TheSamba.com :: View topic

Tue Apr 13, 2010 5:55 pm

Hello Peter_ Plade, Hopefully someone will post a Real OG Kold Badge so we can see what a real OG one looks like. Cause someone just posted another Koln Badge claiming it is Real and OG. But it looks Identicle to the one you have. Oh! Does paint chip the way your badge has a chip or does enamel chip more like that. Well hopefully we will see an OG one soon so that we can learn more about OG and Fake ones. I looked at the one below yours and that person says he has had it since 1979 and yes it has wear and plating is dark do to use but tab looks the same unless they where making fake ones back then to. The one that you have has not had any wear and could be NOS but I am no expert but comparing all the ones I have seen they are Identicle. Take a good look at the one below yours and you can see a flaw line in the stamping under the center crown
in the picture with 38.75 and then look at yours it has the same flaw line.
Looks like they must have used the same stamping plates for these so called repros to,What are the chances. Enjoy Your Badge Peter_Plade for what ever it is I think its a bad ass badge not many poeple have them they only wish they did.

Tue Apr 13, 2010 7:16 pm

These badges were available in the 1960's as an aftermarket replacement to the Wolfsburg crest. VW had the rights to the Wolfsburg crest, and they did not allow aftermarket manufacturers to use the VW logo or the Wolfsburg crest. So, aftermarket suppliers made crests like the Koln, Bremen and other Cities.
So, there were original aftermarket badges from the 1960's, but not original Volkswagen Koln badges.

Tue Apr 13, 2010 8:04 pm

IN2VWS wrote: These badges were available in the 1960's as an aftermarket replacement to the Wolfsburg crest. VW had the rights to the Wolfsburg crest, and they did not allow aftermarket manufacturers to use the VW logo or the Wolfsburg crest. So, aftermarket suppliers made crests like the Koln, Bremen and other Cities.
So, there were original aftermarket badges from the 1960's, but not original Volkswagen Koln badges.

I agree, BUT.............................The "original" badges are not plated with the same finish shown on Peter's piece. I would say that Peter's and it's identical badge are a more recent production. From some collector's standpoint, they are considered "place holders" until an early badge shows up. I would pay upwards of $150 for an early version, but no more than $35 for the later badges. IMO.....OvalDash52's and Stevo's 32 are "dead-on".... :wink:

Tue Apr 13, 2010 8:19 pm

Not sure about OvalDash 52's, the pics are too blurry.
Stevo's32 looks to be an old one.

Thu May 06, 2010 4:49 am

i have a different cap i have to take a pic of. i have never seen it before.

i will put a pick up next time i have my car out.

Sun Aug 15, 2010 1:24 pm

Russ wrote: here gav,
i have the one with the soldiers on it (center)

Those are not soldiers.. The one in the left is called "Bandeirante", the first Portugueses wich arrived in Brazil around 1500 and colonized Brazil. And the right one is the native indians. This is actually the creast from Citi in State in Sao Paulo, called "Sao Bernardo Do Campo" where the VW where made back in the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's ... The script in the bottom "Paulistarum Terra Matter" is latin and it says "Paulista (wich is the State of Sao Paula) Mother land".

Fri Oct 22, 2010 12:28 am

Having just looked through this thread I couldn't see a definitive answer for my question - perhaps there isn't one!

As I think some of you know, my car was built in May 55 so should it have a 3 or 4 brick crest? I've been told it should be 4 brick.

If it's a 4 brick, I've been offered these supposed NOS crests. My question is given the differences in them, colour & pattern of the sky, thickness of the lines in the water, differences in castle design, which one would be more correct for my car?

Any help much appreciated. :wink:

Fri Oct 22, 2010 12:42 am

F-22A wrote:
I've never seen a texture in other crests like the one on the left.
It looks like a repo/repop. I would go w/ the one on the right.

Quote:
In this shot, it looks like the one on the right is a repo/repop.
Did you flip then over and keep them on the same side or also flip sides?
It looks like the first photo right/front goes with the second photo left/back crest.

Fri Oct 22, 2010 3:24 am

David wrote: it looks like the one on the right is a repo/repop.
Did you flip then over and keep them on the same side or also flip sides?
It looks like the first photo right/front goes with the second photo left/back crest.

They're not flipped. The left is the left in both pictures.

Reading through this thread it doesn't seem conclusive that 4 brick crests were repopped so I assume they're both OG.

Fri Oct 22, 2010 12:12 pm

I don't recognise the maker's marks on either emblem. The back of the right one looks odd (almost chromed), with the mark down low. The left one has the blue background with a texture like appearance, seems odd also! makes me think they could both be repops!?!?!

Fri Oct 22, 2010 1:45 pm

56TIMOTEO wrote: I don't recognise the maker's marks on either emblem. The back of the right one looks odd (almost chromed), with the mark down low. The left one has the blue background with a texture like appearance, seems odd also! makes me think they could both be repops!?!?!

I dont like either one of them. :?

Fri Oct 22, 2010 2:46 pm

So here we go, from left to right. The original off my October '53 3 brick, and a nice 4 brick on the right.

And the backs....

Notice the detail on both, but here's the 4 brick since its' either NOS or barely used...

The original base from my '53.

And the fit of an original crest to an original base is very precise unlike repros I've seen...

Hope this helps Martin :wink:

Fri Oct 22, 2010 7:43 pm

F-22A wrote:

Both of these do not look original to me.
Never seen one like the one on the left before, nor have I seen that makers mark.
The one on the right does not look correct on the back.

Here is a pic of the back of an original Lauer 4 brick badge.

Fri Oct 22, 2010 10:45 pm

56OvalRHD wrote: So here we go, from left to right. The original off my October '53 3 brick, and a nice 4 brick on the right.

Tks Eric. So now I'm really confused...if your 53 had a 3 brick on it should my car even have a 4 brick? Perhaps they use both on early Oval's and the brick difference's just reflect the different manufacturers?

Fri Oct 22, 2010 10:48 pm

IN2VWS wrote: Both of these do not look original to me.
Never seen one like the one on the left before, nor have I seen that makers mark.
The one on the right does not look correct on the back.

Thank you Sir.

Have you got any views on whether a May 55 would have had a 4 brick fitted?

Fri Oct 22, 2010 11:20 pm

IMO, it should have a 4 brick crest.
I know of a low miles original June 1955 car, with a 4 brick crest on it. The badge looks like it has never been removed from the car.

Fri Oct 22, 2010 11:23 pm

IN2VWS wrote: IMO, it should have a 4 brick crest.
I know of a low miles original June 1955 car, with a 4 brick crest on it. The badge looks like it has never been removed from the car.

That helps a lot, so I think after the answers above on the photos I posted the search is still on for a perfect NOS or used badge!

Sat Oct 23, 2010 12:35 am

F-22A wrote: 56OvalRHD wrote: So here we go, from left to right. The original off my October '53 3 brick, and a nice 4 brick on the right.

Tks Eric. So now I'm really confused...if your 53 had a 3 brick on it should my car even have a 4 brick? Perhaps they use both on early Oval's and the brick difference's just reflect the different manufacturers?

You know Martin, just as John pointed out that his opinion is that a 4 brick would be best, I would tend to agree. My '53 had never been apart, and had the original hood, trim, etc... but I don't feel comfortable saying anything about whether 3 or 4 brick emblems are correct. I know that one was original to my car, and had the right amount of patina to match.

Sat Oct 23, 2010 11:58 am

IN2VWS wrote: F-22A wrote:

Both of these do not look original to me.
Never seen one like the one on the left before, nor have I seen that makers mark.
The one on the right does not look correct on the back.

Here is a pic of the back of an original Lauer 4 brick badge.

cool thing, the seller of thes batches bought them from Lange ( the company who did the crests) direkly out of the old rooms, so not only K.S.P was doing them.

the left & the right came from lauer nürnberg!

Sat Oct 23, 2010 2:21 pm

oval56 wrote: IN2VWS wrote: F-22A wrote:

Both of these do not look original to me.
Never seen one like the one on the left before, nor have I seen that makers mark.
The one on the right does not look correct on the back.

Here is a pic of the back of an original Lauer 4 brick badge.

cool thing, the seller of thes batches bought them from Lange ( the company who did the crests) direkly out of the old rooms, so not only K.S.P was doing them.

the left & the right came from lauer nürnberg!

Interesting to note......Look at the tabs on the back of the 2 badges. Why are they mounted at a different height? It looks like one will work, and one will not.

We are not disputing that Lauer made badges. It is well known that Lauer was one of the suppliers of badges to VW. I am questioning the production method.

The originals appear to be stamped out on a press. The badges in question appear to be cast, which is the method used to make repops.