HAC Cont.
Attachment 242865Attachment 242866Attachment 242867Attachment 242868Attachment 242873Attachment 242874

OSD
Attachment 242869Attachment 242872

Titles
Attachment 242875Attachment 242876Attachment 242877Attachment 242878

That HAC artillery looks a likely fake with the loops cut and the stumps straightened out.
The rest appear OK to my eyes.

CB

I said "may be a restrike," as in made from an original die and not a fake die.

The evidence that I have can be seen in these photographs.

I have three different examples from the the same worn die that share some of the faults but some have more faults than others.

https://www.britishbadgeforum.com/fo...ictureid=92394

https://www.britishbadgeforum.com/fo...ictureid=92393

https://www.britishbadgeforum.com/fo...ictureid=92392

https://www.britishbadgeforum.com/fo...ictureid=92391

Hi Neil,
Yes, the small white metal lugged London Scottish is new to me.
Perhaps others might be able to comment on it.
Cheers, John

Hi Neil again,
I believe this small white metal badge with E-W lugs is for the leather sporran. Another similar badge with N-S lugs was for the hair sporran.
John

Thanks for that John I suspect the third badge in amongst the caps is the hair sporran it's half way between a cap and the collar sized badge

Pre 1908 london regiment
the bloomsbury rifles is cast from another badge and the last two have had issues with their lugs
Attachment 242913Attachment 242914Attachment 242915Attachment 242916Attachment 242917Attachment 242918Attachment 242919Attachment 242920Attachment 242921Attachment 242922

[QUOTE=Neil s;539594]Thanks for that John I suspect the third badge in amongst the caps is the hair sporran it's half way between a cap and the collar sized badge

Neil,
Yes, that badge has the extra long lugs N-S.
John

The three are not from same die.

The one on the left of the trio (link 3) is very clearly a different die with a flaw above the B rather than the R.

I cannot see any evidence in your photographs or posts. As I said a die flaw does not automatically = restrike. From what I can see of the fronts barring them being cast copies you have shown 3 original badges.

I am still waiting to hear why they may be restrikes? And are you saying both dies have been restruck? What do the originals look like?

As I said before every one I’ve seen with die flaws is on a period slider or loops and has good reverse detail etc. etc. I’ve seen nothing to suggest they are of modern or post 1920s manufacture. None are encountered on repro marked sliders, not sold by the fake sellers or present in Martin Marsh catalogue etc.

Also very interested to hear why your annotation on the last link states the three (from two different dies) are ‘probably made by British Leyland’?

I am not sure that you are understanding the definition of a restrike, unless of course, you are being deliberately obtuse.

Generally, a new die was cut when an old die was worn out and discarded. Many of the discarded dies have survived and have been used to strike new badges.

I find it strange that three separate badges all have faults from worn dies. (Four if you include the one posted by the person who started the thread).

All three of my badges have the same fault over the B of Brigade.

It is possible that worn dies were kept in use for too long to meet war time demand, but it is equally possible that discarded dies were used to produce badges for the collectors market after the badge became obsolete when the design of the London Rifle Brigade cap badge was changed to include Great War battle honours.

The British Leyland remark was an attempt at humour.

Can`t agree with your idea that these die faults indicate unoriginal badges. I have a group of three cap badges with these same faults that came directly from a ww1 veteran of the LRB and they were his actual service issue badges..

I think you should wind your neck in.

If you look at my Martin Marsh catalogues you’ll see I define restike as a badge from an original die produced later outside its period of west.

Look again at your badges and the badge you commented on in the opening post. The flaws are very evidently on R and F of RIFLE and the R and E of BRIGADE.

Please highlight the flaw over the B on the badge in post #1 or the first two of your links? I don’t feel the need to continue this as your errors are so obvious and attention to detail so poor.

You’ve shown no evidence the LRB badge with the die flaw is not genuine and period.

I’ll leave you to remount your high hobby horse.

Neil s apologies for diverting your thread.

Wow, what an interesting discussion, so full of emotion and so lacking in reasoned argument.

For the sake of clarity, I will just state my point of view for those who might like to hear it before I stop posting on the forum.

My contention regarding that London Rifle Brigade cap badges is that the badge illustrated has some of the classic flaws associated with a badly worn but original die and therefore may be a restrike in the truest sense of the word.

The badge was worn between 1908 until sometime after the Great War, but neither K&K nor John Gaylor give a date for the change to the newer badge with the Great War battle honours.

What we do know is that Territorial Battalions ordered their cap badge from private sources at a regimental level. Their cap badges were not issued by the War Office until about 1915. So presumably, the London Rifle Brigade ordered their badges from a maker, who made their own die, and had agreed production runs of say 10,000 badges at a time.

If the L.R.B. recruited an average of 500 men per year and issued two badges per man, a run of 10,000 badges would, in peace time conditions should have lasted until 1918. As we know, the Great War broke out in 1914 and the demand for their cap badges increased exponentially, as the L.R.B. added two extra battalions.

So for the sake of argument, the L.R.B. ordered another 10,000 badges from the manufactures, who used the original die rather than cutting another set. Many of these later badges would show flaws from the wear and tear to the die.

I do not know know how many badges a case hardened steel die can produce before they are worn out, but there must be a upper limit before the badge quality becomes unacceptable, even with lowering the quality threshold to meet war time demand.

I do not know what happened when the War Office took over the issuing of badges to territorial battalions, they may have approved the design of the existing badge and placed the order with the original supplier, or, insisted on a new pattern with a completely new set of dies.

We do know that the old badge and sets of dies became obsolete when the new badge was introduced in the 1920s.

So what happened to the original dies? They were either destroyed, sold for scrap or kept in a cupboard gathering dust for years on end.

In theory, there should have been no further use for them, but suppose members of the London Rifle Brigade's Old Comrades Association decided that they didn't want to wear the new issued cap badge at the Cenotaph or down at the local branch of the British Legion.

It is entirely plausible that they approached the original manufacturer to place an order for a batch of original badges.

It is also entirely plausible that the manufacturer said, "I need a minimum run of 1,000 badges and if I have to cut a new die they will cost 7/6d each but, if I use the old die you can have them at one shilling each." If this was the case another 1,000 re-struck badges with die faults would appear on the market.

Another possibility is that around 50 years someone realised that there was a demand for L.R.B. cap badges and bought the original but by now, very worn die and started their own production run, releasing thousands more worn re-struck badges onto the market.

All of this is conjecture and cannot be proved without looking at the manufacturer's order book. It is of course possible and entirely probable and would explain the plethora of London Rifle Brigade cap badges with die faults that are about.

I know of four cap badges that share some of the same faults and presume that the dies deteriorated with use, so that some have more faults than others.

I do not believe that the London Rifle Brigade would have accepted a badge with faults from a badly cut die when they accepted their first batch of badges.

I do not believe that no member of the London Rifle Brigade was ever issued a cap badge that didn't have faults.

I do believe that the London Rifle Brigade may have had to accept badges of a lesser quality due to the demands of war time badge production.

And finally, I do not believe that I should change my opinion because another forum member hectors, using provocative and emotive language, whilst refusing to engage in reasoned debate.

If I am wrong, show me wear I have gone wrong, convince me with logical argument, facts and evidence and do not assume that I am familiar with, or, have had the time to read every post that you have ever uploaded.

I can see now why so many members of this forum refuse to raise their heads above the parapet and offer an opinion. It really isn't worth it.

I cant give you an exact date for the change . But the LRB had the new pattern crossbelt plate with WW1 honours by 1923. So the cap badge would almost certainly have been produced before the crossbelt plate.
As for quality,the new Officers badge is listed in K&K as silver. I have a Gaunt marked sterling example and an unmarked silver example.

There was a post on here a few years ago where someone was selling a load of mint looped (I think) examples, I’ll have a trawl though to see if I can track it down, quite a few members bought one. It’ll be interesting to see if they have the flaw.