Spearhead Posted February 25, 2015 Share #1 Posted February 25, 2015 I was over at a friend’s place yesterday, and he showed me these two officer EGAs. I’m a little skeptical about both. The EGA marked Gaunt looks like the double posts were removed and a single screw post (with square at bottom) and stabilizing pin were added. The wing tip is also molded one piece to the ring and stock. Many officer Gaunt EGAs the wings are separated from the ring and stock. There are exceptions to this, but I haven’t seen the molding to this degree. The second EGA is a dark brownish black color and missing the attachment system. It’s seems a very light weight for an older EGA. It looks very similar to Figure 30. in Orgel’s reference section on page 152 of Moran’s U.S. Marine Uniforms 1912-1940 book. The books states pin back. I wonder if the pin back attachment was connected on one long piece attached to the back instead of two separate attachment points. The majority of the older EGAs I reviewed in the ref section have two piece pin attachment system. Sorry for the quality of the pics, I took them from my cell. I’m looked through the fake/ fantasy thread. I would appreciate any thoughts regarding their authenticity. My friend is a long time collector and was not familiar with the US Militaria Forum. I showed him the website and talked about the features and benefits of the USMF. He would be value-added to our forum community, so I hope he joins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearhead Posted February 25, 2015 Author Share #2 Posted February 25, 2015 Second EGA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stucky151 Posted February 25, 2015 Share #3 Posted February 25, 2015 The droop wing should have the continents applied where you can see the attachement wires on the opposite side. i dont think those are legit at all, my two cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
normaninvasion Posted February 26, 2015 Share #4 Posted February 26, 2015 Both are bad. Gaunt has lack of details on front. Globe is sloppy. Where wing meets anchor stock excess flash. On the reverse, it's a mess of a casting and hallmark. Last one shows zero detail that one would see on an original WW1-20s emblem. Back has no attachments. The fresh flat black color is another giveaway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teufelhunde.ret Posted February 26, 2015 Share #5 Posted February 26, 2015 I need MUCH better pics in order to give you my thoughts. Do you have, or a friend, have a camera with macro feature? Thx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearhead Posted February 26, 2015 Author Share #6 Posted February 26, 2015 Yes I have a digital camera with macro feature. It may take a few days to get back up my friend to get better pics. The lighting was not good at the time either. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teufelhunde.ret Posted February 26, 2015 Share #7 Posted February 26, 2015 Yes I have a digital camera with macro feature. It may take a few days to get back up my friend to get better pics. The lighting was not good at the time either. Thank you. Look forward to seeing them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brig Posted February 27, 2015 Share #8 Posted February 27, 2015 I have to hold judgement until better images as well. It appears as if the Gaunt was set up for, or had removed, a set of clutchbacks or screwposts on the anchors. I've seen this done a time or two with different models, assume it was a transitional move Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themick Posted February 27, 2015 Share #9 Posted February 27, 2015 I'm going to watch this with interest. Better pictures would help. Still, I can't believe the Gaunt is a good one. They are known for quality and detail, and this one looks like it was made by a student in an elementary school crafts class. Then again, I've been wrong before, and always love learning!! Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
normaninvasion Posted February 27, 2015 Share #10 Posted February 27, 2015 I might have spoken too soon regarding the Gaunt. Brig makes a great point about a fastener conversion, which could explain the rear being a mess. Ready to insert foot into mouth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usmcaviator Posted March 5, 2015 Share #11 Posted March 5, 2015 Both are real. They look like factory seconds to me or modifications gone bad. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearhead Posted March 5, 2015 Author Share #12 Posted March 5, 2015 More pics. I hope this helps. I'm not very good with the camera...I'm guessing you can tell that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearhead Posted March 5, 2015 Author Share #13 Posted March 5, 2015 The other EGA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brig Posted March 5, 2015 Share #14 Posted March 5, 2015 I like them, seen rough-backed variants like that Gaunt before, not sure if was considered acceptable due to being limited to the reverse or one that slipped past the inspector Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobgee Posted March 5, 2015 Share #15 Posted March 5, 2015 Initial glance - that Gaunt reverse looks UGLY! But to me the crap is due to the repair of adding the center post and removing the screw posts unprofessionally. Obverse shows typical Gaunt quality. The #2 bird may be a WWI vintage officer missing the screw-post applied bar. . My 2-cents. Semper Fi......Bobgee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
normaninvasion Posted March 5, 2015 Share #16 Posted March 5, 2015 I'll yield to the other opinions that have more experience than myself. But have to ask, wouldn't there also be wire attachments for the globe on the Gaunt for this model? As for the second, really reminds me of the nchs or mr.mac, I forget who exactly, WW1 style service collars that were being sold awhile back. Having a really hard time with this one. Again, it could be two bad days at the shop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brig Posted March 5, 2015 Share #17 Posted March 5, 2015 Wire attachments/prongs was a very limited practice in Gaunt stuff, I believe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teufelhunde.ret Posted March 5, 2015 Share #18 Posted March 5, 2015 I'll yield to the other opinions that have more experience than myself. But have to ask, wouldn't there also be wire attachments for the globe on the Gaunt for this model? As for the second, really reminds me of the nchs or mr.mac, I forget who exactly, WW1 style service collars that were being sold awhile back. Having a really hard time with this one. Again, it could be two bad days at the shop. The Gaunt emblem is too late an era for the prongs, thus no. But it looks horrible, no excuse for these leaving the jewelers bench. Agree w/ your second comment, it stinks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearhead Posted March 7, 2015 Author Share #19 Posted March 7, 2015 Thanks to all for their thoughts on these two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stucky151 Posted August 2, 2022 Share #20 Posted August 2, 2022 On 3/5/2015 at 12:10 PM, teufelhunde.ret said: The Gaunt emblem is too late an era for the prongs, thus no. But it looks horrible, no excuse for these leaving the jewelers bench. Agree w/ your second comment, it stinks... I just got this bird in and it does have the prongs attaching the continent’s to the globe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now