Real or fake? Kriegserinnerungskreuz Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha

[malborghetto]

Hello,
any opinions for these both crosses? Never saw a plain backside on a pinback version before.
Thanks in advance!

Christian

[Brian L.]

IMO, the pin-back is not contemporary to WWI. The detail is not sharp enough. The file marks on the edge really bother me. Is it gilded? If so, that isn't normal, either. Also, you're right about the reverse. The pin is the typical hardware, though; not one of these coke-bottle pins seen on the fakes. It could be post-war or even post-45 piece by Sedlazek. I have the Sedlazek catalogue from the 60s and this cross was advertised.
The ribbon mounted cross looks better. But, it's either your photo, or the finish seems a bit lighter than normal. But, I like the detail better than on the pin-back.

[Valter Gorenc]

On pinback, I don't like poorly finished lover edge on reverse, and there are some pits under the cypher and on the reverse, that could be casting bubbles.

[malborghetto]

The pinback cross is made from copper with bronze finish. Weight 7 grams. On the photos the bronce finish of both crosses is much lighter than they really are. The pinback is not gildet. There are no bubbles on the pinback.

Regards, Christian

[Brian L.]

The pinback cross is made from copper with bronze finish. Weight 7 grams. On the photos the bronce finish of both crosses is much lighter than they really are. The pinback is not gildet. There are no bubbles on the pinback.

Regards, Christian

This is a fairly scarce award and I doubt that there were more than a handful of makers of this during the war. The finish of the issue pieces is usually a very evenly-toned medium-light chocolate bronze colour, with no striation, which appears on your cross. However, this may just be wear. The details on the issue pieces is extremely fine and sharp with very smooth, perpendicular edges. The bevelled filing of the edges on the back of your pinback indicates a later piece, as it is generally believed the quality of manufacture, particularly in the final finishing of awards went down in the 20s. You would never see this lower level of craftsmanship on first issue awards.

Having said all of that, I believe it's genuine in that it's not a piece created specifically to fool collectors. As I said before, the hardware is typical of this cross. So, it may just be a replacement award purchased at some time after the war.

[Valter Gorenc]

I rounded up the areas that made my concern. When I look closely again, there are no pock marks on the front, my mistake...

[Don D.]

Here is what the issue one looks like. Note the quality and finish.

[saschaw]

One thing I'd like to mention, regarding early war, late war and post war quality: This cross wasn't even instituded in WW1, but didn't come until 1922!

However, I'd not pay a full price for a cross that's not text book.

[VtwinVince]

I agree with you guys, the second class looks good, but I wouldn't touch the first class.

[malborghetto]

Many thanks for your opinions!

Regards, Christian

[Brian L.]

One thing I'd like to mention, regarding early war, late war and post war quality: This cross wasn't even instituded in WW1, but didn't come until 1922!

However, I'd not pay a full price for a cross that's not text book.

I thought it was instituted in late 1918. Thanks for the new info.

Don

Beautiful "textbook" piece.