Inspection Stamp Quiz

[snapperm1c]

This is a uncalled for post. You asked if I would explain it in another post and I answered you that I would.

I will be posting answers after it has been up a little longer. Rick B

No need to get defensive, Rick, the post was not meant to inflame. But for over 10 years on Jouster I've watched these Cartouche posts come up again and again, with almost no definitive things to look for on particular cartouches.

There are the obvious ones, like the famous "Snoopy", and clearly some with new wood, etc.

Sometimes the answer is that, for example, the letters are misaligned, or of improper shape, without giving an example of a "correct" cartouche.

So what I'm saying is, unless examples of correct and fakes are placed side by side, and errors pointed out, there really is no information flow.

But if you do that, then of course you run the risk of educating a faker.

So I don't really see any point to these quizzes unless you describe the specific things about the fake and tell us what the real one should look like.

That way, the vast, overwhelming majority of us will be wiser the next time we are contemplating a purchase.

And you will have conributed greatly to the collector community.

Sure, there will be humpers, but the rest of us will be smarter...

SN1

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Bob Seijas]

"There are the obvious ones, like the famous "Snoopy", and clearly some with new wood, etc"

It wasn't obvious at the time, it was early days in cartouche fakery. GCA had to go to great lengths to show close-ups, real examples, enlist expert opinion. There was still a big hue and cry that maybe there were different styles. Since the seller said they came from an Air Force Base sale, maybe the USAF had a different stamp, yadda yadda yadda. His defenders on CSP were vitriolic. NOW it's obvious, but those partisan defenders never admitted they were wrong, they just slunk away.

Good for you, Rick, keep it up.

[Bodyman]

So what I'm saying is, unless examples of correct and fakes are placed side by side, and errors pointed out, there really is no information flow.

SN1

Perhaps the link below is a long winded response, but the short version is that the only way to not educate those that you are trying to thwart is that each individual has to do a great deal of work to figure it out themself, just like the "experts" did. We, (if I may) all made it up as we went along - why not you? Some ideas are good some aren't - most of them are not new. But to keep ahead in this cat and mouse game, most folks have realized the value of keeping their "cards close to their vests", so to speak ... Not to say that ideas are not shared and that there is not "information flow", it is just not flowed on the Internet any more.

Back in the day it was truly nasty. To call the posts on these subjects merely "vitriolic" is understating it by a long shot. Believe it or not, I actually had counsel (yes, an attorney and fellow collector) review some of my posts before I posted them! He told me I was insane to continue, but continue we did - all of us.

This is my response as to why information does not flow freely (at least here on the Internet any more (sorry)) and what those concerned need to do about it for themselves ...;

http://www.bulletinboards.com/TreeMs...UseNoFrame=yes

Best regards all.

[Ramboueille]

No need to get defensive, Rick, the post was not meant to inflame. But for over 10 years on Jouster I've watched these Cartouche posts come up again and again, with almost no definitive things to look for on particular cartouches.

There are the obvious ones, like the famous "Snoopy", and clearly some with new wood, etc.

Sometimes the answer is that, for example, the letters are misaligned, or of improper shape, without giving an example of a "correct" cartouche.

So what I'm saying is, unless examples of correct and fakes are placed side by side, and errors pointed out, there really is no information flow.

But if you do that, then of course you run the risk of educating a faker.

So I don't really see any point to these quizzes unless you describe the specific things about the fake and tell us what the real one should look like.

That way, the vast, overwhelming majority of us will be wiser the next time we are contemplating a purchase.

And you will have conributed greatly to the collector community.

Sure, there will be humpers, but the rest of us will be smarter...

SN1

In the same vein, one can also "beat the bricks" themselves and do their own evaluations and research by going to gun shows, surplus dealers or importers and going through a few thousand stocks or even buying the occasional nice rifle and gathering their own photos from the Internet. Surely enough time has passed in your 20 years of collecting to have garnered some idea of what is fake and what is not, perhaps not 100%, but at least to improve the perceptions of what you have now.

You can always contact Rick B. privately for an assessment or evaluation, can't you? I have quite a few times.

[Rick B]

Thanks Guys I appreciate the good words on this sour issue. I have not given up the good fight to help find the forgeries and in the past taken plenty of flak with many of you.

Ok here is the 2nd part of the test. Number one is a FAKE and below is the comparison. Under the pics states Authentic and fake. I would like to see as I put them up slowly if people can see the differences on them before I spot a few out. By the way the real one is from Bodyman's pictures Rick B


Authentic Stamping ------------------------------------------------------- Fake Stamping

Here are the cannons close-up which are a dead give away.

[snapperm1c]

Rick,

This is exactly what I'm lookiong for. You don't need to point oout all the characteristics, just set them side by side and I can do the rest.

The most striking feature to me on this one is the slightly flat-topped "A" in the original. I have one just like it from a CMP rifle.

Also the shape of the "F", and others.

On the cannons, the fake has a wider "breech" area, IMO, and the uneven muzzles, trunnion location/shape...

But this is very valuable, just placing the fakes and corrects side by side is actually a big help. Now, on those more elusive stamps, where parts are missing or rubbed off, things get a little trickier.

Thanks, Rick, I appreciate it.

[snapperm1c]

I'm refining my guess...

In addition to #1 being fake,
GHS:
2, Fake
5 Fake
6 real
11 real

McF:
4 real
9 fake
10 real
8 real

Although my WIN-13 has no periods between the letters...

SN1

[Rick B]

I'm refining my guess...

In addition to #1 being fake,
GHS:
2, Fake
5 Fake
6 real
11 real

McF:
4 real
9 fake
10 real
8 real

Although my WIN-13 has no periods between the letters...

SN1

13/16"th boxed GHD should not have periods but the 1" inch boxed one does. WB and RS had periods also. Rick B

P.S. you have 4 wrong in your guess's

[snapperm1c]

13/16"th boxed GHD should not have periods but the 1" inch boxed one does. WB and RS had periods also. Rick B

P.S. you have 4 wrong in your guess's

Thanks, Rick,

Hey, 4 wrongs is less than 50 percent... Looks like I need to go back to school...

I think my GHS's are all wrong... I'venever seen an original of those. But # 5 has to be fake... I think...