Opinions on Balteus

[Matthew Amt]

Avete!<br>
Okay, do what I can, here. Rusty, I'll certainly agree that the buckle, frogs, and leather are terrific, especially compared to the old junk. Better rivets and overall quality. But the plates are still no good, nor are the studs. Basically they made up stuff that sort of resembles a drawing of the real thing and could be stamped out. I still think the openwork plates on the apron straps are iffy, and have my doubts about the terminals (they have a second-century look to me, though I'd have to check my books).<br>
<br>
They are also still looping the apron straps around the belt. I realize they say that's for adjusting for size, but on different-sized guys it is NOT the apron's position that needs to be adjusted, it is the pugio frogs! The apron is always center front and the buckle right next to it. This method only allows adjustment if you don't mind the buckle creeping around your back where you can't reach it, and it is not supposed to be back there!<br>
<br>
If we could just get Deepeeka to sell loose parts, we'd be in heaven! Several different good buckles and frogs to choose from!!<br>
<br>
Dave, I'm with you on the "RGZM" cast belt. The plates themselves are probably about right. But then they repeat that radial dome motif on the pugio frogs and all the apron studs, and I think that is completely wrong. And it ends up weighing a ton. If they have modified that to give it plain studs and frogs, I will certainly take another look.<br>
<br>
So I'm sorry, Rusty, but I'm still going to recommend against this belt. Deepeeka definitely should have given it a new number, but it's not the first time they've shot themselves in the foot on that score...<br>
<br>
On a related note, the Deepeeka website now seems to require a registration and log-in to get in. A couple people have said that they registered and still can't get in. Is this some clever advertising ploy?<br>
<br>
Valete,<br>
<br>
Matthew/Quintus <p></p><i></i>