50's EKI???

[Nigel N]

This (to me at least) is a very early example of an S & L EK1..........
Matt painted core, nicely detailed oaks and acorns, frosted beading, a frame you can see your reflection in, frame and backplate perfectly aligned, quality soldering, edges of frame filed to a smooth finish etc.medals%20474.jpg
No prizes for guessing which pin style!!!

[LuckyLuudje]

In post #10 of this thread, Peter dates an EKII with very similar traits all around to 1957/58 manufacture - CLICK!

I have no idea what similar traits you are seing because Idon't see it.
Peter is IMO right about that mm4 ek2. But that mm4 ek2 is IMO earlier as your EK1 (also as mine EK1 you posted).

If I compare my mm4 ek2 against my EK1 (the one you posted), I see nothing that my ek2 has been made earlier.

I have no idea what the early new form S&L finish should look like, but the matt finish on the EK1 seems to have a weird finish while if you turn the ek2 upside down, it is almost impossible to find it between my wartime S&L's.
My mm4 ek2 is almost identical (finish, frosting, soldering) as my ww2 counterparts!!!!

The burnishing on my mm4 ek2 has been done smoothly with care while it looks like the wanted to be ready in 1 minute with my ek1.

If you compare the frames of my EK1 against my mm4 EK2 I see that the frames of my EK1 has developing more flaws.

[LuckyLuudje]

I made a quick picture of another new form mm4 ek2 that still has the black finish that I as a novice see as the early black paint.

I took this one on purpose to see that some damage at the die already developed.
It already shows some flaws that I also see on the frame of the EK1.

[Matthieu]

Adding my newly acquired EK2 mm4 for comparison .... Same flaw as Luuds crosses.

[naxos]

I've been watching this discussion with great interest.

Here are my thoughts on what I've read so far.

If the premise put forth that core details are a major determining factor (which I agree with) then Hardy's cross with open hinge block, wide catch and matte paint, seen on the far right below, appears to be of earlier manufacture than the cross that started this thread. Perhaps the core is of early manufacture but was then set aside until used in the late 60's.

Perhaps the crispness of the core details on the cross that opened this thread are obscured by the thickness of the paint applied. Or perhaps an alternate die was used that was then retired. The frame details on the cross that opened this thread certainly appear less flawed and more crisp than the three crosses being compared IMHO.

So where are we in dating EK's? Needing more discussion and open minds!

Nice comparison shot!

Is there a difference in the core? - Have a look at the top line of the 3, on mine it is strait, on the EK in the middle it appears to be wavy.

Better image:


compare the number 3:

Hardy

[LuckyLuudje]

I did notice that the later pieces don't show the flaws anymore.
Maybe it is interesting to investigate if the dies have been altered or completely different dies have been used.
And when wich needle?

All the information is already here, but sperated in many different threads.
Maybe it is interesting to start a reference thread with detailed pictures?

[streptile]

I did notice that the later pieces don't show the flaws anymore.
Maybe it is interesting to investigate if the dies have been altered or completely different dies have been used.
And when wich needle?

All the information is already here, but sperated in many different threads.
Maybe it is interesting to start a reference thread with detailed pictures?

I think that's a superb idea. Separate out different cores, frames, and pins. Trace the evolution of die flaws on the frames. Try to collate this information and see what comes out. It's a big job that requires, more than anything else, a large body of examples to compare, and someone willing to do the research.

[LuckyLuudje]

I think that's a superb idea. Separate out different cores, frames, and pins. Trace the evolution of die flaws on the frames. Try to collate this information and see what comes out. It's a big job that requires, more than anything else, a large body of examples to compare, and someone willing to do the research.

Many examples are indeed needed!
But we have a member called Nigel here that can help a lot. He has about 50% of all new form EK's on the WAF.

Any ideas how to organise it so it won't be a whirlpool of different crosses?

[Mike Yokum]

I think that's a superb idea. Separate out different cores, frames, and pins. Trace the evolution of die flaws on the frames. Try to collate this information and see what comes out. It's a big job that requires, more than anything else, a large body of examples to compare, and someone willing to do the research.

I too think it's an excellent idea. Good one Luud!

Just the three EKI's in this thread have posed problems in dating or so it seems. Let me speak for myself, they have for me! Adding many examples will require careful indexing and evaluation. A field far beyond my current experience and capability. Nigel, Trevor, Luud, David? You guys are the EK peeps.

I for one am glad this thread sparked a discussion on dating and not about who's cross is the earliest!

Note a few differences in this comparison again. This is not to mention the obvious differences in the oak spray and hardware!

I have no idea what similar traits you are seing because Idon't see it.

My comment was not intended as a deep, technical statement, only that they had similarities that are only seen on the earliest crosses like burnishing, frosting, crispness of strike etc.

[George L]

I'm with Trevor on this, or is he with me on the Souval style pins?

Mike, that's a nice EKI you got there.

As I added in my .02 earlier, compare the hardware of the different types to the assault badges with the same setup's. That same style sem-flat pin being found on slightly later style badges, while the earlier pieces either had perfectly round needle pins, or the broad type as found on the luft flight spangen.

I need to crack open my EKI's again and check the cores/frames for flaws.

[Nigel N]

That is a great idea Luud, as Mike says , between us we've probably got the answers, but it is going to be a huge job!!
Let me give you one example, I only have two S & L EK2's with the "4" stamped on the ribbon ring, this dates them to the first couple of years of production, say 57 to 59, and yet....they've got different cores!!!
But it would be great if we could do it, so i think we need to dig out a magnifying glass and start checking the frames and cores of our EK's, hardware too on EK1's, and see if we can make any sense of it all!!!!! -Nigel

[Leroy]

Just based on what I have seen with RK's (wartime, postwar, 1957), I believe you will find that no other company did more things with more different cores, frames, etc. than S&L.

[streptile]

I just had a thought:

There are many firms listed in the back of the recently discussed book on new-form awards that made or sold EKs. Firms we've never discussed. Some of the hardware on the reverse of EKs (and other awards) could be associated with these firms, with them having sourced cores and frames from S&L for assembly in their own shops.

In this way of thinking (to take an extreme view), there could be only one type of true S&L EK1. I don't think that's really the case, but who knows? What does a 57er EK1 sold by Ferd. Hofstätter look like? I submit that it could well be one we call an S&L, perhaps this one (the "bleeding 3" core):



Maybe this core-type was manufactured by S&L for sale to other firms? Maybe the die itself was manufactured for another firm by S&L? After all, there are comparatively few S&L marked EKs. I think one place to start would be to look at all new-form EKs that are marked and see if they all have the same core-type and frame. This could help us understand whether certain so-called S&L cores were perhaps used (exclusively?) by other firms.

We do eventually have to grapple with the fact that a multitude of firms were known to have made and/or sold new-form awards, not just S&L, Assmann, Deschler, and Deumer. Maybe pin-types can separate makers, and cores and frames were liberally sold among firms? Aftrer all, aren't S&L cores to be found in properly marked Assmann EKs? Why should it stop there? This was how it worked during the war. This is how collectors identify wartime EKs in large part. And... what a coincidence! ... S&L was by far the most prolific retailer of EK cores and frames to other firms during the war, all of whom assembled them in-house, and added their own pins.

Just a thought.

[Nigel N]

"Just a Thought" Trevor, but a very good one buddy!! I honestly believe that the story of 57 EK's is a lot more complicated than previously thought!!
At the moment its all guesswork, but i'm sure there are links between several different makers, that have got lost in the mists of time!!
Its up to us to search them out!!!wall.gif
I think a lot of what you said in your last post could very well be true-Nigel

[Nigel N]

Just based on what I have seen with RK's (wartime, postwar, 1957), I believe you will find that no other company did more things with more different cores, frames, etc. than S&L.

You are sooooo right there Leroy! they did'nt make it easy for us collectors did they -Nigel