Grand Cross

[Jack]

Hello all,
Can any body give me some comments on this cross.Weight is 43.5Grm is correct width and height as per Bowens book.Any thoughts if this is good or bad or what period this was made?
Cheers Jack

[Jack]

.

.

[Don D.]

Looks like a newly made repro to me. The finish on the core is too thick.
Don

[Jack]

.

Thanks Don the cross has been in a collection for approx 25 yrs that I know off.
Cheers Jack

[Don D.]

I'm not n expert on crosses- just making an observation. I'm sure some of the more knowledgable members will give you more input.
Don

[Tom Y]

It could be the scan, but the details don't seem to match those of Tiger 1's Crosses http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...ht=grand+cross Since they're all repros the question is is it "official" or "unofficial". My vote would be "unofficial".

[Tiger 1]

Jack,

As you know all the originals are accounted for and this is a copy. The GC you show has the dipped jump ring as the originals do. This is a nice feature. The positioning of the core details are quite high up inside the frame beading giving an unbalanced cramped look. The 'softness" of the crown and the curvature at the base of the core details suggest a core of stamped sheet iron or steel. This indifferent approach to assembly and attention to details doesn't make for a very high quality copy. The finish, while hard to determine from the pictures, seems to suggest a similarity to later '57 KCs.

Having said all that, if the price is not too much this cross would be a good example to show the size differences in the EK series.

Tony

[Jack]

.

Hi Tiger,
the cross was up forsale I know this is not an original piece I was trying to work out when this could of been made?The detail of the crown and leaves and acorns are not clear but it looks like the paint is thick.If this is a 57 piece what price would be fair?Thanks again for everybodys input.
Cheers Jack

[Tim Tezer]

Aside from the overly thick paint, it's a pretty good copy.

I have tried to categorize all of the copies I've seen of the Grand Cross of 1914 and determine their origin, but to no avail. Nimmergut's book shows two types of Museum copies which he represents as contemporary, and a third type copy that was worn by Hindenburg (and may have been custom made for him). There is another type that I have seen which has a Roman "I" in 1813, as the originals did, but does not have a dipping ring in the frame. As I have only seen a few of these, I think they are pretty early. Yours doesn't match the characteristics of any of these types, so who knows?

There is no way to tell for certain how old these pieces are, so my feeling is that a copy is not going to have any historical value, per se, but will have a market value if collectors still find them desirable. The higher the quality and fidelity to an original, the more it is worth as a copy. I've seen copies offered for $3,500 and get no bids at auction, and I've seen copies priced at $1,500 on show tables that sold. If you put this on Ebay with a $900 starting price, there would probably be a feeding frenzy, but you just never know until you offer it up.

Tim

[Tiger 1]

Jack,

Tim hit the nail pretty much on the head. I don't know how to prove when these copies were made other than comparing construction details from different periods. Even then there's a bit of latitude timewise. The impression I get from the pictures posted is that it is not very old. I still think that it may be a '57 era piece. Just my opinion here.

Value??? That's very subjective. How much do you like the piece and how much are you prepared to spend? There is definately a market value for copies. The older contemporary copies, i.e. museum copies, being more desirable seem to bring more. The price is usually not really set in stone but an agreed to figure between the buyer and the seller. I know this sounds a bit hazy but it's the best advice I can give you. Only you know what it's worth to you just as the seller knows what he needs to get.

Tony