EK2 1870 - please opinion

[Eryk]

Hello
I am asking for an opinion about this cross
Original?
thank you in advance for your help.
greetings
Maciej

[Dansson]

It's a good one. Probably made in the 1890's.

[kid74]

I have been watching this sign for a long time ). There are doubts about the originality. Have you seen a 100% identical one before? I didn't see.

WR Kirill

[Willi Z.]

It's a good one. Probably made in the 1890's.

Is this what we call the "1895 Jubilee" EK? Still trying to figure these out.

Seems like many of these have the off-center crown towards the right side.

[morel5000]

I am with Greg on this one. Has a big hump pointing it into the S&L Jubelee frame but has a type A core with the soft details. Maybe a comparison should to be done with the known S&L jubilee examples. If it is original then it would be a nice example of that type. But for the money it is for sale I would buy a real type A.

[Willi Z.]

I found these in my files:

[Miro O]

It´s me selling this piece.

It is as stated in auction description, later A-type core Spangenstuck with straight arm frame, that appeared in 1890s and is usually seen with a hump.

Regarding your claim Kirill (Kid74), that you have not seen anything identical, I have handled such big-humped straight-framed crosses with softer A-type core before. Precisely this is fourth example of this kind. When I was selling one of those previous ones, you asked me for pictures for your reference folder, and I emailled them to you. Then, about year later, you wrote again and asked if I have still this cross in offer, but it was already sold. Check you email history, the conversation started in October 2016 and ended in November 2017. You will find there not absolutely identical, but clearly similar piece like that.

Back to the reviewed cross. The presence of the hump doesn´t make any piece a S&L product, because many A-types are sometimes seen with humped frame as well.

S&L, just to make you a bit wiser, has a drilled out jumpring, as you can always and clearly see on S&L reference pics, for example in the previous post of this thread. Contrary to this, the piece offered by me has a non-movable, soldered jumpring, just a bit bent to one side. This is the only feature that can fool you in S&L way. But only at first sight. I think that good collector should go further in his observations, at least to the moment of spotting the hole around the jumpring on S&L pieces, which is clearly missing on my piece, if not further, to the moment of comparing frame and core. The auction photos include also the picture of the frame soldering, which is closed and handfinished perfectly, ruling out any tampering with the cross.

At last, but not least, it would be good to say in such review, that this is not a single cross, but part of a 2er medal bar (with KDM 1870). Not always, but very often we see such A-types with softer details on medal bar pieces. Spangenstucks are many times lower quality that awarded originals, I hope I am not saying anything new here.

It also partially explains my price estimate. So, if you think that 319 € is too much for such cross, do not forget to count the price of KDM (awarded piece), the price of the bar, 10% eBay fees, 20% VAT on fees, and 5% Paypal. And when you will sell your good looking, just later production A-type for 225 € (or for 265 € throwing in a KDM 1870 and a medal bar), just let me know. Until that, such comments about the price are as valuable as agreeing with Greg, who haven´t chimed in this thread so far.

[Werner.L]

Hello

I really don't know anything about these crosses, but picture # 2 shows 1813 looks terrible, this is normal?

All the best

[Miro O]

Difficult to say what is normal, but this is not surely the worst looking A-core I have seen.

To me, the S&L cross looks even more terrible. But as a collector of the Imperial EK, I want to have it regardless of it.

It is a correct date style, this what should interest you. The execution, well, later quality from a distant branch of casting tree. But it doesn´t make it a Frankenstein or a fake. Btw, have you read what I have written about soldering the frames?

Surely this is not a starter cross. For something like that we want early awarded piece. But variant hunter should be interested. Well OK, variant hunter should be knowledged as well...

[Willi Z.]

Miro, who do you think the maker is of this cross?

[Werner.L]

Difficult to say what is normal, but this is not surely the worst looking A-core I have seen.

To me, the S&L cross looks even more terrible. But as a collector of the Imperial EK, I want to have it regardless of it.

It is a correct date style, this what should interest you. The execution, well, later quality from a distant branch of casting tree. But it doesn´t make it a Frankenstein or a fake. Btw, have you read what I have written about soldering the frames?

Surely this is not a starter cross. For something like that we want early awarded piece. But variant hunter should be interested. Well OK, variant hunter should be knowledged as well...

thanks for the clarification Miro, appreciated

[kid74]

It´s me selling this piece.


Regarding your claim Kirill (Kid74), that you have not seen anything identical, I have handled such big-humped straight-framed crosses with softer A-type core before. Precisely this is fourth example of this kind. When I was selling one of those previous ones, you asked me for pictures for your reference folder, and I emailled them to you. Then, about year later, you wrote again and asked if I have still this cross in offer, but it was already sold. Check you email history, the conversation started in October 2016 and ended in November 2017. You will find there not absolutely identical, but clearly similar piece like that.

.

Miro, I remember very well our correspondence and the cross we discussed. I am more and more interested in this type of cross. BUT this cross differs in both the design of the frame and the core. This is something new for me.

WR Kirill

[morel5000]

Buy the item not the story.

[Miro O]

Miro, who do you think the maker is of this cross?

I have no idea. Maybe there was not only one maker of these straight-framed crosses. I handled them painted and blackened, with solid silver frames as well as with alloy ones, slightly varying in the size of a hump, caused by different outer cut of the frame (the wider the cut, the bigger the hump). I had also a piece which was without ribbing on inner vertical side of the beading rim (closest to the core). The frame was just cut straight downwards there.

But always there is A type core, always softer and flatter looking one, differing only in the level of deterioration of the detail. The best observation point is the reverse crown. There is a big hole in the second arch from the left. I handled also a piece which had apparently smaller hole there, then the cross sporting just a crack at that place, as well as the piece with intact second arch.

[Miro O]

Miro, I remember very well our correspondence and the cross we discussed. I am more and more interested in this type of cross. BUT this cross differs in both the design of the frame and the core. This is something new for me.

WR Kirill

If I remember correctly, you are interested mainly in S&L type of EK2 1870. But on 30. 10. 2016, I posted you pictures of straight-framed EK2 with A-type core. It was painted variant with just a crack at the second arch of the reverse crown. The hump was smaller due to slim outer cut of the frame. But it was a cross from the same family as this one.