For discussion: 23rd Fighter Group Patched A-2

[JDAM]

Here's one worthy of scrutiny & debate.

Guess the selling price. Closest estimate wins a gold star! I'll start with $1475

http://www.ebay.com/itm/WWII-AAF-A-2-FL ... 3f32f4716b

 

[Silver Surfer]

the tiger looks like a decal on leather. were they done that way? from my limited experience, the disney tigers i have personally seen, that were painted, were not as "cleanly" painted. and, the paint was often inconsistent from color to color. often the white paint being thicker then the other colors.

 

[dmar836]

Personally, it doesn't look like the patch has been in there very long. I also think it looks to be a "crusterized" patch. Does the thread appear synthetic to anyone else? I can see no variance in jacket wear under the edge of the patch.
Here again, I would never buy such a jacket without provenance. This guy has been putting up rare stuff for years and now it's always "for a friend". He wouldn't be the first to be caught fabricating or selling fabricated A-2s. He just hasn't been foolish enough to post his previously found wares all over the web.
JMO,
Dave

 

[unclegrumpy]

Painted patches can be very hard to judge with 100% accuracy from pictures, and even in hand it can sometimes be very difficult. That said, this one looks both artificially aged, and to have been painted with modern paints. The modern paint is part of what is giving it a "decal" look, but I doubt it is a decal.

The 23rd Fighter Group is one of the most heavily copied designs, and has been for years. The originals I have seen have been very will executed, many of the fakes not. I am not sure what "crusterized" is, but it does not sound good....which is probably appropriate.

Now this from the standpoint of discussing if the patch is an original from WW II. If someone was buying this as a knock around original jacket, with a very well done postwar patch on it, then it is a pretty nice package. However, it sadly appears from the description, that this guy is hoping that someone bids as if this was right off the pilots back.

 

[a2jacketpatches]

If not a decal, very nicely painted. The cracks look good and consistent with an old patch and brittle oil paint. The perimeter thread looks like it was painted over with the gray. Overall patina looks real and not overly done as most faked patches do. Can't say for sure too much about the wear under the edge of that corner, but if in hand I'd be lifting another area. The smallest scratch that continued under an undisturbed part of that patch would indicate foul play. Great job if it is a fake and most likely done quite some time ago.

 

[unclegrumpy]

Overall patina looks real and not overly done as most faked patches do.

I know recreating patches is clearly one of your areas of expertise, but I have to disagree with you about the patina.

While I agree not overdone, this patch has the look of the applied browning that was common in the fakes that came out in the 1990's. I think if you take a closer look, you will see it is not age, wear, or dirt, but something wiped on.....and then artfully wiped off.

 

[foster]

I've had a close look at the thread, and it is difficult for me to say from the photo. I do agree with Sean that the white / gray border appears to have been painted over the thread as well.

 

[a2jacketpatches]

I hear what you're saying and considered that while examining. But those cracks most likely would have have picked up something that was wiped on and then off. And the white is an even off white. My other thought is that that a real patina may have been cleaned up a bit.

Just an opinion based on practical application of the method. It looks to be oil paint as well and that has been the same recipe for centuries with very little change.

 

[dmar836]

Sorry, "crusterized" is fake wear/aging. Looks like an oil wash to me. I find it difficult to believe that a patch, if original to the jacket, could receive the wear that the jacket shows, enough to require new cuffs and zipper, and enough patch age to show such "patina" yet not suffer any loss of paint. We have all seen painted patches that were original to a jacket and this just doesn't add up. The isolated view of the patch looks like a layer of wear on top. Wear fades and removes - it doesn't add. JMO
So, was it common to over paint the thread with silver? Is that how the 23rd painted patches were done? I would have thought these were complete prior to sewing.
Either way, with such potential for question why would anyone go big bucks on such a jacket? It will never grow provenance so the authenticity question will continue for the life of the jacket. Unless someone adds further to it.
Dave

 

[a2jacketpatches]

Can't say the patch is original to the jacket, but I think it's been there a while. Can't say that painting over the perimeter thread was common either, but very possible, this stuff has been messed with by everyone from the original owner on down. Can't say that 23rd FG patches were done this way because I've never seen one exactly like this.

Can say that the paint may hold up better than the jacket depending on how it was mixed. I've seen patches almost completely losing their paint on a very good condition original jacket. And good condition painted patch on a crispy potato chip dry rotted jacket. We simply cannot gauge one based on the other. Can say this paint job looks older to me. And can say that if faked, a very good job of it.

 

[unclegrumpy]

But those cracks most likely would have have picked up something that was wiped on and then off.

Not if the special sauce was applied when the patch was new and had no cracks in it yet. I think what you are seeing is a well executed artificially aged patch that was sewn onto an original jacket, and then worn. Then the cracks came from the wearing and time. I also agree with Dave that there looks like there has been some further touch up and aging enhancements a long the way as well.

One thing to consider about cracks, is as an original leather patch wears and ages, it is probably going to pick up dirt and patina in the cracks.....unless the cracking is more from time rather than actual use. Except even then, years of dust and other factors can usually be seen.

Part of what I think is clouding your perspective, is you are a very honest and reputable guy.

Many people aren't, and are exceptionally skillful in the art of deception....especially when there is a chance for a significant profit.

 

[unclegrumpy]

Can't say the patch is original to the jacket, but I think it's been there a while. Can't say that painting over the perimeter thread was common either, but very possible, this stuff has been messed with by everyone from the original owner on down. Can't say that 23rd FG patches were done this way because I've never seen one exactly like this.

Can say that the paint may hold up better than the jacket depending on how it was mixed. I've seen patches almost completely losing their paint on a very good condition original jacket. And good condition painted patch on a crispy potato chip dry rotted jacket. We simply cannot gauge one based on the other. Can say this paint job looks older to me. And can say that if faked, a very good job of it.

I agree with your analysis.

However, I think real things generally stand on their merits. Often there are a few unanswered questions, but not many tough significant ones.

The crooks depend on the buyer starting from the position that they want an item to be real. This is a big advantage for them. Shattering that belief can be very difficult, because the buyer has vested themselves in it....their egos and level of expertise are on the line.

I think if you look at this jacket as a put together first, and then make it explain its way out, it becomes much tougher for it to make the grade.

 

[a2jacketpatches]

Basically I'm with everyone on this including the probability that it's been messed with along the way and not an original WW2 attached patch. But I also prefer to look at things from the perspective of never say never as opposed to it being a clouded view. I've seen as many good and fakes as anyone here, in hand and photos. As quick as you can say if the special sauce was, another guy can say if it wasn't. Again, I'm with you and not against, I just happen to have a little bit more to add.

I age my patches using a custom mix of components from under the sink to standard art supplies for my special sauce, apply it and remove it partially using another method of my own. It looks great to the untrained eye but would never fool most guys here. It has to be a quick and easy process for it to be worth doing. On the other hand, I'm very well aware of the aging of such items and probably could fool most guys here if I wanted to.

 

[unclegrumpy]

But I also prefer to look at things from the perspective of never say never as opposed to it being a clouded view. I've seen as many good and fakes as anyone here, in hand and photos. As quick as you can say if the special sauce was, another guy can say if it wasn't.

I totally agree! You can never say never, but it sure would easier to if we lived in a world without people trying to cheat other people.

 

[dmar836]

Yep. And with anything from such a famous group, just as if it were an astronaut's jacket, it really should be named for a buyer to have any confidence.
Dave

 

[FlyingYankee]

Let me guess: Got it directly from the estate of a veteran while criss-crossing the country

 

[dmar836]

No, that's his old story. Now he sells things only "for his collector friend".
Dave

 

[a2jacketpatches]

It seems this guy has a rep for trickery. So just to add a little bit more, I haven't trusted a dealer in over a decade. I sold a super rare mint condition N-1H Navy Deck jacket to one of the most reputable and well known dealers on the East coast. Bought this jacket out of a church rummage sale for ten bucks and sold to him for 80- thinking I did well. Well, about a month later I saw it on his Ebay at 1800- and climbing. It grew an appropriately mint squadron patch, paperwork, trench art, along with a written name in white paint inside somewhere. So regardless of all being real stuff, it was all married together and in reality the name and provenance wasn't worth its weight in ****

As far as I'm concerned, unless I buy at the flea market for peanuts, or straight out of an estate sale, the possibility of BS is very high.

 

[foster]

At shows around here, the warning label is this:
Buy the ITEM, not the STORY.

Dealers often embellish the item with a fantastic story which cannot usually be authenticated or verified.

When setting up at shows, I was also tempted to do the same - not to fake an item so much as to offer a worthy tall tale to go with it. Many of the dealers expected it. I decided several years ago that I disliked the peer pressure to be dishonest. So now at the shows, when I do set up I sell items as they are for what they are. Lying isn't worth it - not for a $20 item and not for an $2000 item, and any other value. Honesty is worth something far greater, even if there is no dollar sign measure of it.

 

[dmar836]

Well said, both of you.
Grumpy's point is one I have considered a lot.

"The crooks depend on the buyer starting from the position that they want an item to be real. This is a big advantage for them. Shattering that belief can be very difficult, because the buyer has vested themselves in it....their egos and level of expertise are on the line."

If this jacket sold as the sum of it's parts it would bring little. Or what if the seller suggested that he didn't trust the patch. It would not only ruin his sale but set our discussion on a different foot.


Dave