Arne Jacobsen Egg chair identification  

Early chairs, pre 1960 were produced with a one piece base and without cushion. I have only seen these, though, in leather. Seems like the cushion for your chair was misplaced. Maybe go back to where you got it and seem if maybe its still hanging around?

Wonderful, Modme!
Uphostery seems very nice.

Were these done with welt
on the seams at the seat? I really don't know. And the welt around the perimeter? Most of the Eggs I've seen with original fabric did not have welt around the perimeter and I've never seen any with welt on the seat seams. The fabric also looks like a very bulky weave for this chair. It looks to me more like one of the tweedy acrylics that were popular on ready-made furniture and with upholsterers in the 70s-90s and probably still. I just redid a couple of American lounge chairs that had this type of fabric on them (80s re-do?).
I have no doubt that the chair is the real thing, I'm just wondering about the upholstery. And of course, I could be totally wrong. I'd love to see a very clear closeup of the fabric with a bit of the welt in the frame for scale.

ModMe
That is a nice vintage chair. Authenic Fritz Hansen, but the upholstery is not original.
As jesgord said fabric egg chairs have a hand-sewn seam and no welt cord. Leather and vinyl egg and swan chairs were originally done with a welt cord around the edge.
You need to loosen the set screw on the sleeve at the bottom of your chair and insert the base fully inside. The bearing should not be visible like that and there should be no gap.
Now, tell me about your #45 chair...

Pics of Egg upholstery
Here are some more pics. Thanks everyone for responding! (and Pegboard..... we love our Juhl rosewood chair. 🙂
The Egg chair was at an upholsterers for many many years... waiting to be re-upholstered but never was. Upholstery doesn't look new.... some wear in places.

If it was original, that would be wool
and it just doesn't look like wool to me. Or rather, it looks like a lot of older synthetics that are made to look like wool. But the welt is the clincher.

ModMe
The upholstery is clearly not original. There would not be a welt cord around the perimeter, and especially around the seat. It makes me wonder if they used plygrip when it was reupholstered rather than hand sewing it.
Also, you seat cushion is missing. The earliest chairs from 1958 which were made without a seat cushion also had thinner plastic feet. Yours has the later thicker black plastic feet.
Is your #45 a Vodder produced chair? If so, does it have any interesting history? Neils Vodder production in rosewood are very rare.

Thanks Pegboard for your input. Any idea what year the Egg chair would be from... there isn't a marking on the base. As for the Juhl.... see photos. Stamped on bottom of chair :). Leather looks like it's been redone, note the back of chair. We believe it's rosewood... very heavy chair and it looks like rosewood 🙂

Modme
Hard to say the age of your egg chair, i could be anywhere from the mid 60s to the late 70s. I think they switched from the one piece cast base to the two part base around 1980.
Your #45 chair is beautiful and to think that you found it in a thrift is amazing! What part of the world do you live in?
Couple of questions: what makes you think the leather is not original? You mention the back, but I'm guess you are shooting with a cell phone as your pictures are kinda distorted with the wide angle. if you can post a nice shot of the chair, I could better tell if the upholstery details are correct. The color of the leather looks right. Perfect in fact. The upholstery tacks in your detail photo tell me that if the upholstery is not original, it was redone quite a long time ago or redone by someone who spent the time to redo it as close to the original as possible. Upholsterers have been using staples rather than tacks for some time now.
You said it was rosewood, but in your close-up of the brand, the wood looks to me like teak. A teak Vodder #45 is still a VERY desirable and important chair (and a legendary thrift store find!) but like I said the rosewood chairs are very rare. Can you share a picture of another part of the fame that would show the wood?

Here are more pics.... had to move chair to outside to get better light 🙂

More pics. Also note the chair is VERY heavy. It's surprising since it doesn't look very heavy. Heard that rosewood is a very heavy wood. Note on this pic below... a crack in the wood. 🙁

Thanks for the extra pictures
...and I'm sorry if we've hijacked this egg chair thread.
However, I think in a way it speaks to the same issue. Originality and details. ModMe, your #45 chair ( just like your egg chair) appear to be original vintage pieces. However, based on your photos I think they have both been reupholstered and I think your #45 chair is teak rather than rosewood. Again, some good overall shots of the chair would be helpful, but a tell-take sign is the lack of welt cord where the back meets the frame at the top outside corners.
Please do not think I am trying to diminish either chair. The fact that you got the #45 at a thrift store and your egg chair from your upholstery shop makes me assume you got a terrific deal on both. And as original vintage pieces, they still have substantial intrinsic value. I would have bought either in an instant.
When we discuss whether the upholstery is original and the wood is either teak or rosewood we are splitting hairs. It is a matter of determining if a piece is rare, desirable, valuable etc or a museum-worthy piece. Vodder #45 chairs are rare. Rosewood #45 chairs are crazy rare. You need only look at auction results to see the difference in valuation.
In my mind, what you have are fantastic, enviable vintage examples of two very important Danish mid-century modern designs by the original makers. I would buy and be happy to live with ether chair in my home, and I suspect you bought both for far less than I would be willing to pay. The fine line (to me) would be if either still had their original upholstery in excellent condition. The fact that upholstery wears out over time with age and use (especially if it is not afforded extra care) makes original upholstery very uncommon, especially in good condition.
It's accepted that things like upholstery are fugitive and prone to replacement, and a good restoration or reupholstery of a nice vintage example rarely does little to diminish its value. However, an example of either of those designs in very good unrestored original condition needs to be treated with special care and I think are candidates for a place in a museum design collection.
Congratulations on both your terrific chairs.
*edited for embarrassing typos.

Swivel?
I'm being told by a seller that early (pre 1960) egg chair bases did not swivel. Is that true? Apparently Fritz Hansen is the source of the info...
I'm going to look at a chair later today that has an ink stamp and no cushion. I'll post some photos to get your opinion, if you're all interested?

Not true
I have a 1958 egg chair, all original in black leather. It swivels. So has every other early example like it I've seen.
If it is stamped rather than labeled, that would indicate early production. Likewise the absence of a loose seat cushion. However, the early chairs which were made without seat cushions have more foam padding under the upholstery than later chairs which had the loose cushion. It's subtle, but if you see them side-by-side or have scrutinized some in person it is not difficult to discern.

That's kind-of what I thought. So it turns out that the owner has already stripped the chair down. It had a really bad upholstery job and the foam was gone. The ink stamp was on the original fabric, under the new. I believe the seller wants $1k for it. I want a restoration project, but I assume at that price it better be a very early example. Ebay is not helping me find any com parables... I'll post some photos tonight.