Ludwig Trans badge ....

[Paul G]

The interior part of the grommet looks fine, like on my own drum but the exterior flange looks odd. Looks too fat and too rounded to me. Might just be the angle of the photo though or the fact it looks to be polished. Mine is much flatter. Then again mine might be an oddball, although I'm sure it's original.

View attachment 530166

Thanks K.O. The height of the grommet looks flush/flat against the badge in your photo. Am I seeing that correctly or is there more of a curve to it?

Without a doubt the grommet profile on my drum is quite different from yours...

Thanks for chiming in.

...And very nice to see you here, Happy Holidays to you.

 

[Bijan]

I’ll get on the computer tomorrow and break it down.

 

[DolFan54]

Here’s my buddy’s drum. We noticed it has a bit of a flange on the grommet on the interior much like your drum has.

 

[K.O.]

Thanks K.O. The height of the grommet looks flush/flat against the badge in your photo. Am I seeing that correctly or is there more of a curve to it?

Without a doubt the grommet profile on my drum is quite different from yours...

Thanks for chiming in.

...And very nice to see you here, Happy Holidays to you.

That's an old picture taken many years ago I first got the drum, but, yes, the flange on the outer grommet is pretty flat on my drum. Most Ludwig grommets do have a rounder profile on the outer lip, but even then, not to the degree that yours seems to exhibit. That's almost like a Slingerland grommet (although theirs were aluminum, not brass).

 

[Bijan]

I’ll say it again- the inner flange of Paul’s drum’s grommet is not the same as all the other drums posted. The difference is subtle, yet very stark. No offense to any of the other posters.

 

[Paul G]

Thanks all. You guys rock!
Here are some of the many grommets used around the same era...some might be slightly older.. I've borrowed photos from the internet, so if any of these are yours and you object, please inform me so I can remove it... I thought it might be better to look at WFL drums since mine is an early transition version. In the photo with multiple badges , check out the grommet dead center...Pretty sure that's the one...
I'm not disagreeing, but I'm skeptical due to the fact that there not a nick or any signs of any wear on the drum...none on the screws to install the snare wires, no marks on the trods, lugs, or anywhere else on the drum. Could be a swapped out grommet but that makes no sense due to the pristine condition of the drum. Especially when historically the brass drums plating was not the problem that plating the aluminum drums presented...Must see in person. Thanks for all your help and I think I have all the answers I need and I'm confident in what I have here. Thanks again...
Be well all.

 

[Bijan]

I'll try to break it down as quickly as possible.

So, the badge the preceded the TB is the WFL badge that says LUDWIG DRUM CO on the bottom line of the badge- those badges have grommets much different than Paul's drum, so most of the pics above aren't really pertinent.

A. The grommet- it's just wrong. The grommet itself is incorrect, and the way it was attached just isn't right. The grommet is also polished brass, which is incorrect as well. It was polished before being installed- if it was done after the fact the badge would have been affected. I've seen loads of COB Supers besides the few I currently owned. Why would the grommet be wrong? see B

B. The chrome- pretty much all WFL/TB Super shells were less than well prepped. I've seen many that look like the shell wasn't fully polished before being chromed. The lugs also appear to have been replaced, as the corners are soft looking. Also, the WFL P-83s weren't mirror finished- from the pics this one looks TOO GOOD- literally like a mirror.
That's just inconsistent with production parts. I believe the shell and some (or all) of the parts were rechromed.

There was something else, but I can't remember what it was right now. When both A and B are considered, it's just too much evidence of something "off" about this drum.

Again- I don't AT ALL believe Paul is trying to hoodwink any of us. Whoever sold him the drum did that (or whoever sold them the drum)

 

[Bijan]

Oh yeah- chrome tension rod washers- if the drum and parts were plated those got plated too. They were never chrome from the factory.

 

[Paul G]

Its certainly possible that someone may have re chromed this drum which again seems unmarred, but for perhaps a labor of love? That's expensive unless you have the skill set to do it yourself correct?
Your points are all well taken however. Especially the washers...
If the drum were used and needed to be re chromed, I'd think I would see signs of old wear, nicks on the lugs, worn trods from tensioning the drum, marred set screws, some sign that the drum was used. I see absolutely none of that. Re chroming would detract from the resale value of the drum in this case...It makes no sense to me as a player, unless someone had money to burn so they could look at a gorgeous instrument and never play it.
That has changed, I'm playing the mess out of it now.
Thanks again for all the time you guys put into this thread. Much appreciated.

 

[Bijan]

Well, chrome from that era was, many times, less than perfect. If it was done 20-30 years ago, I suspect that it was way more affordable at that time. At least they did a great job and didn’t change the lines of the lugs much at all. A shot of the backside of the throw would probably confirm if it was replated or not.
Labor of love for sure- but these drums have pretty much always been desirable to collectors , as they’re fairly tough to find, especially the 402s. As you know, they sure do sound fantastic!