Jump to content

N.S. Meyer modern restrikes reproduction


Sabrejet
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'd be interested to know what the current perception of these Meyer re-strikes is within the broader wing-collecting community? I've had them since the late 80s. They came out of the old "Great Western Gun Show" in California, so they already have some age to them. Are they still in production? I've heard purists refer to them as "Junk!" but I'd be inclined to disagree with that. They are actually very crisply struck, quite heavy and well-made...unlike some of the cheap and nasty repros which are commonplace today. Also, they display very well...they look great in a shadow-box or a Riker mount. They also make great "fillers" IMHO...for example, the chances of me finding a gold Flight Surgeon wing in the UK are slim indeed! I know what they are, I know what the tell-tale signs are but I bought them in that knowledge and am quite happy to own them. That said, I do realize that along the way some unsuspecting and inexperienced collectors will doubtless have bought them believing them to be WW2 originals....as always caveat emptor!

 

First up...Service Pilot.

post-8022-0-88441100-1444640436.jpg

post-8022-0-12221800-1444640481.jpg

post-8022-0-15282600-1444640493.jpg

post-8022-0-32054600-1444640511.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting question. My feeling on these is that they have completely undermined the collectors market for Meyer wings. Their only value, in my opinion, is the scrap weight of the silver. Or for the propose stated above, as a "Gallery of Fakes"

If you educate yourself, these aren't problem of course, but so many now a days fail to do so.

The other problem comes when people use these as a base to deceive. All it takes is the findings from a real Meyer aircrew, ( or NOS findings, which are out there, believe me ) a re-strike Glider and a a little skill and bingo you have a "real" Meyer glider.

Forty years ago, when I started collecting my Father told me that every penny you spend on fakes is one less that you have to spend on the real thing ! Good advice! B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting question. My feeling on these is that they have completely undermined the collectors market for Meyer wings. Their only value, in my opinion, is the scrap weight of the silver. Or for the propose stated above, as a "Gallery of Fakes"

If you educate yourself, these aren't problem of course, but so many now a days fail to do so.

The other problem comes when people use these as a base to deceive. All it takes is the findings from a real Meyer aircrew, ( or NOS findings, which are out there, believe me ) a re-strike Glider and a a little skill and bingo you have a "real" Meyer glider.

Forty years ago, when I started collecting my Father told me that every penny you spend on fakes is one less that you have to spend on the real thing ! Good advice! B)

 

I think Paul summed it up nicely...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you consider "fakes" ie made to deceive...and "reproductions" to be the same thing? Our hobby is awash with very good reproductions...and sold as such. Uniforms, insignia, patches, webgear, ephemera etc. I could even direct you to website which sells accurate repro GI underwear! My point is there is a big demand for reproductions and a big production base which keeps it supplied because there is a demand for it. Successful businesses exist solely for that purpose...and continually strive to improve the accuracy of their products because the market demands it. Thus...down the line, collectors will unsuspectingly buy used examples believing them to be "original"...they probably do already anyway. These wings date from the 80s, well before there was repro market as we know it today. Thus, I would venture to suggest that they were intended as "collectors re-strikes" rather than "fakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AAF_Collection

Personally I feel it's a fine line between a "reproduction" and a "fake". It seems that in many cases something is only a "reproduction" once, ie when it is originally sold as such, but as soon as something is sold as being original when it is not-knowingly or otherwise-it becomes a fake.

 

We have not yet seen U.S. militaria hit by the problem of fakes to the degree that Third Reich militaria has been, but sometimes it seems it's only a matter of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I feel it's a fine line between a "reproduction" and a "fake". It seems that in many cases something is only a "reproduction" once, ie when it is originally sold as such, but as soon as something is sold as being original when it is not-knowingly or otherwise-it becomes a fake.

 

We have not yet seen U.S. militaria hit by the problem of fakes to the degree that Third Reich militaria has been, but sometimes it seems it's only a matter of time.

 

I agree with you Matt. I recall when back in the 80s we GI collectors used to "tease" our TR collector friends about the minefield of fakes they had to contend with. We never thought that in 25-30 years time we would also be in the same boat!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Years ago I met an older collector who bought as many "fakes" as he could (as long as the price was right). He would pin them to 3X5 card with all the reasons why the wing was a fake written on it (and who he bought it from or who he thought made it), and kept them in a small file box. He told me it was the best reference source he had (this was in the days before the Pinks and Greens books came out). He said that if he was trading with another dealer or collector, he would sometimes ask them to toss in a couple of their fakes into the deal, so he got a lot of his material for free. I always thought that that was a pretty clever idea, but like Paul said, who wants to spend money on fakes for any reason?

 

I also know a fellow who doesn't see anything wrong with Meyer restrikes, as long as they came from Meyers. He told me once, "if you have to worry about the size of the sterling mark or how far the freakin' pin opens and that is the ONLY difference between the two wings, then you are too obsessed". His point is that if the same company uses the same dies to make the same badge in the same way in 1984 that they made in 1944, then who cares? Its not like new old stock of a surplus pilot wing from a scrap metal dealer is any more "historically" important than the "restruck" wing. He also said, face it, from the point of view of the metal, a 1984 sterling silver planchet ain't any different than a 1944 sterling silver planchet--especially if you're banging them into the same die. This guy isn't that into collecting wing, however, so I'm not sure I share his view. :rolleyes:

 

Lots of people use these wings for place holders. My experience is that a lot of collectors follow the same collecting trajectory... first they want just a few wings because they look neat, then they want one of each rating to cover the history, then they want a few examples of each maker to see the variety, then they want a set of every wings made by each of the makers, then they want a few of the different variations of each maker, then they want every variation of every wing that was ever made from 1916 till 1945... then their wives/girlfriends/mothers/boyfriends/coworkes have a intervention and they start collecting a few stamps because they look neat...

 

As for the newbies... Sadly, they will always have to learn the hard way when it comes to wings. This forum will help, but it isn't what fakes they will buy, but how many they will buy before they learn. Its sad but true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the collector with the fakes, he also told me, if you ask a bunch of dealers if they think a "good" wing is a fake, you will get many different opinions. But if you ask these same people if a "bad" wing is a fake, you tend to get very good and consistent answers. Also, he thought that dealers don't get as upset with you if you ask them what they know about fakes, as opposed to asking them to "authenticate" an item for you. One set of information they seem more than happy to share, the other information they tend to resent you for asking about.

 

I like to study Meyer restrikes because they give you a good idea of what the majority of fakes look like.

 

P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it's all about education isn't it? At the very least this thread will provide a basic at-a-glance reference for inexperienced collectors re nine different Meyer re-strikes! I was a 32 year old novice collector when I bought them in the 80s, knowing exactly what they were. I'm now a 62 year old experienced collector. Would I buy them again today? Probably not...but I'm not at all "offended" by their presence among the genuine wings in my collection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you consider "fakes" ie made to deceive...and "reproductions" to be the same thing? Our hobby is awash with very good reproductions...and sold as such. Uniforms, insignia, patches, webgear, ephemera etc. I could even direct you to website which sells accurate repro GI underwear! My point is there is a big demand for reproductions and a big production base which keeps it supplied because there is a demand for it. Successful businesses exist solely for that purpose...and continually strive to improve the accuracy of their products because the market demands it. Thus...down the line, collectors will unsuspectingly buy used examples believing them to be "original"...they probably do already anyway. These wings date from the 80s, well before there was repro market as we know it today. Thus, I would venture to suggest that they were intended as "collectors re-strikes" rather than "fakes.

 

 

"Do you consider "fakes" ie made to deceive...and "reproductions" to be the same thing?" This is such a fine line, but largely yes, because to me the words mean basically the same as far as "collectability". Repro/fake= ZERO collectability. I understand that there is a big demand for repros/fake stuff and from a business standpoint it is perfectly understandable, and expected, that someone will rise to meet the demand. I am always amazed to see what is being reproduced, sometimes for higher dollars than you can buy the real thing. Many of those companies mark their products to differentiate them from period pieces. I really don't have any issue these items. The problem with the Meyer wings in particular is that the only thing that differentiates them from originals is the hardware. They were made on the same dies as the WWII era wings.

 

The question of intent again, is difficult to determine. I believe the first batch was turned out by Beckman out of Chicago (someone correct me if I'm wrong) after he bought the dies after Meyer shut down. They were sold by the bushel full for something like $20 a pop. I remember going to SOS and seeing every variant you would ever want. He didn't say that they were WWII era; however, he did NOT alter the dies to make a distinction between old and new. Would as many people have purchased them if they were marked 1988 for example, or if he added an additional hallmark? Probably not, BUT the end result is that the Meyer wing market has been truly damaged by the repros/fakes, which is a shame, because they made a nice wing.

 

"..and continually strive to improve the accuracy of their products because the market demands it. Thus...down the line, collectors will unsuspectingly buy used examples believing them to be "original"...they probably do already anyway." yes they do make better and better repros/fakes, and yes people buy them as real, particularly on the secondary market. We see it all the time on the forum. As I said if something is marked as a repro I don't have any issue with it.

To me personally, once the market becomes flooded with repros/fakes I get out, it’s not fun anymore, that’s just me. I no longer collect WWI or WWII US field gear because of all the fakes/repros either and I used to have a rather extensive collection!

 

This is one of those issues that is interesting to debate, any other viewpoints?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it's all about education isn't it? At the very least this thread will provide a basic at-a-glance reference for inexperienced collectors re nine different Meyer re-strikes! I was a 32 year old novice collector when I bought them in the 80s, knowing exactly what they were. I'm now a 62 year old experienced collector. Would I buy them again today? Probably not...but I'm not at all "offended" by their presence among the genuine wings in my collection.

 

I agree completely, Its all about education! Some people paiy dearly for that, I have been fortunate that other than reference material mine hasn't been too expensive :D

 

Do they offend me ? Nope! Have I owned some along the way? Yep!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With regard to the marking of repros as repros...this is always a bone of contention. I once took a dealer to task about this. He was selling repro WW2 US webgear. Every item was stamped with a bona fide WW2 manufacturer's name and a 40s date...eg BOYT 1944. I questioned the need for this and asked why it couldn't be marked BOYT 2015 instead? His response was that the reenactors demanded it and wouldn't accept modern dates!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does the pin open beyond 90 degrees?

Yes it does, that's the problem.

 

Is that an absolute guarantee it is a restrike? Wings look older than 1980 to me.

 

 

W

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the benchmark tests is the presence of a cam on the pin which prevents it from opening more than 90. All of the examples I've featured here lack that feature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...