Lodge 104: Another R5 Variety?
Posted in 
Occoneechee 104: Unlisted R5 Variety?
(Editor: Oops… I had this set to publish on 2/25 or so I thought. Since it didn’t go through as originally planned, I have back dated this post. )
Greg Grimes recently sent me an image of an unusual copy of Occoneechee’s R5. He had acquired a R10 and R5b for his collection so was examining what he already had in his collection. He saw what he had thought was an R5a. He writes:
I thought I had an R-5a that was my dad’s patch….as it had separation between the red & black chest bars. Well in looking at it, I quickly determined it was not an R-5a due to the antenna, but it has a separation between the red and black bars, unlike the R-5c which has no separation. Could this be yet another variation of the R-5?? R-5d maybe??
The patch in question is shown at the top of this post.
Blue Book and my site list the R5 varieties like this:
| R5a | LBL | WHT | RED | BPR face; BLK antenna; felt; YEL space between BLK & RED bars on YEL chest plate; WHT felt extends 4mm; MVE | ||
| R5b | LBL | WHT | RED | BLK & RED bars touch w/no YEL in between | ||
| R5c | LBL | WHT | RED | BLK & RED bars touch w/no YEL in between; HOR WHT dots on BLK antenna |
I’m having trouble deciding what to make of this. The R5 varieties confuse me. Here’s a montage of the images I have online for these patches:
Occoneechee 104 R5 Montage
Another local collector has since found a copy of what they think is an “R5d” in his collection.
I am not a fan of adding additional varieties based upon minute differences. My first inclination is to say something like “that’s interesting” but not list it as another variety. If the lodge 104 collectors want to chance this patch and consider it a variety, they are certainly free to do so. That perception is colored by my confusion about the R5 varieties already listed, so I can be swayed.
What do you think?
Popularity: 10% [?]
OK…Here’s my take on this. The difference in the R-5 a & b is the seperation or no seperation between the red and black bars on the chest plate. Now look at the antenna orientation. The top piece of the antenna bends back in.
On the R-5c there is no seperation between the black and red bars on the chest plate. The antenna on the left side of the head, the bottom portion curls back in unlike the a & b varities that curl from the top.
So there is a clear difference soley by the antenna orientation.
The c and proposed d varieties have the same antenna,but there is seperation between the red and black bars onthe chest. This is the same difference that classifies the difference between the a & b so it seems to me the same should hold true for the c and proposed d varieties as well.
In other words, if it’s good for one,it’s good for the other.
I would be skeptical if there was just the one example, but now we know there are at least two out there…maybe more. So John,go ahead and indicate as R-5d. I don’t like varieties either, but this seems straight forward to me. If we weren’t going to have varieties on this particular issue, then the BB editors should have indicated as MVE to begin with. Once you let the bull out in the china shop, it’s hard to get him back under control.