Reissues

[Mr. Mitt]

Thanks, murphusa. That wasn't clear enough in the first post. Similarly, the left handed bat post in the "sale/wanted/trade" section could be taken several different ways. Unfortunately, sometimes things are misread or taken differently than the author intended because inflection doesn't translate well in this medium. No worries...

[vintagebrett]

My dad did locate the catalog with the reissues pictured - hope to have a snapshot of it this evening and will get it posted when I do - he said there is no Keltner in the shot but there is a Rolfe - we can then compare it to John's and the one in Hunts and see if they are similar. Still would love to see the back of the ones in Hunts.

[murphusa]

David Hunt told me we would have pictures of the labels sometime today

There is also a Rolfe pictured on Bruce Rogers dsale list with the Rawlings St Louis Label

[softball66]

Whew, lengthy dialogue here and very intriguing discussions for us.
I have a numbered list of the gloves, re-issues from Nocona and replicas from John Golomb the sports Doctor. I can furnish info on quantities of each model that we made. I'm surprised that more of the Nocona re-issues don't show up.
Two things one should check in determining the originals from the replicas are, of course, the patch and the other is the wrist button if those are used.
I know we didn't have original Nokona buttons for our replicas. Ditto on Sports Doc gloves when he made some replica HHs, (15 sold) and RRs nor Rawlings patches. And patch dating will be useful if later style patches were used.
The six Mantle repro MMs that Rawlings made, I believe, were made for the pallbearers at Mantle's funeral. It looks like, from time to time, Rawlings
has made some more of these in various models like the McQuinn. Bob C. would certainly have some answers for us on that.
One of the differences in the replicas and even the re-issues, is the leather is not going to look quite the same and unless original dies are used and not hand cut from patterns, the glove will look much better.
So J.D. look at the button on your Spalding. If it's a Spalding button then maybe original glove, if not and it's a generic shank button, then??? The rolled lace connector on the web, like Mutt pointed out, doesn't look right. And why no ink in the stamping?
On Hunt's gloves, those don't look right to me as original. Patches will tell and maybe Rawlings buttons would reveal more if Rawlings buttons are used,if any left at the plant.
We know Akadema is making Gehrig and other replicas. Pastime Sports, here in Dallas, makes some replicas but these are rather crude
and turned out in Mexico.
In my humble opinion best replica has been our Babe Ruth D&M made
by Nocona. We produced 155 of these, but, no D&M buttons on these and
we made replica patches that don't quite match up. The glove fitted together nicely though and the leather was close. We didn't get the web right though.
If anyone has some questions on these, just email me at glovecollector@mac.com

[Mr. Mitt]

like Mutt pointed out

Joe... who's Mutt?

I agree that of all the repros, the D&M Ruth is the sweetest. Also love the fact that they can never be mistaken for originals given the edition numbering. The box was a hell of a nice touch too!

Where did you get those D&M patches made?

[murphusa]

From Bruce Rogers site

[softball66]

Just diggin ya Jere. Nocona got the patch made.
"Sorry, Mr. Mitt! meant Mitt as in Mittens".

[murphusa]

I'd buy both Hunt gloves now for the price they're at

just sayin

[murphusa]

David was a man of his word, here are the pictures. They asked that we get back to them asap so they can correct the listing

Rolfe



Keltner

[murphusa]

My opinion is that both of the gloves were intended to be display models only and not for retail sale.

I would not consider them re-issues as they were not

As such I would value the Keltner at $225.00 and the Rolfe at $400.00

Just my opinion, what's yours?

[vintagebrett]

Thanks for getting pictures of the tagging - they are definitely not vintage. They may not have been made for the intent of resale but I still classify them as reproductions as they are not vintage stock. I bet there were made with a purpose in mind - most likely as a display models as you suggest - either for a ballpark or for a Rawlings display.

I'll get a better quality pic of this next time I run over to my parents house but as you can see, on the cover of the 2000 Rawlings catalog, they had these reproduced versions of the gloves. There is a Rolfe glove and it looks similar to the one in the Hunts auction.



Value is whatever they end up at in the auction - I'd value them less because I'm not a big Rawlings fan and they are not vintage. But to someone who likes Rawlings items, they could be very valuable.

I'm glad that David has been monitoring this and will update the listing. The gloves will still do well but it's reassuring to know that the bidders will be informed as to what they actually are.

This has been a great discussion - thanks for everyone's assistance and opinions - keep them coming!!

[Mr. Mitt]

For some reason, murphusa’s photos from Hunt are not visible for me. I’ll try to view them later, on a different computer.

Interestingly, the Mantle repro on the cover of the 2000 catalog is slightly different than the ones made for the Mantle family. The one on the cover does not have “MM” on the heel like the others.

[swalt1234]

Sorry I'm late to this as I just looked at the Hunt catalog. Those Rawlings KK and RR gloves had the Rawlings logo on the front with the 'Registered' trademark. This appeared before 1963, around 1957. Note most of the 1958 tags have the little 'R' after the Rawlings but the 1954 MC for example doesn't have it. Look at Rawlings P 6-7 on Jim's site and compare the early DS with the 2 1958 black tag versions. BTW I've always thought the O'Farrell Rawlings mitt on Jim's site Rawlings p 22 was the same remake and looks similar to the Hunt gloves in question. To me these shouldn't be worth much at all, and have no real inherent value.
Mark

[swalt1234]

Those cloth tags posted above are tags from the 1960's so these gloves seem to be displays from the 60's or even '70s. Noone would ever pay top prices for 60's remakes of 1940 items if they were display signs, decal bats or any toy for that matter. I hope Hunt revises accordingly.

[Mr. Mitt]

On a different computer now and can see the Hunt photos. I concur, they are definitely not vintage and defer to Mark on dating them properly as he has more Rawlings experience than all of us combined (outside of Bob himself). Re-issues, no, since we seem to believe they were not produced to be sold, but they can definitely be categorized as reproductions since they are not original to the period they represent.

Again to each his own as to what to collect and how to value items. My opinion, however, is that reproductions made in limited quantities have some value. I just disagree that the two examples in question are worth several hundred dollars each. Value wise, the KK and RR models can not be compared with the MM. They're not in the same league, even if if there were more MM's produced. There's a story behind the MM, Mantle's family ordered them and they were given to select friends and family. This aura creates demand, and that demand creates inflated value. The KK and the RR are very nice repros, but there is very little value there in my opinion.