

Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
Originally Posted by JR
On a side note, those who live in Italy where beautiful jewelry making goes back centuries, take your TK ring into an old time establishment. Ask the jeweler who has been in the business for years and passed down through his family, what was the method that was used to manufacture your SSTK. And report back here your findings.
I'm no jeweler, but I have owned several SSTK's over the years. And have identified telltale "fingerprint" flaws inherent to the 40's style of rings. Because of what was left in the cast and carried over to additional rings made from the same mold.


_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

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

Ric

Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
1
Offline
1
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 32
Hello JR,

thanks for the photos!

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

Best regards,
Dierk

Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
JR Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9

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

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

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099
Likes: 275
G
Gaspare Offline OP
OP Offline
G
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099
Likes: 275
,, you've not compared every ring in existence!, dam man,,disappointed in you grin wink

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

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

Something else going on with them..

SWAS.jpg (87.26 KB, 304 downloads)
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,422
Likes: 61
Offline
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,422
Likes: 61
BTW ur ring look like debatable ring of Frank
this is + to original of Frank ring IMO

Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
Originally Posted by JR

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

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

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


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hello JR,

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

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

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

Ric

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

Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
Judging rings by pics alone may drive to wrong conclusions/opinions and rings collectors know it very well.

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

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

Ric

SSHr-FrankRing.jpg (27.51 KB, 270 downloads)
SSHr-FrankRing1.jpg (26.45 KB, 260 downloads)
Last edited by Ric Ferrari; 01/26/2020 12:32 PM.
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
Originally Posted by Evgeniy
BTW ur ring look like debatable ring of Frank
this is + to original of Frank ring IMO


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

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

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

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

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

Ric

Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
JR Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
Ric,
I base my evaluation of SSTK being cast on the fact that they come no where close in perfection, compared to an item that is die struck or manufactured using pressure and weight. We can actual see this visually with the way that liquid silver fills the void of the mould in different way, on different rings. Antonio furthers his assessment backed up by scientific evidence pointing to the conclusion that these rings are in fact cast. If I may ask, what evidence can you point to that you base your " die pressed" theory on, in regards to the manufacturing process of these rings? Is it just a guess, or do you have some actual evidence to back that up with ?

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

Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
JR Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
Gaspare,
You are absolutely correct in noticing that though the leaves and the borders of the rune panels show that the liquid flowed into a mould, there is one thing that doesn't change. And that is the very small flaws that I've pointed out with swastika panel, on 3 separate rings. If pressure or striking were the manufacturing process, the leaves in the band would be more uniform and exact as some of the colleagues have shown on the rings that they have manufactured.

Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
JR Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
With that I yield back to my colleagues who have a much more profound and actual knowledge of the scientific study of these rings, than myself.

JR

Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
Originally Posted by JR
Ric,
I base my evaluation of SSTK being cast on the fact that they come no where close in perfection, compared to an item that is die struck or manufactured using pressure and weight. We can actual see this visually with the way that liquid silver fills the void of the mould in different way, on different rings. Antonio furthers his assessment backed up by scientific evidence pointing to the conclusion that these rings are in fact cast. If I may ask, what evidence can you point to that you base your " die pressed" theory on, in regards to the manufacturing process of these rings? Is it just a guess, or do you have some actual evidence to back that up with ?

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


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hello JR,

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

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

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

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

Now my position :

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

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

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

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

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

My explanation is : because they were made by stamping !

Ric









Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
Originally Posted by JR
Ric,....
.
P.S If you're still riding that train with the implementer of ring COA's, you may want to think about stepping off. That train derailed a long time ago.


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

JR.,

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

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

Thank you

Ric

Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 55
L
Offline
L
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 55
I would like to express my thanks for all new inputs, in particular to JR., since I do not have mint 40's ring in my hands.

Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
JR Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
As a note for those interested, here is kind of an explanation of the terms related to manufacturing processes discussed in this topic:


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


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


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


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

Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
JR Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9

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

FR8.jpg (79.96 KB, 304 downloads)
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
Originally Posted by Ric Ferrari


Hello JR,

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

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

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

Ric

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


__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hello,

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

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

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

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

Hope this helps in some way.

Thanks!

Chris"

Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
JR Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
"My explanation is : because they were made by stamping ! "

Ric

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

A. Die Cast
B. Die Forge
C. Die Striking
D. The Ferrari Method :))

Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
JR Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9

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

Honestly this statement doesn't help your cause, Ric. Chris is a friend of mine who I've known personally going back a slew of years, when he was in his teens. Where we were all led to believe that SSTK's were manufactured in a certain way that utilized pressing or striking, new evidence has shown differently. And even Chris who once subscribed to these old theories put forward, has now opened the door to suggest that casting may well indeed be the method of manufacturing of these rings.

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

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

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

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

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

Best regards,
Dierk

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

001.jpg (32.19 KB, 283 downloads)
004.jpg (83.68 KB, 275 downloads)
005.jpg (74.72 KB, 271 downloads)
006.jpg (89.97 KB, 266 downloads)
007.jpg (23.79 KB, 260 downloads)
Last edited by 12472; 01/26/2020 11:19 PM.
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
R
Offline
R
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 590
Likes: 31
Originally Posted by JR
As a note for those interested, here is kind of an explanation of the terms related to manufacturing processes discussed in this topic:


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


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


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


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


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Hello JR.

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

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

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

Ric


Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099
Likes: 275
G
Gaspare Offline OP
OP Offline
G
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099
Likes: 275
JR, glad your participating.. For those not here long ,,years ago JR and I were co moderators here at the 'Don Boyle Honor Ring forum. I want to thank you as you were here longer at the time and knew the guys. It was a troublesome period and I always appreciated the help, Thanks. ..


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

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

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


* One other thing. Back then and now,,die cast pieces are porous! I've seen plenty of broken intake manifolds from the 40s/50s and inside you could see the porosity..,

Last edited by Gaspare; 01/27/2020 07:47 PM.
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099
Likes: 275
G
Gaspare Offline OP
OP Offline
G
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099
Likes: 275
As for die pressing/struck: During the 3rd reich period and before,,commercial firms all had at least one die cutter [and apprentice] on staff. They all had a die room where the masters were kept sometimes under lock and key. Working dies were exact, exact duplicates of the master die.. when a worker got worn, or broke,,another was made from the Master.

IF there was a flaw it could not be repaired as the Master was super hardened,,and the worker would soon fail at the spot that was tried to be corrected. So every HR would be exactly the same as it came out of the die. Very little if any correction would be needed. Now IF you wanted to do some embellishing yes that was possible. But the photo above of the Swas panel,,one ring has a cut in it and another doesn't and the cut does not look hand done..

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099
Likes: 275
G
Gaspare Offline OP
OP Offline
G
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,099
Likes: 275
and considering lost wax cast back then,,,, Please,,check the link:

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

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

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

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

spures-1 (1).gif (80.9 KB, 218 downloads)
014 - Copy.JPG (35.25 KB, 209 downloads)
Last edited by Gaspare; 01/27/2020 07:44 PM.
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 55
L
Offline
L
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 55
This is really annoying, pretty do not understand, why the pictures have to be resized to too small files and that all in 2020 ... .

I have pic of mint 44 swastika panel, but I have to destroy the pic to resize it or continue at WAF ... .

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

21.6. 44

rsz_giespanel.jpg (43.99 KB, 192 downloads)
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
JR Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 9
The photo is very telling, and thank you! It shows that though the oak leaf band is affected by how the liquid silver flows in the mould, the panel and runes are un-altered. Thus revealing the exactly flaws associated with this very symbol voiced several times.

Page 3 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Moderated by  Stephen 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Popular Topics(Views)
2,261,477 SS Bayonets
1,760,279 Teno Insignia Set
1,128,755 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
Wir fahren gegen Engelland - Battle of Britain
by Gaspare - 03/28/2024 12:34 AM
Paul Weyersberg Heer
by Tanker - 03/27/2024 11:30 PM
Luftwaffe Swords
by Tanker - 03/27/2024 07:29 PM
HJ Fahrtenmesser,
by OWN - 03/27/2024 07:05 PM
Frog question.
by Dutchman - 03/27/2024 03:27 PM
Forum Statistics
Forums42
Topics31,652
Posts328,702
Members7,501
Most Online5,900
Dec 19th, 2019
Who's Online Now
8 members (Vern, Paul, benten, AntonGrabbe, Seppi, Dave, AndyRose, Documentalist), 415 guests, and 55 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5