1870 EK2 variant?

[Bill M]

--I am virtually certain that all of the four crowns pictured are not the same. Eric's cross most closely resembles the WuS cross, but doesn't (to my eyes) have a bulbous, off-kilter bead. It is highlighted, however. I don't see any of that on the DN cross either. To tell you the truth, it probably doesn't take much for a bead to flatten a bit, creating a 'bulbous' look. Look at any EK2 back crown and they are almost certain to have a few.
--I would like to see less shadows in the others, as the two KO crosses may or may not be identical. There is a thin-ness to the top of Eric's crown from bead to cross, that I certainly don't see in the KO's. The vertical beading is also somewhat different. What I see different about the Niedersachsen cross is the thickness up top, especially to the right. It almost makes the crown look lobsided. The shadows play up top of the crown on DN's 'copy' but this may be the case there too.
--For my eyes, Gordon's cross resembles Eric's enough to ask him for a better shot of the crown. Someone shoot him a PM, would you? I, for one, have no problem with that particular cross, if I remember correctly. Ask for photos of the reverse too! Let's get some reverse photo comparisons up here, they may be very telling.
--I am not done looking, I will try to sort out my thoughts more clearly soon...
--PS, Both Eric's cross and the Wus have a very upright crown, the KO's slant slightly leftward.

[Biro]

Just nice to wake up this morning and find I'm not unanimously booted off the Forum for spurious comparisons involving some of the 'big boys....'

I Agree with all Bills points, (especially Reverse photos and BETTER PHOTO's) however, have to point out that, in my opinion...

posted by Bill M..... Eric's cross most closely resembles the WuS cross, but doesn't (to my eyes) have a bulbous, off-kilter bead...

I don't see any of that on the DN cross either.

- With the exception of jani tiainen's cross, Erics appears to have the MOST bulbous 9th bead...check also the large 4th bead, and small 5th bead in Franks posts #40 and #41 of Erics cross against Detlevs EK1 'copy'...

posted by Bill M..... To tell you the truth, it probably doesn't take much for a bead to flatten a bit, creating a 'bulbous' look.

- The SAME bead each time?.....

Keep it coming....or this will stall..

[Bill M]

--Still sorting...

--Did see those small beads, though. A similar three-bead pattern over on the left side. Very confounding. The picture of DN's is just not good enough, I really need to see an unshadowed photo. Need Gordon's cross here as well.

[Tiger 1]

I think that Bill asked the most pertinant question here. We have Detlev's post that this is a copy. The bones certainly need to be fleshed out with WHY it is a copy. I have my own criteria which works for me and it doesn't include a maker's mark on an 1870EKII. I'll reserve my comments for now as there is a lot to look at and consider. I've been away and missed most of the build up of this thread so I have some catching up to do here. I would be very curious what Detlev would have to say further on this cross and how he arrived at his conclusion.

Tony

[Gerd W.]

Hello!

I´m just a little bit confused now Can´t see clearly, if the maker mark on Detlev´s cross is the same as it is on my EK.
Got my cross from a private source, never had doubts about. If this EK turns out to be a fake, than it´s the best I ever saw.............

I´ll send my cross, complete with the 25 year oaks and the case, to Detlev this week and ask for his opinion. Will post back as soon as I have his answer.

Regards

Gerd

[Brian S]

Here is the crown on the Detlev 'copy' obverse.

[Gerd W.]

Worked a little bit with my KO pics (Detlev is on the top)............think it´s not a match.
Would like to see Erics, sure it´s also not matching

Regards

Gerd

[Eric Stahlhut]

Biro,


You are doing a great job! I am quite familiar with the 'ninth bead' theory.

I'm hoping to have some time tomorrow to post a few more pics of my cross.

I have noticed another salient feature on my cross that no one else has brought up yet, and I think it is a rather important detail that many have overlooked simply because I didn't post the correct picture.

Back to the bead: it's wierd because when you look at the cross with the naked eye you can't tell that the bead is bulbous. It merely has the finish removed.

[Bill M]

"I have noticed another salient feature on my cross that no one else has brought up yet, and I think it is a rather important detail that many have overlooked simply because I didn't post the correct picture."
--What... what... ... what???!!!???
--You can't just leave without mentioning what it is!!

[Blitz]

Eric is teasing us.. The cunning fox..

[Biro]

You are doing a great job! I am quite familiar with the 'ninth bead' theory....... it's wierd because when you look at the cross with the naked eye you can't tell that the bead is bulbous. It merely has the finish removed.

Thank you my friend - I can't provide too much insight, but I've got TECHNOLOGY and I'm going to USE IT!!

And I agree, you don't even need magnification to spot it in some instances...it just seems to 'shine' out at you like a great shining...........bead...thingy..

We'll crack it!

[Eric Stahlhut]

Eric is teasing us.. The cunning fox..

Sorry to keep you guys in suspense, but I just wanted to work with my camera for a bit. Gerd, I'll get a better pic of the crown for you.

I noticed another odd feature on the reverse of the cross. On the center oak and to the left there is an odd bump or protrusion. The finish is worn off of it.
I wonder how this came to be?

Hope you can see it.

BTW another curious feature of the core is that there are slight rust formations beginning on top of the finish, which seems to be indicative a bluing rather than paint application.

[Eric Stahlhut]

For Gerd et al

This is a closer view of the obverse crown. Notice the ding to the right side below the beading. I used a macro text only mode in order to try and bring out
features.

[Eric Stahlhut]

Here's another pic of the nodule on the reverse oaks that I was referring to yersterday. It kind of looks like a left over part of the molding process for the core.

[newcollector]

Sorry I've come in six years late on this thread! So the upshot of all this is that the 9th beaders are definitely fakes? And 1870 EKIIs did NOT have makers marks on the ribbon ring? And over and under '8's in the date? Just starting to learn about 1870 EKIIs.