Options about EK1

[Stuka87]

Hello for all members.
I would like to hear some options about this WW1 EK1.
Is this original or not?

[Don D.]

What are the measurements?

[grueni1208]

Look's like an EK which were made between 1919 and 1935. These versions are very light. There are EK II's (4 piece sheet construction) in these version, too.

Regards

Daniel

[Stuka87]

Thank you Daniel for reply.
Is there many EK makers between WW1 and WW2?

[grueni1208]

I know Steinhauer & Lück, Deumer and Meybauer, but I believe there are more.

Regards

Daniel

[gregM]

I do not have much experience with this style of cross but I've got
to say, I am not a fan of this one. The date looks bad, so does the
"W" (but that might just be camera angle) and the pin looks funny.

Even though the quality of the originals was not great to begin with,
this one seems to be really lacking.

[Ron P]

I do not have much experience with this style of cross but I've got
to say, I am not a fan of this one. The date looks bad, so does the
"W" (but that might just be camera angle) and the pin looks funny.

Even though the quality of the originals was not great to begin with,
this one seems to be really lacking.

I have to agree. Regards, Ron.

[Stuka87]

So.
Ron and Greg you think that EK isn't OK ?

[grueni1208]

Here are some other EK's in the same design.

Regards

Daniel

[grueni1208]

next

[grueni1208]

...the EK II version

11,76 g

[gregM]

same design but NOT identical. check out the date. Specificly the "9"

On the cross that started this thread, the 9 has a straight back
while on the rest of the crosses pictured, the 9s are curved.

I may be completely wrong -- as I said I do not have a lot of
experience with this style cross but IMO the first one is bad.

[ekhunter]

Cores

Greg is right, the cores are definately different. I personally wouldn't feel comfortable with the first cross.

[saschaw]

Though in my opinion all EKs shown on this thread are old ones, at least pre 1945. Ugly nontheless...