1914 EK2 marked '9'

[norwest]

I have not seen the '9' mark in any database. Is it legit?

[norwest]

Here's a couple more pics, comparing the '9' in the middle to a 800 CD (left) and a 1939 EK2 mm 120 (right). The '9' is 24mm tall, the same as 1939 mm 120, and taller than the 800 CD.

[norwest]

A better view of the core and the 'W'. Possibly a private purchase? This core seems unique to me, as I've found no other like it.

[upbeek]

Nice ek2
It is probably post WW1 because of the frosting
I thought the mark could of been a Godet but no, here it is next to my Godet

Kind regards Chay

[gregM]

The core is a match to this cross marked "WuS" posted by Ralph in
our database thread. See post #34.

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...=263254&page=3

[gregM]

side by side

[norwest]

Looks like you nailed it, Greg! Thank you for taking the (probably considerable) time!

I assume WuS = Wagner und Sohn?

Regards,
Kevin

[gregM]

Looks like you nailed it, Greg! Thank you for taking the (probably considerable) time!

I assume WuS = Wagner und Sohn?

Regards,
Kevin

You're welcome. I don't mind taking the time as long as it's appreciated.
Wagner und Sohn is correct.

[norwest]

Greg, it matches an EK2 that was posted as a 'Type A.' However, I am not learned in the nuances of the Imperial EKs. It that truly a 'Type A'?

http://forum.wehrmacht-awards.com/fo...24&postcount=9

[gregM]

Now I am learning also.

After doing some more searching, your cross does match the "A14" crosses.
If I understand all of this correctly, The "A14" cross is one of the very first
designed 1914 crosses. It is called the "A14" because it was made off the
design of the "Type A" 1870 crosses.

While I was trying to match your cross, I considered the "A14" crosses but
discounted them because the examples that I was finding (including my own)
did not have such a well defined crown. I thought that all "A14s" had this ugly
crown (see the picture of mine) I guess I did not read into them enough to
find the example that you linked to, to see that others more knowledgeable
than myself see these as A14s.

I like learning new things

[norwest]

Thanks again, Greg. It seems we've established that it is an A14 core, and often found in WuS crosses. I hate to keep dragging this out, but there are still some aspects that puzzle me:

1. The beading looks 1939-style
2. The arms of the cross do not widen out as much as either the 1914 or 1939 examples (the photo below was edited to show this more clearly)
3. The ring is marked '9' (I usually read from the inside of the ring perspective, but I know this isn't always the case), and perhaps also has a mis-struck '800' mark

How to reconcile these things?

[gregM]

Thanks again, Greg. It seems we've established that it is an A14 core, and often found in WuS crosses. I hate to keep dragging this out, but there are still some aspects that puzzle me:

1. The beading looks 1939-style
2. The arms of the cross do not widen out as much as either the 1914 or 1939 examples (the photo below was edited to show this more clearly)
3. The ring is marked '9' (I usually read from the inside of the ring perspective, but I know this isn't always the case), and perhaps also has a mis-struck '800' mark

How to reconcile these things?

It's been a great thread so far and an interesting conversation.
I don't have any more answers for you. Hopefully someone with more knowledge
will join the fun.

[norwest]

Did I finally make you tap out, Greg?