Home / User comments

Filter
Display

  • Shenley - Sunday 29 January 2017 12:22
    I have one of these for sale. Shenley
  • jbcherry - Thursday 19 January 2017 21:12
    My mistake, already in database, number 4590, I didn't realise there was a section for pony brasses :)
  • jbcherry - Wednesday 2 November 2016 22:07
    This one is cast :)
  • jbcherry - Tuesday 18 October 2016 19:06
    Already in the database, number 8555
  • jbcherry - Tuesday 18 October 2016 18:59
    This one is cast :)
  • Esther_Franck - Sunday 18 September 2016 20:48
    you are right.
  • jbcherry - Saturday 17 September 2016 00:24
    I suspect this is stamped :)
  • jbcherry - Monday 29 August 2016 23:32
    I now understand why there are these 'modified apple core' brasses. In 1911, on welfare grounds, it was made illegal to fit brasses with bells to horse harness. So owners would remove the bells an replace with something else, similarly the manufacturer would adapt unsold stock and unused 'blanks'. Similarly with the many 'beehive' brasses that had bells attached to the apex, with the bell removed the usual solution appears to have been to stuff a bit of ribbon in the remaining hole.
  • jbcherry - Monday 18 July 2016 21:31
    OK, counting is not my strong point, there are of course only 9 petals/points on the flower/star.
  • jbcherry - Wednesday 13 July 2016 14:35
    The orientation of the central star could appear to be a trivial reason to class this as a different design to 11038. For similar cast crescents, where the star is soldered to the central bar, I would agree. However for these stamped brasses it would require making a new die to emboss the shape and a new punch to cut out around it. I would argue that amount of work justifies classing it as a different design, a conscious decision was made to produce it (why? as it is unlikely most people would even notice), it is not just a whim or an accident of how the star was orientated when assembled.