My humble collection ....

[Tom B]

A Beauty !

Wow... what a beauty ! I have a Schickle (unmarked) I picked up in the 1970's but this is only the second one I've seen marked ! What a great addition to your collection ! Congrats !, Tom

[Nigel N]

Another great addition to your RK collection Mathijs!!
As always the Schickle looks great, also nice to see it marked!!
Have you got one with the "835" mark that they used wartime???
Not 100% on loops, not an expert, or even close, but this looks good to me!!
Altogether a great piece!!
Congrats!!!
-Nigelparty0038.gif

[Nigel N]

That should have read "935" and if i'd have read more carefully, i would have seen you'd already answered my question!!

-Nigelth_tumbleweed.gif

[Arthur Spooner]

GREAT RITTERKREUZ Mathijs

[Seewolf]

I love these "Schickles"
Wonderful pieces. Congrats to another top addition

[Matthieu]

The HK RK from this thread is fantastic, and one of the best of its type. And a fare better quality than anything else considered postwar. The best of these crosses puzzles me alot.

The price is hard to say... even not same variant of the B-s&l, it would be interesting to see what this one go for

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...=553018&page=2

Nicolai

Hi Nicolai,

Thanks for your comments ... indeed a questionable piece ... In all honesty, I paid 1.4K Euro for this piece.
First reason ... its indeed questionable ... if it turns out to be the real deal, good investment. If not, well ... my money does no good in the bank as well .
Secondly is the link with 57er St&L ... interesting to see how the frame developed since this one ...

Grtz
Mathijs

[Nigel N]

Hi Mathijs!!
Sorry for the dumb question, but what is it about the S&L RK with swaz that is questionable??
Or do some people think these are wartime???
-Nigel017.gif

[Matthieu]

Hi Mathijs!!
Sorry for the dumb question, but what is it about the S&L RK with swaz that is questionable??
Or do some people think these are wartime???
-Nigel[ATTACH]2044344[/ATTACH]

Hi Nigel,

Good question ... seems there is a thin time-line as to when these RK's were produced. The majority accept them as postwar ( after May 1945 ), but there are some who believe they are prior May 1945.
Also there seems to be a difference between magnetic / non-magnetic pieces ....

I have received several positive comments about this RK, but seeing the commotion on this, most of the collectors will not touch it ... seems I'm not one of them .

There is an extensive thread on this in the Crosses section, but after page 5 I got a headache .

My conclusion ... the RK looks smashing and shows a link to the 1957 issue "B" frame ... I do not even care if its was produced May 1945 or June 1945 !

Grtz
Mathijs

[tystgaard]

Yes

Agree... a win win if postwar your type is one of the most early... war?... postwar?... IMO still a lovely cross with alot of history...

Hi Nicolai,

Thanks for your comments ... indeed a questionable piece ... In all honesty, I paid 1.4K Euro for this piece.
First reason ... its indeed questionable ... if it turns out to be the real deal, good investment. If not, well ... my money does no good in the bank as well .
Secondly is the link with 57er St&L ... interesting to see how the frame developed since this one ...

Grtz
Mathijs

[Nigel N]

Thanks for your explanation Mathijs!!
I do remember reading a few threads on these, but ended up more confused when i'd finished than i was when i started
To be honest, i dont think anyone can say for sure when S&L started making RK's again postwar, or even if they ever stopped??
My own thoughts on most of these RK's are that the core paint, frosting etc, looks more like a 57er than a wartime piece, but who knows??
If these are postwar, the less developed flaws on the beading, when compared to a 57er with the "B" frame, should point to a pre 57 date, exactly when.....????????
They are great looking RK's, and i would love one myself, but at that price, it'll never happen!!
-Nigel

[Matthieu]

Well Nigel - my good friend - I took a real gamble at that price .... but like you say, most of us shall never own a 100% guaranteed wartime RK.

But this smashing St&L is good enough for me, and that is what counts ( IMO ).

Grtz
Mathijs

[Nigel N]

I think you've got a great piece there Mathijs, wether it is late wartime, or early postwar!!
If i were you, i'd hang on to it, very collectable and desirable RK
-Nigel

[LuckyLuudje]

Very nice RK, congrats on your new find

Still missing the "935" marked version .

Do you mean "835" or "935".
On 1957 RK's I am only aware of "835" marked RK's.
I have a "835" and it is stamped on te back on the lower arm. The "935" marked RK's I have only seen with a swass.

I looked in the crosses section to look on details and mark on the loop.
These are hard to judge, so I can only guess.
I can tell that the mark doesn't match the 800 markings on my wartime and postwar S&L loops. It also doesn't match witch the fake loops that I have in my files.

I read this comment in the other thread:

As 57er loops are unmarked, .......

I can't agree with this statement because I have around 5 1957 S&L RK's ( of witch 4 came with good provenance) wich have a "800" marked loop wich doesn't match with my wartime S&L marked loop.
I even have a "835" marked loop on one of them.

[Nigel N]

You are right Luud, and i was right the first time around!!
"835" was what many of the wartime Schickles were marked, and the same mark can be found on some 57ers too.............57%20Otto%20Schickle%20RK%20Rear.jpg
-Nigel

[Matthieu]

Sorry lads .... got a bit hammered last night and seems I posted some mistakes ...

1. Of course I mean the "835" Schickle version so lovely shown by Nigel, in the above post ... D'oh.
2. Marked loops ... I always assumed these were reproduction loops and not 57ers .... D'oh.
If you indeed have marked loops with good provenance, no argument there, Luud.

And Luud, should you have a spare "835" Schickle RK, you know where to find me ..

Grtz
Mathijs