Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19
  1. #11

    Please login to view user info
    The only thing I know about the triangle is that it is in a collection since the early 1970's.
    That's what I know.I have not heard of fakes from that age! But who knows? Maybe it is
    indeed a fake after all.
    But could'nt it be a manufacturer's manufactured variation? There were many manufacturer's
    that did produce these triangles and the one or the other may have come with a special
    specimen, which might have been not approved by the HJ High-Command.
    Last edited by wilhelm saris; 30th November 2013 at 09:56 AM.

  2. #12

    Please login to view user info
    I am still not convinced that this triangle is fake .. Yes the weave is wrong , however ; it could be an original with a short manfactured run . There must have been dozens of companies that made triangles from the earliy 1930s onwards . And there were many variations especially in the 1930s .

  3. #13

    Please login to view user info
    Quote Originally Posted by holzwurm_1920 View Post
    Ok, thank you for your opinions.
    Then is the triangle in wilhelms book on page 79 also a Fake.
    Best Regards
    Alois
    Hello Alois,

    you are absolutely right and I still think it's a fake. I like not at all the backside of the triangle that you showed us yesterday.
    I never would have bought it for my personal collection.

  4. #14

    Please login to view user info
    interesting is it has a weave line along the bottom like the top of border of a SB insignia, the rear threads almost has the same rope look threads as the standard bearers insignias also. however i would not like to comment on originality as i simply dont know!

    watching with interest tho

  5. #15

    Please login to view user info
    Remind there is an official difference in manufacturing, as mentioned in the regulations:
    1934 = 100/2 with 75 threads for 1.0 cm (Garnart); 40/1 with 38 for (Schuss).
    The script 60/2 with 38 .
    In 1936 = 80/2 with 80 threads (Kette/Garnart); 40/1 with 40 (Schuss).
    The script 40/2 with 40 theards. It is all very technical. In the regulations nothing is said
    about vertical or horizontal weave.
    You really think all manufacturer's have followed the instructions?

  6. #16

    Please login to view user info
    Quote Originally Posted by wilhelm saris View Post
    You really think all manufacturer's have followed the instructions?
    nope! as evidenced with my new Jungzug wimple and pole set up!

  7. #17

    Please login to view user info
    Hello,
    thank you for all your opinions.
    Best Regards
    Alois

  8. #18

    Please login to view user info
    Hello,
    There is no problem with this triangle. It's one of the few manufactured between 1933 and 1934 without RZM regulations.
    Best regards

  9. #19
    ref page 79 we can not say without seeing the reverse which is the key. I have over a hundred district triangles and none have this weave but some have a similar front as I stated earlier think a good faker almost got it right in this case as an adjunct this may also be a one off unlisted weave by a very different maker who did not get a contract it is that good.
    Last edited by Paul Ayerst; 30th November 2013 at 06:31 PM.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

HJ-Research, the Hitler Youth Militaria Collector Forum
Copyright © HJ-Research.com 2009 -
Web Hosting by Vidahost "Hosting for Life"