1870 EK1 ... need fast help!

[Don D.]

That is not the same cross as the one that started this thread.

[stdub]

Yes Don, you are right ... strange ... got this pic from the seller.

Didn't notice that before - thanks!

Think there is something wrong.

[saschaw]

I was offered that cross too, at least the one from the latter pictures. I was not in the mood for an obscure auction via e-mail, so I did pass.

While both crosses look good (Weitze's does not, imho), that is a strange story...

[streptile]

That is not the same cross as the one that started this thread.

Yes, you're right. Something is amiss here.

I was inclined to agree with Marshall/Biro, that the thread-starter is OK. But, again, I wouldn't go for it at all now, as it seems the seller has multiple 1870 EK1s, and the image you got was the wrong one... I don't know, I'd leave it alone and stick with textbook examples.

Fakers really suck... even if the original piece is good and the seller honest, the fakers have ruined our ability to judge.

[stdub]

Thanks again guys!

I think it is better to leave the cross where it is now.

Asked the guy for clearing up why he sent me photos of two different crosses, but got no reply until now.

Best regards,

Joerg

[Brian S]

Jorg/Stdub...

A perfectly good A Type, with the correct Wagner maker mark and badly replaced and repaired reverse hardware.

A perfectly OK cross - but not one for the purists...

Marshall

Aha! With that then, I rest my case. The hardware was messy and for a reason. Thanks again Marshall.