HOW to determine pre/post S&L!

[tom hansen]

See in frame #103. Is this the beginning of the flaw that you have noted on the "B" type cross on the corner of the 6 and 9 oclock arms? This is on an "A" type cross. Also, with the "dots" on the bottom of the 3 oclock arm, has anyone else seen this besides Harry? Flaws do not disappear (unless repaired) so such pieces would have to be later than those A types without these flaws.

[Dietrich Maerz]

See in frame #103. Is this the beginning of the flaw that you have noted on the "B" type cross on the corner of the 6 and 9 oclock arms? This is on an "A" type cross. Also, with the "dots" on the bottom of the 3 oclock arm, has anyone else seen this besides Harry? Flaws do not disappear (unless repaired) so such pieces would have to be later than those A types without these flaws.

No, this is not the B-Type knee flaw.
The knee flaw looks like this. It;s very small - but I could see it with a good loop yesterday on another B-type nice and clear. Unmarked, magnetic S&L.

Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

George I think that Dietrich summed it up well....


Just plain mis-information and faulted assumptions or intended nonsense

[George Stimson]

That's what I thought!

[Dave Kane]

Tom, the 'dots' appear on the 935/4 as well...


I'll get a good angle later and shoot a pic.!

[tom hansen]

Tom, the 'dots' appear on the 935/4 as well...


I'll get a good angle later and shoot a pic.!

Thanks Dave. I am a believer in the one repaired die theory and the presence of the dots on later "A" type and "B" type would be further corroboration.

[Dave Kane]

Lighting isn't the best but this give the idea!

[tom hansen]

Lighting isn't the best but this give the idea!

Thanks Dave- I can see the dots. Can you see flaws on the other arm as well?

[Dave Kane]

Interestingly enough Tom there's fewer on the reverse!

[Bob Hritz]

Dave,


That is what I think I see on both Harry's 800 marked Knight's Crosses, on the lower 3 C'clock arm. What I am asking: are these the dent row seen more clearly in other examples. Dots, dents, are getting me confused. Perhaps they are the same flaw, but to a lesser degree?

Bob Hritz

[Dietrich Maerz]

Bob,

no taking into account the fact that they do not sit in the same spot (valley instead of hill), don' have the same appearance and are a a lot smaller ....

Dietrich

[VIPER]

Summary

So in reading this post. Can it be said in reasonable certainty that all incused 800/4 and 935 with incused 4 with magnetinc cores are pre May 1945. And all unmarked, 800 marked with and without iton cores must be determined by workmanship etc. to be either early war or post war. It would seem too me that the later would be post war as I dont think SL would defy PK orders by dropping the maker mark and iron core even late in the war.....Jimmy

[Brian S]

Workmanship and wear and iron cores are essential for type II's in my opinion. I think Type II's may be without '4' if an early Type II. Workmanship on known examples illustrate this clearly. Postwar are not difficult to spot...

[Dave Kane]

IRON is absolutely necessary.....


If the core is non-ferrous a RED FLAG is instantly raised and if other factors fall in to play to include 'hints' posted early in the thread one may feel comfortable suggesting the cross is post war

[Dietrich Maerz]

Iron Core with non-silver frame and Type B is also very bad, IMHO. Goes in line with the Revue Article from 1953, i.e. not 'real' crosses.

Further ongoing research with several dealers and collectors has only turned up provenance for 935-4 so far. From that (radical) point of view, this is the only 'safe' B-Type so far. However, Detlev Niemann also mentions 800-4 and I would think he got some in with provenance. But I don't know that.

Dietrich