Third Party Press

ZF39 scope can-good or bad?

fl22326

Active member
Gents,

thoughts? i have my opinion but I'd like to have yours as well

Cheers
 

Attachments

  • s-l1600 (1).jpg
    s-l1600 (1).jpg
    252.5 KB · Views: 76
  • s-l1600 (2).jpg
    s-l1600 (2).jpg
    81 KB · Views: 72
  • s-l1600 (3).jpg
    s-l1600 (3).jpg
    235.1 KB · Views: 84
  • s-l1600 (4).jpg
    s-l1600 (4).jpg
    191.2 KB · Views: 74
  • s-l1600 (5).jpg
    s-l1600 (5).jpg
    150.3 KB · Views: 61
  • s-l1600.jpg
    s-l1600.jpg
    245 KB · Views: 55
Not looking good. The tell tale is the hasp/latch which doesn't have the best pic. There is a commercial stamped marking on the hasp/latch of these and zf/41 cans (circle with a star made of triangles). Legit examples have a "U" or upside down "U" between two of the triangle points - appears to be missing on this example. This was a small detail missed by high quality reproductions produced in France or the Czech republic.

My other worry is all the orange rust - which IMHO shouts out - expedited rust/aging. Genuine examples have some rust or oxidization but rarely have the extent of orange/deep rust that this example has.

Likely someone has good pics of a legit hasp/latch.

You can't always use the "U" method as once upon a time battery boxes were plentiful and cheap - so they would take legit commercial hasps/latches off these boxes and use them on there reproduction scope containers.
 
Well, I am a bit puzzled because to me, it is a fake but PPP is an expert so I have some difficulties imagining he is wrong...Any other advice to share from other experts?

Max
 
I also think the can is original. I see the fakes at every show, and this is not one of them, IMO.
 

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top