A 1870 and 1914 ek1 for review

[Franko]

Hi guy, I am having some problem with 2 ek1, I believe the 1870 one is fake, but I am not sure and the 1914 one really look strange when I compare with other cross made by the maker KO. What do you guy believe?

Thanks in advance

The 1870 one:

[Franko]

The 1914 one. As you can notice, both are engraved.

[Don D.]

I don't like either one personally. The 1870 is fake for sure and I'm 98% certain the other one is too. I think the engraving was done by the same person also.

[gregM]

I think Don is right on with his assessment. The 1870 is the infamous "muffin Crown" The 1914 is kind of hard to judge from the photo but it is either an outright fake or a VERY poor quality original. -------and I think Don is right about the engraving. The lower case "m" on both crosses really look to be the same.

[Franko]

Thanks a lot guy

[Mike Kenny]

Hi Franco,

Could you show a full reverse pic of the 1914 KO with the pin in the closed position? It may be a good cross with bad engraving. The 1870 is definitely bad as has already been commented.

No - don't worry - I just noticed the inner corners of the flanges are very rounded (ie the outer profile where the cross arms meet at the "W"). Not typical for KO at all imo - but a very similar effect to the fake 1870.

Regards
Mike

[Tim Tezer]

The engraving is horrible on both, and definitely seems to be done by the same hand. Even if the 1914 is an original, the engraving can be considered damage, so my advice would be to stay away.

Tim