1870 EK Fakes

[Bill M]

--Wow, this is like a chat room! Touche, Tony.
--I've got the other Godet, pics aren't as great as I'd like them. Be right back...

[Bill M]

.

[Bill M]

--Again, sorry that the images aren't better as I lifted this from another source.

[Bill M]

--Btw, in reference to the crosses in the first post. What a bunch of stinkers!

--Are we now of the policy of just holding our noses and not getting too specific or can I say that the damned {BLANK}s look ridiculous? They NEVER seem to get the {BLANK}s right, do they?!? Thank God for small favors.

[Biro]

Good man Bill....not dissimilar to the Wagner then, (crown aside....)

Marshall

[Bill M]

--Fair assessment, very similar for that matter.

--But as similar to a '2nd die pattern' as a 'J' is to an 'I'

[Tiger 1]

Bill,

Where did you find the reference to the two specific types of Godet cores?

Tony

[Bill M]

--You, with your Godet 'short 7' and Previtera with his spread of Kaiser Bill 1's unmarked EK1 on pages 110 and 111.

--Proof to me that the Kaisers was a Godet, that yours is 100% A-1 and therefore that Godet had a second die...

[Tiger 1]

Damn, we're good!

[Biro]

Damn, we're good!

Regular Sherlock Holmes, the lot of us....

I can't fault us!!!

[Tiger 1]

Now we're having some fun!

My personal take on the second type would be that it is a bit later. If Kaiser W1 was awarded his during or shortly after the conflict that should be the first type. the second type that you show IMO was a later refined example with better core quality. I would put the later type core as a Jubilee example from 1895-6 era. A closer look at some details on the crown should help determine that.

[Bill M]

--Well, some of you may know that I don't really subscribe to the 'jubilee issue' theories as such. I believe that these two (and others for that matter) were likely either concurrent or even contemporary to each other and not necessarily seperated by decades.

By the way, how come some images (loaded on this forum) fall off our threads but others do not?

Brian, that's a good question! I recently looked at my "Display" thread in the display forum and all of my initial photos are missing! After all that work uploading them!!!

[Tiger 1]

Ok, Supposing as a baseline that Kaiser W1 could read. He would have been able to discern that the numbers looked a bit funny. Why if they were concurrent would you give him a lesser quality core than the better one? After all the 1870 EKI was held in such asteem that it was sparcely awarded as an award just below the PLM in prestige. It was in fact used to preserve the the PLM to some extent from being over awarded.

What I have found is that there are some fundamental differences in specific details between pre .c 1875 EKs and the 1895 Jubilee era and later Imperial ones. The 1870s that most collectors laud for their exquisit detail and finish are from the Jubilee era IMO. The jubilee era thru the early 1914 era was the epitome of EK craftsmanship.The award pieces from 1870 or so have more in common with the 1813 series than the later Jubilee era.

Tony

[Bill M]

--Ok, I realise that I may have needed to add some more substance to my last post but am too lazy to think and write coherently so I went back in time and pulled up a post of mine from a few months ago and pasted the gist of it here. In essence - I plagiarized myself. That's allowed, right?


--I'll say it again, I don't believe in 'Jubilee' crosses; I don't believe you can specifically date anything to then, anyway. The equipment that they used during this time was likely the 2nd or even 3rd generation since wars end due to technical jumps and the expected replacement of unsatifactory and worn equipment. I think the manufacturing process went on the whole time, and there was no need to create new ones unless the firms' current equipment was unsatisfactory or worn at that time.
--And further elaboration a few posts later...

--I would like to know why it is assumed that the Jubilee ushered in the production of new 1870 Iron Crosses. I've also heard nothing more than a 'probably' when speaking about 1913 Centennial 1813 EK's. Is it recorded somewhere that they specifically set up to do this?
--I tend to think that since end of the war, 1870 EK's were produced in dribs and drabs privately, according to demand. And this is why we have so many variations of EK2's, and to somewhat a lesser extent; EK1's. How many 2's can we all match perfectly amongst us? Maybe there was a bit of a spike in demand when Jubilee time came round, but I think nothing more involved than that. Dies being made as needed in the business as opposed to special dies whipped up for the occasion. A progression, and I think the evidence supports this.

[Bill M]

Why if they were concurrent would you give him a lesser quality core than the better one?

--Ok, I am posed with the possibility that I may have misused a word here. I hope this is not that case as I will be personally devastated!
--By concurrent I meant consecutive, which is why I added 'contemporary'. The difference between an EK produced in 1872 or 1873 as compared to ones produced in 1871. {Now I'm confusing myself! }
--If you look at the 1870 period Wagners, you may wonder why he didn't opt for one of them instead - as they are also of superior detail.