I've been offered a 1957 1st Pattern Ritterkreuz --> Opinions Please!

[Leroy]

I see that Dietrich has posted about this cross in the other thread (the one about the ribbon, loop, etc.) and thinks this is the frame he calls the "C" frame, which he believes to be "very late".

S&L certainly did switch to another frame for its final version of the 57
RK. Normally, this frame would be sandblasted (not frosted) and would have a much later style core (with the acorns right next to the leaves and with flattened numbers). If this is their last frame, it is the first I have seen with the very early core and with frosting equal to the first 57 pieces produced. In turn, this makes me believe in the possibility that this frame must already have been in existence during the time when S&L was still still using the early core and early frosting (believed to be 1957-mid-1960's).

Another mystery in the S&L saga!

Again, a very nice and collectable cross!

[streptile]

Hi.

You've summed up my thoughts pretty exactly, Leroy.

I am learning pretty quickly here, but: if this is the so-called "Type C" S&L frame, the evidence provided by the other manufacturing details would seem to make your conclusion pretty sound:

...this frame must already have been in existence during the time when S&L was still still using the early core and early frosting (believed to be 1957-mid-1960's).

I have just one question: While it's been established that the "Type A" and "Type B" cores were in use concurrently at the beginning of the 57er series, at some point all makers stopped using Type A cores. You note above that this was "believed to be" in the mid-1960's. Is there any documentary evidence of this happening? Or of why this happened? And, most importantly, exactly when this happened?

It would help us fix a latest-possible date for the introduction of this so-called "Type C" S&L frame.

Another thought, to which you alluded in an earlier post: Is it possible this is an early piece by some as-yet unknown manufacturer? Or are there some hallmarks of the frame that make is unmistakably S&L?

I know, a lot of questions...

Thanks,

[Leroy]

[QUOTE=streptile;3323180]

I have just one question: While it's been established that the "Type A" and "Type B" cores were in use concurrently at the beginning of the 57er series, at some point all makers stopped using Type A cores. You note above that this was "believed to be" in the mid-1960's. Is there any documentary evidence of this happening? Or of why this happened? And, most importantly, exactly when this happened?

It would help us fix a latest-possible date for the introduction of this so-called "Type C" S&L frame.

Another thought, to which you alluded in an earlier post: Is it possible this is an early piece by some as-yet unknown manufacturer? Or are there some hallmarks of the frame that make is unmistakably S&L?

I know, a lot of questions...

QUOTE]

Yes, quite a few.

First, my comments concerned only S&L crosses, not those by other possible makers of the 57 version cross. I have not looked closely at them and think that there are others here (such as Peter Wiking, just to name one) who could better address the "spectrum" of 57 RK's.

I do believe that the early style core was used by S&L from 1957 to (approximately) the mid-60's. Other may extend that date by a few years, but I don't think by much. This is based on my personal observations, speaking with other collectors and looking at purported 57 "groupings". Early-core S&L crosses are certainly more highly-valued in the collecting community than the later style and are much less frequently encountered. The crosses which have them are consistantly better in fit and finish than later crosses and reflect real craftsmanship which, over time, simply fell by the wayside.(And even as well-made as these early crosses are, they still are not as good, in my opinion, as wartime pieces, although some are close.)To my knowledge, there was no type of "official" change in core style. Perhaps the original die was damaged in some way. I just don't know (and I don't believe S&L is in the habit of answering questions, at least not questions I have sent to them!).

Finally, I believe the frame, after looking at it a bit longer and now having had a bit of a chance to compare it to others, IS an S&L and not some other, unidentified, maker. S&L crosses (and this is true for crosses by other manufacturers as well) have a distinctive "look" to them. After years of looking at them, it becomes almost 2nd nature to be able to identify them fairly quickly, as they have stylistic features which are unique. On this particular piece, although I immedately "thought" S&L, some of those characteristics were a bit hard for me to make out in the photos and so I had to look at others areas of the frame (not usually my reference points) to be sure. I frequently look at a cross from a side angle (if I have it in my hands) to double-check, as there are also certain features from that perspective which are good "tells".

I think it would be a fascinating study to look at as many 57 versions as we could, including S&L and others, as they will provide clues to "what came before". I am looking forward to what others may say.

[DavidM]

Hello

In my opinion the new form RK that you have posted is from S&L and is a transitional piece, that is a cross over between the 1st and 2nd pattern cored pieces. The frame on yours lacks the die flaws seen on the very early made frames (which were made using the original WW2 dies) but matches to the frames seen on the very early production of the 2nd pattern RKs. At some point S&L ceased to use the original WW2 tooling for the frames - it's pressumed that the die had deteriorated to such an extent that it was easier to replace it with a new one - and unflawed framed 57 RKs came about. Why the core was changed is unknown, or at least as far as I am aware.
Your RK shows wear to it, and with the level of wear it potentially points to this one having been actually worn and cleaned by a veteran, either that or really frequently handled and cleaned by a really over zealous collector.

The loop may or may not be a wartime one. As far as I am aware virtually all war time loops are about 1.5mm in diameter, with very little + or - tolerance - but then that is also the specification for the 57 loops as well !! Genuine, and early 57 loops are found with the '800' stamp on them. However, that said yours has a good point in it's favour, and that is the finishing on the ends. Most 57 loops, including those from the very begining of production, are sniped off at the ends with pliers, leaving an angled point. Yours has very nicely finished and rounded ends, a feature normally associated with the war time loops. The '800' mark itself can also help as the font etc can be compared to known original war time ones.
As for the case and ribbon, the case I can't really comment on as the only photo of it I can find only shows the interior with the cross sat in it. The ribbon is, in my opinion, a post war piece.

I hope this is of use. At the end of the day my view is that it is a good, and very interesting transitional new form RK from S&L. Don't pay a premium though on the basis of a war time loop or ribbon.

Regards
David

[streptile]

Got this one today! New photos to follow, perhaps in a new thread.

[Matthieu]

Looking forward to seeing new pix of that fantastic RK !!!

[old siagon]

Hello,
I know who the seller is and it is 100%, just like the seller!
Vince

[streptile]

Ugh, just too much to do last night. Photos tonight I hope.

[Seewolf]

Hope you´ll have the time for photos, a very interesting early piece, i´m still waiting to see the photos .

[streptile]

Hope you´ll have the time for photos, a very interesting early piece, i´m still waiting to see the photos .

Check back tonight around 11.30pm New York time... (probably tomorrow morning for you). The piece is very nice in-hand.




EDIT TO ADD:

New photos shown:
HERE





.