A serious discussion about SSHR

[clevischi]

I was talking with Gaspare with PM and we decided to start a topic about it, i will ask apologies in advance because i have to mention anothers forum and people.

About one year ago Alex K. posted this SSHR at WAF:

[clevischi]

I said in the topic that is something wrong it the skull, at most at this section:



But some more "famous" members said that it is ok, because is the rare 'triangular teeth' version.

[clevischi]

ABout 10 days after the same ring was posted at GD and some members - including John Pepera have said that it could be a "super fake", and for consensus, was better to send it to Don Boyle or Rob Wells. Nothing more was said about this ring.

[clevischi]

Yesterday, this ring was posted in WAF by Uhu:

[clevischi]

I think the last ring has something weird... and comparing the two:

They have almost the same date (21.6.42/21.6.43) - ok its not so big deal.

They have some lack of details near the skull.

And i think the most reliable part, look for these defects at "S":

[clevischi]

I could be wrong... and making a false judge about it... but i would like to see some others opnions about it. Again, sorry for mention another foruns and people.

[RaymondG]

Hi Carlos

I am not sure if Gaspare can remember a discussion I had with him about two years ago.

I bought a totenkopfring on approval and it showed the same defect. It could have been through an increase in size, but I think I was perhaps being too fair. From the photographs, it was not really apparent until I had it in my hand for inspection.

I did not like it and the more I looked at it the more I disliked it as it did not fit in with the norm one would expect to see. It was not an easy name to research and fakers would have chosen an easier name to fake.

I had to really dig to find the name, but find it I did, so that was a plus point for the ring. It was a highly unusual name and he never featured in any of the SS DAL's.

Now I wonder if I have some images of it still to share with members.

Interesting discussion topic, Carlos.

[Gaspare]

please don't worry about mentioning other topics at other forums,,we are all in this together and anyone that has a problem with it ,stop and click off now!:glare:


Yes there are a few of these circulating recently. they get offered, there are questions, they disappear, then come around again..

What I can tell everyone is that there were superfakes made with no engraving.. This is VERY dangerous.. With enough practice they will eventually get the engraving style down!

Sticking to the ring on WAF recently,,, A member there wrote right away its good.. That's maybe a little premature. Some better photos need to be taken. It could be that only a 'in hand' inspection is needed.. I don't know if its this ring or a couple others but a while ago buyers wanted to buy them on the condition they be sent to Don. I know 2 owners did not want to do that. Like I say, Don't know if its this ring but it happens..
I had wrote there is something weird going on with it,,that maybe it was resized....


Check this photo.
Some problems in red.. What do you guys think they are:

[Gaspare]

I kind of remember Ray,,it was from Germany? I think it was a bad resizing..

This photo shows a problem for me.. That 'Dot'.. From first hand playing around with lost wax casting,,you'll see these dots when you have a bad cast. You either leave them or try and remove and make the repair invisable.. There is even another dot on the other side,,not as bad,,check the prior photo..

[clevischi]

I think if it could be done 60 years ago, why cant be done now?
I saw this spots that you apointed, Gaspare, and really did not like it. But when i saw the inner inscriptions... its equal to a real one... that kind of job just give me chills.

[Gaspare]

Carlos,,early on collectors used to have their own favorite 'flaw' they looked for on the outside band of the ring.. For years that was the 'way'.. Then better fakes started to appear. The outside was outstanding! Collectors then went to looking mainly at the inside engraving. Most copies had the engraving cast in. Easy to spot even with artificial ageing..
Now it seems they really trying! blank Superfakes. A near perfect outside,,no engraving inside. Engrave it,then age it to hide any imperfections..

Your photos showing the spots on/near the sig rune are weird. The 'dots',,and that breakage of the bones on the left. 'Pops' or holes on the right side of bones.. Really, it looks like a very good resizing or its fake!

Please, those that have 21.6.42/21.6.43 rings,,check the sig rune,,does it display these spots or smudges?? Please let us know..it really should display on any later pattern!

I mean are we being too critical? say ;what the hell' its a good one and be done with it. Are these spots/smudges on the sig rune from wear? blurring out or fatting the rune to the base then a smudge appears?

[honorringman]

I have been following this topic very close and it is nice to see the input people have been submitting. First of all as to the die flaws . People look for them but on many Original Honor Rings they do not exist haveing looked at over 400 honor rings over the years and my documentation this is true. Having said ,that we should be looking at other things and many I do not mention as this I keep to myself so the people who make copies do not have everything. Some people look at the syle of the teeth. Did you know there are 4 styles of teeth and two styles of the laugh lines. There are rings with a septum between the nose and others that do not have it. As for the first Honor Ring from the photos it does look like it might have some problems but I can tell you it looks as if it might be good but can only tell if the Honor Ring is in hand as photos are decieving. It looks as if it was buffed or cleaned a lot. If it was buffed you would see what is circled and pointed out in one of the threades which makes the bones on the skull appear as it is one part with the ring great point taken by the person who pointed it out that is why it must be held in hand and examined as the engraving appears very nice. As for the second ring posted it to has things that might send up a red flag such as the die flaw on the one sigrune. There again pictures can be deciving as it could be the angle of the camera or the ring could have taken a hit and the silver spread this is another good point taken by the person who posted it always beware. The ring in my opinion from the engraving looks like it might be real but would need to be examined in person to be 100% as photos can mis-lead one.As for the two having the same date and wear this does not bother me what would bother me is if the person refused to let you inspect it or have someone who is qualified inspect it then that would send up a major red flag to stay away from it. It is nice to see everyone is looking at the right things and have the right questions it helps every one on this forum. By the way I see Miitary Nut (Andy Legere) has just picked up a couple of nce original Honor Rings. They are still out there to be found so keep on looking you never know. Thanks for letting me put some in-put in. Best Wishes Don Boyle

[clevischi]

Mr. Boyle, Its a honor to learn a lot from your words, and i think that i can talk for all forum members. I am a proudly owner of a ring sold by Andy, and he is a very nice person for making busines.

The time goes by, and i feel that somethimes we can refuse some ring just seeing the pictures but almost all the rings that could be good have to be examined by some authority in this matter.

[honorringman]

Carlos: Thank you for the kind words. Andy has many nice original Honor Rings as well as military items not to mention everyone who ever meet him says he treats them as a friend and is up front and educates people on what they are purchasing or might purchase wether it is from him or someone else. I remember the Honor Ring you purchased from him it is a very nice example of an original Honor Ring it must be the highlight of you collection as it is one of the rarest items to own. I always tell people who say to me or other people I will never have as nice a collection as you or as large. My responce is wethere you have one common badge , dagger, document, flag, etc. as long a it is original and makes you feel good to own a true piece of history your one item in my eyes is just as valuable and just as important as the next person who might have a silver framed presntation signed photo by Hitler photo. I never get tiered of looking at any historical item no matter what price people put on it. I recently purchased a collection of early Nazi Party Pins about 15 all different sizes and makers they might be worth only about $75 to $125 each but I was so excited in finding them and getting them as all items are getting harder to find as time goes on. So to all of you I say be proud of what you have no matter how samll or large your collection is as you are the true keepers of history. Best Wishes Don Boyle

[Gaspare]

Thanks Don.. Yes sometimes if the owner cannot get good multiple photos there's no other way but in hand..

Please,when it comes to HRs,,if you really want to know authenticity by photos alone,,they must of course be in focus. And, well lit but as little glare as possible. Have the ring fill up at least 75% of the frame. PLEASE, no angle shots!
At least :
a shot of the skull AND behind [seam]
the left Sig rune.
at least 2 more runes.
A 'birds eye' view.
If you do not want to show the name fine but include the Himmler sig. and the date..

If any member has another suggestion for a photo they like to see please add in on here.. I'll eventually I'll make a list just for photo suggestion shots and post a topic just for that..

[Gaspare]

Friend and advanced collector John Pepera has sent us 3 photos of the left Sig rune from his late pattern rings..
For reference,,Thanks John! :thumbup1:

[Gaspare]

3rd, and last.
All late, different, and in good condition.. No ghost smudges on these!
I also had a email saying its because the first ring Carlos posted is very worn. That the runes/emblems get fattened and smudgy and thats the spots we see. I don't agree 100% with that. Emblems on silver rings WILL distort with wear and tear ,but these spots look artificial. The area would have to be worn completely down to then have the base worn and distort...

What do anyone make of the breakage on that left bone!

*Member 'MilitaryNut' who also has a very large collection of PP and HRs wrote me that none of his late rings have those spots!

Johns 3rd example of Sig rune..

[clevischi]

Very nice shots, please say thanks to Mr. Pepera.

[RaymondG]

Hi

I have finally found those images of the ring I had on inspection.

The debate is over, but I have spent an age finding them and so I am posting them up :D

As you can see, it appears to be a re-sizing job that has created a rather odd look to the front of the ring.

Raymond

[clevischi]

Could thos resize be postwar in a original ring?

[RaymondG]

Hi

I am not sure Carlos. It could have been a period re-size, a re-size undertaken post war, but still by the original recipient, or a post-war re-sizing by the next owner of the ring.

It is usual to see rings re-sized smaller, so it is unusual that is larger.

Raymond