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:
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?
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).
