Is this George Brett look legit

[yanks12025]

Was wondering if the George Brett experts believe this to be legit or faked. It's a model C271, measures 34 inches and is cupped. Shows pretty much no use, just acouple rack marks, has light pine tar. Now on the knob it has the word LOU, I know he put that on some of his bats. But what I'm worried is looks like someone stained the knob? Any thoughts, I believe it does match his records. He did order 34 inch C271 bats in this time frame (1992).

Another question he also ordered model C271C, were they branded with the second C or just came cupped? Because the bat is cupped so would it be a C271C or does it have to be branded C271C. Thanks

[CampWest]

the second C means its cupped... but that is not stamped onto the model number.

Do you know the weight of the bat? Should be around 31 ounces.

my quick review answer would be that it looks pretty good. There are a couple of things I really like. Specifically, the model and length is appropriate, also the wood grain looks very high quality. I am unaware of any promotional bats in 1991-92 that would be C271C in 34 inch and if there were, i doubt promo bats would have this quality of wood grain.

If I saw this on the open market, I would consider it for the right price.

[CampWest]

But what I'm worried is looks like someone stained the knob?

I've seen some Brett bats with knob discoloration due to pine tar. This looks like it could be the case on this bat as well.

I would add, the LOU on the knob looks pretty bold, whereas the period signature is quite faded. Not sure if that is a concern item, but LOU looks very bold to me. Brett often slammed the knob on the infield warning track dirt to dislodge the bat weight donut, but since this bat has not a ton of use, that may not be of much concern.

[yanks12025]

Thanks for your thoughts Wes. I had just sent you an email asking about the knob, guess that answers it now. Hopefully more can chime in. Thanks again

[Birdbats]

The difference in the boldness of the signature vs. the "LOU" could be as simple as "LOU" being in black and the signature being in blue. Blue Sharpie is notorious for fading on bats, and I'd guess it could be exaggerated by being absorbed by unfinished wood.

[CampWest]

The difference in the boldness of the signature vs. the "LOU" could be as simple as "LOU" being in black and the signature being in blue. Blue Sharpie is notorious for fading on bats, and I'd guess it could be exaggerated by being absorbed by unfinished wood.

I agree with that... I probably wouldnt be concerned either, just an observation... And after looking at the knob a little closer I dont see any reason to think it was added later.

[scottanservitz]

Yanks,
I agree with everything said thus far. The only concern I would have is that the pine tar application looks too even all the way from the knob to the centerbrand. Brett was known for applying the tar around the center label and then it would be transferred to the handle by his hands. There should be a break or area with less tar between these points. Andy Benish has a feature on his site at Vintagebats.com that shows this very well. I purchased my Brett from him which is the third bat down. The tar is not all the way on mine as it appears on this bat. I have to say that everything else looks to be good. You have to look at it closely when in hand where this would be better shown.

Scott

[MichaelofSF]

Scott,
Your Brett bat is the 1990 that is third down? I would love to see some pictures of your bat if you would like to post them. I'm always searching for a nice 1990 Brett bat

[scottanservitz]

Michael,
Yes it is. I'll try and get some up tonight.
Scott

[scottanservitz]

Here is some pics of my Brett. Notice the break in the tar.