Bren Pogo Stick: Real or Repro

[rob love]

I recently bought a Bren stem (aka pogo stick) mount from Ebay. The buyer indicated, several times, that it was an original, minty, and in his possession from the mid 80s when he brought a carrier out of a barn in France and imported it to the US. I already had an excellent repro from Rick Debruyn, but thought an upgrade to an original would be a nice treat.

It showed up yesterday, but there seem to be a few inconsistencies from what I would expect on a 75 year old item. So I am going to post some photos, and would ask the opinions of those who have known originals, as well as known repros. I'll point out a few of the things that bother me, and await the opinions of the collective group.

First off is the little 6-32 screw. It has a plated finish as opposed to the non-plated screws that I am used to with that vintage. As well, there seems to be some odd wear on the end of the little locating stud more akin to welding and filing.

Then there is the long spring. The ends are plain, and this one is actually two shorter springs welded in the middle. Seems odd that the military didn't have the required springs manufactured.

[rob love]

Next is the end of the dowel that runs up the middle of the lower half of the stem. This is the only part that shows "patina (rust), but the end is still shiny from where it was crudely ground. Seems to me in production, the end might have been turned in a lathe and over 75 years, the patina would have covered the ground portion.

This one has British casting marks on the upper cast part. No other part numbers are anywhere on the mount. The cast part number is nice and clear on the one side, but a little faint on the other. There would appear to be a small locating mark in the tube at the top where it meets the cast stem.

[rob love]

I have seen a little drain hole on the bottom of the tube on some repros, just above the steel pintle insert and below the long slot. This one does not have a drain hole.

Paint is the darker British green, and underneath the top half there does not appear to be any primer, nor any patina where the paint is missing on the first 3". As well, there is a slight counterboring done on the upper tubing for the first 1/4".

I'll now ask for the opinions of the group. Did I buy a repro, or an extremely minty original? Overall it just appears too good to be true.

[rob love]

http://www.mapleleafup.net/forums/sh...ght=pogo+stick
On the above linked thread, Kevin shows a repro he made next to one he says is original. The original seems to have a few of the same features as this one, like the black primer underneath the green paint on the bottom half of the stick. He only shows the part number on the one side of the upper casting....seems to be a very good match. Would love to see some of the finer details of that original. The photos below are Kevin's.

[Lynn Eades]

Hi Rob, The spring is definitely a replacement.
I had 4 originals.
One i traded of to Nigel Ward in Australia. he made about 20 copies if I recall correctly. He took them to the U.K to sell.
Yes they have two pinning holes and above that is a smaller drain hole.
The original spring only has an air gap about the same size as the wire dia. (do you follow?} One I have appears to have a slightly lighter spring.
The inner tube is marked TL12433 FAACO 42
The tubes seem to be stainless and have no primer only an olivey green paint
In contast, he cast top is marked FMCo and has a smaller i.d. to the B.G. mounting hole, than your one pictured.
Your screw has probably been replaced. One i have is much shorter, but the same head style.
Of the four, the one Nigel had, had a pitted top casting. The three I kept being better. One I have has very faint markings.
The flange on the bottom is marked TL12429 around the big dia.
The outer tube is marked again with the FAACO (Ford Anti Aircraft Co?????)
but the part number is faint. One, I cannot find any markings.
Does that help?
I'd say the main bits you have are original, if you can forgive the hole size in the top casting and the keeper and screw.
The bottom bit looks rather new?
It is likely the keeper is hand finished, in keeping with British methodology

[rob love]

Thanks for your insight Lynn.

The three photos in the post above yours are of Kevin's repro along with one he had borrowed which was original. The one I have has a more proportional hole on the top casting very much like the repro from Rick. There is still paint in the hole. I'll try it out on a Bren tonight for fit.

The lack of part numbers and drain hole is worrisome to me.

Does anyone know when these were initially repro'd? I thought I had read about reproductions dating right back into the 80s in the old quad or cmp magazines.

[Jordan Baker]

I bought a repro years ago from a batch Dennis Walker had made.

[kevin powles]

The Original I borrowed was from Bruce Parker, I've since got part of an original which was ground dug but restorable. The one from Bruce was definitely an original.

Repro ones don't take to kindly to having gas operated Brens attached or driving them into low cover tent frames........ as I've found out.

[rob love]

I was contacted by another forum member who can ID himself if he likes. He made up some early copies back in the 80s, and in fact welded together most of the springs as shown in my photos. He is positive this was one of his creations.

So now I start the return process on ebay. It's hard on the seller, as he has to re-reimburse the shipping that I paid, as well as pay the return shipping (with insurance and signature) back to him. Since it's international, it takes a lot of meat off the bones. I don't think he intentionally mis-represented it, but it still falls on his responsibility in the end.

Oh well, with any luck I'll find an original at my favorite scrapyard yet.

[David Herbert]

Rob, I think that Ebay rules now more or less automaticaly give you your money back in cases of misreprisentation and it is up to the seller to pay for any costs involved in getting his item back. Obviously you need to use the Ebay due process and offer evidence but the one time it happened to me (I purchaced an "Army" jacket in "unissued condition" but it came with RAF and unit badges and a name in it!) I got my money back in full and got to keep the jacket. As you say, it was the sellers responsibility to give an accurate description and if not sure, to say so.

David

[rob love]

David
I am currently in the process now of requesting a refund. The seller has until the 11th to sort it with me, after which ebay will step in. From the point of my emailing him that I want to return it, he went into radio silence. Not sure how that tactic will work with the monstrosity called ebay.

[B. Harris]

Perhaps a negotiated settlement for a repro price would be in order.
I'm sure someone on here would be interested in purchasing it for what it is?

Just a suggestion.

[rob love]

Bruce

I have been contacted by a board member who is interested. However, I am in to it for a bit more than I think a repro would sell for. I have no intention of losing anything on this deal, so we'll see what happens.

I already have a repro myself....don't need another.

[David Herbert]

Rob,
When they go silent on you, you pretty well know that they are not as honorable as they might be. I loose all sympathy for them at that point. If you have made your case to Ebay as you have here I think you might be plesantly surprised by the outcome.

Good luck David

[rob love]

Well it was over the weekend, so perhaps out of town or whatever. Anyway, he has contacted me today. I don't think he was scamming, I think he really thought it was original.

As I also mentioned earlier, if he gets stuck rebating shipping both ways, it will really take a chunk of change. He has asked if someone up here in Canada wants it, or alternatively, UK or elsewhere. To that end, It will be up for offers, and he will cover any loss to myself.

[Lynn Eades]

Rob, can you put up photos of the base?

[rob love]

Lynn: Do you mean photos of the bottom half of the assembly, or of the lathed portion at the very bottom?

I got a notice from Ebay that the seller has accepted the return and is going to send me a mailing label. So it would seem that my feelings that he was honorable are correct. Quite frankly, that has been my experience in this hobby overall. While there are thousands (or more likely 10s of thousands) of members in this hobby, it is still too small a fraternity to be able to operate with a bad name or reputation.

[Lynn Eades]

Both if you like Rob.

[rob love]

Here are the requested photos. I just noticed there is only a single pin on both the top and the bottom portions as opposed to the two pins that are supposed to be there.

[rob love]

Originally Posted by David Herbert

Rob,
When they go silent on you, you pretty well know that they are not as honorable as they might be. I loose all sympathy for them at that point. If you have made your case to Ebay as you have here I think you might be plesantly surprised by the outcome.

Good luck David

So I made the request for refund from ebay, and as I mentioned before the seller contacted me and we exchanged a few emails. Then I got a notice from ebay that the seller was accepting the return, and that he would send me a return label. Then nothing. I let it go past the deadline, then asked ebay for help, as I had not received the return address. So ebay put a hold on it for 5 days (which ended up being 7). Next thing I know ebay returned all the funds and told me I could keep the mount.

Not feeling right about it, I did send another email to the seller, offering to send it back to him for the cost of the shipping. I also offered that he could sell it on ebay as a repro, and I would ship it form here for the cost of the shipping. Nothing heard in about a week now. Strange. It is a nice repro, and certainly worth something to someone. Surprised that he would abandon it .