Wax Pack - Legit...or resealed?

Charlie9 · January 13, 2009 2:55AM

Anybody out there really good at spying tampered or resealed was packs? I have some doubts about these two wax packs but I can't quite tell from the roller marks, etc.. It may be tough to see in the pics but what about the corner folds, etc.? If you can give me a guess based on some experience I would greatly appreciate it!

BobS · January 13, 2009 3:07AM

Bad, both of them. sorry.

Charlie9 · January 13, 2009 3:09AM

I suspect that as well but what would I be looking for?

jeffcbay · January 13, 2009 3:09AM

Does anyone catch the "irony" (pun intended) with the iron-on illustration on the back?

smtjoy · January 13, 2009 3:10AM

Im a novice at pack collecting but just looking at the corners would make me run, way to loose for me.

smet · January 13, 2009 3:15AM

I agree with the above. The corners look way too loose.

BobS · January 13, 2009 3:19AM

I'll elaborate.

Besides the corners (which are not looking good, way too loose and extra folds), the packs do not pass the "puffy test".

Look at the profile pictures, especially pic #2 of the first pack and the last picture. It is "puffy". It should not be "puffy". Packs are puffy at the factory, but once they're stacked in a box, they flatten out and develop a recognizable look to them. Eveyone talks about the seal and the corners, but nobody talks about the edges. If you have any late 80's stuff sitting around, look at the pack in profile. You'll see what i mean.

Charlie9 · January 13, 2009 3:36AM

Thanks...that helps me greatly and confirms my suspicions.

storm888 · January 13, 2009 3:38AM

<< <i>Does anyone catch the "irony" (pun intended) with the iron-on illustration on the back? >>

////////

That was my first thought!

packCollector · January 13, 2009 3:43AM

terrible corners , way to loose , etc . also look at the 1st scan of both packs , you can see where the original fold was by the break in the line of the new fold

jswieton · January 13, 2009 3:46AM

I don't like it. The corners look like they have been re-folded. I would stay away.

flatfoot816 · January 13, 2009 4:54AM

I'll add my 2 cents--in addition to the above....there are no double folds on the corners. Double corners are very difficult to duplicate once a pack is opened. One of the best ways to tell. As to the "puffy" test, I am not a strong believer. While true they would be flat after lying around for a while, I have purchased many packs that are "puffy" that are also legit.

summerof68 · January 13, 2009 11:05AM

Nobody has yet mentioned the horizontal "roller lines" on the reverse. Either they perfectly line up on both rear flaps or they don't. "Puffy" might be a concern to some; "corner folds" should be a concern for many; but matching "roller lines" should be mandatory for all concerned...

hotmush · January 13, 2009 1:14PM

Gotta admit: I'm missing the roller lines concept. Can you elaborate?

grote15 · January 13, 2009 1:24PM

Really bad reseals...almost as bad as it gets..As packcollector said, you can see the original outline of the pack in the crease in the wrapper. Unfortunately, there are far better fakes than these on the market, too..

With regard to the roller seal on back: when packs came off the production line they were essentially "sealed" with a thin sheet of hot wax, so if the pack is authentic, the horizontal roller wax marks on the back should run untouched and not be broken. If a pack is opened up, it is very difficult (though not impossible) for recreate that natural seal on back, once it is broken..And since many resealers buy wrappers on the secondary market, original roller seals are tough to replicate for these pack factory guys..In addition, a number of these resealers using heating elements to "seal" or reseal the back on back, which will further distort or damage the original roller marks on an authentic pack.

Beezer12 · January 14, 2009 4:16PM

Can't be sure. Those weren't wrapped with any concept of quality control whatsoever in mind way back then so lots of the really old packs just look sloppy. No one cared, nor should they. The lines along the side length might be from an original loose wrap with the wrapper bending over the edge of the cards from 58 years of handling maybe.....
I agree with summerof68 that the roller seal is the key element to consider but one would really have to be familiar with the appearance of the roller seal from seeing other examples from that era to make a better guess. Those packs simply won't look the same as more modern examples so it's like comparing apples and oranges to some extent.
Does anyone have any packs from back then for comparison?

stevek · January 14, 2009 4:28PM

<< <i>Really bad reseals...almost as bad as it gets..As packcollector said, you can see the original outline of the pack in the crease in the wrapper. Unfortunately, there are far better fakes than these on the market, too..

With regard to the roller seal on back: when packs came off the production line they were essentially "sealed" with a thin sheet of hot wax, so if the pack is authentic, the horizontal roller wax marks on the back should run untouched and not be broken. If a pack is opened up, it is very difficult (though not impossible) for recreate that natural seal on back, once it is broken..And since many resealers buy wrappers on the secondary market, original roller seals are tough to replicate for these pack factory guys..In addition, a number of these resealers using heating elements to "seal" or reseal the back on back, which will further distort or damage the original roller marks on an authentic pack. >>

That's great information - Thanks!

Griffins · January 14, 2009 5:11PM

<< <i>Does anyone have any packs from back then for comparison? >>

I do and to me these look as phony as a $3 bill. I wouldn't touch them.
Plus you've got Duncan, Manny and Grote weighing in. That alone is more than enough opinions to make an intelligent decision.

Run!

Wax Pack - Legit...or resealed?

Comments