Ekii 1870

[Don D.]

Hi Don,

That is really big (and good) news to me -- and yes, it does seem to be the same type.

Can you tell if the cross has the weird double-loop frame at the top?

Is the bar yours?

Yes it is mine. The cross/oaks are secured tightly to the bar so I cannot see behind it.

[gregM]

OK---I admit it, I was wrong.

Seeing one on a unmolested bar is pretty good proof.

[Biro]

Presumably, if the cores are the same, the cores are scourced from one foundry... but I'm seeing a couple of different frames here indicating perhaps a couple of different jewellers??...

Makes you wonder why any of them were happy to accept such a crappy core for their product considering the quality of other EK's from both before and after the 1890 period.

Odd...

Marshall

[morel5000]

Don,

could you post a close-up of the cross and the frame.

The thread starter is for sale. There is a disussion going on it at the SDA which probably some here have seen. They are looking for a period mount. So your bar is very interesting. Are you 100% convinced it is original? Wouldn't they use black thread for the iron cross mounting?

Best regards,
Michel

[Don D.]

I'll take some pics tonight when I get home. I'm as sure as I can be that the bar is unmessed with. I've seen other bars with white thread used to hold down the EKs. Remember, the EK is silver and black so either white thread or black thread will do. Its a compromise by the person doing the mounting.

As to the cores, I beleive they are sandcast. Given the number of them produced for the 25th anniversary it could be a case of the lowest bidder getting the contract. To produce these you would have had to have more than one template for the molds, hence, one reason for the minor differences. The other is that the mold can shift when it is pulled from the sand causing errors like you see in post #18, crosses 1&3. Then you have the problem of metal poured at the incorrect tempurature.......

[RAO]

I think better as a bar is a original picture from a carrier with bar and cross as proof.

Regards Mike

[gregM]

Makes you wonder why any of them were happy to accept such a crappy core for their product considering the quality of other EK's from both before and after the 1890 period.

My thoughts exactly.

[römischIX]

original no copy. made about 1900.

[Montgomery Burns]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Biro View Post
Makes you wonder why any of them were happy to accept such a crappy core for their product considering the quality of other EK's from both before and after the 1890 period.

My thoughts exactly.

mine to ....I don't believe in this low budget bad quality acceptance by prussians ( Germans )







.

[Don D.]

As promised.

[Don D.]

mine to ....I don't believe in this low budget bad quality acceptance by prussians ( Germans )







.

Prussians and Germans were two seperate things back then Kay.

[Montgomery Burns]

depending on what period these crosses are gonne be put in .



I am already anticipating to that ...Don





.

[Don D.]

It could also be a bad mix of metal.

[morel5000]

Hi Don,

thanks for the closeup.

I still don't know what to make of this cross.

And the bar, for me a few questions remain;

Is the edge of the ek ribbon stiched?
Has the Kriegsdenkmünze 1870/1871 the rim text? If so why put your original one on the bar and leave your ek2 at home? Because Wilhelm I gave it you? Because you lost it? I guess he would be proud to wear the original. So I would think that the 1870 medal too would be a "spangenstuck". Please let me know your opinions.

Thanks in advance,
Michel

[Don D.]

Here is the other edge of the ribbon. The KDM has the writing on the edge. I don't think the issued KDMs were held in the same regard as the issued EKs.