HOW to determine pre/post S&L!

[Brian S]

...and how many 'b' types did he get marked '800' that he knew were 'b' types in YOUR vernacular. That's a rhetorical question, because we don't know and never will...

...and now you tell us about 'b' types with provenance where before you stated ony the Schloss pieces were 'maybe' inclusive of 'b' types.

Dave, it's not a secret club you need to belong to know the difference, hints... It's pretty damn obvious.

[Dave Kane]

Brian, I'm not sure how to interpret your statement....however I agree whole heartedly if it's meant that (these) crosses aren't a science and in reality ARE easy to understand!


I thought I covered all of the 'flags' in the #54 post but I also realize that lots of folks haven't held even one RK so all of this may be very confusing....albeit no secret!


One must be logical and pragmatic to sum up the 'entire' cross!

[Brian S]

Brian, I'm not sure how to interpret your statement....however I agree whole heartedly if it's meant that (these) crosses aren't a science and in reality ARE easy to understand!


I thought I covered all of the 'flags' in the #54 post but I also realize that lots of folks haven't held even one RK so all of this may be very confusing....albeit no secret!


One must be logical and pragmatic to sum up the 'entire' cross!

Right, want to make sure anyone late to this discussion isn't 'afraid' of S&L's because it's all there for an experienced collector to see, as you say, 'readily'.

[Dave Kane]

The 'theme' of the original post wasn't directed to the experienced guy but more so the first time buyer (who) is taken advantage of by dealers offering crosses 30% less than the going rate and suggesting all sorts of excuses for finish, material etc.

Dietrich identified a 'landmark' that we can all work from and considering 'everything' about a particular piece the information offered here will allow most folks the ability to determine suspected 'post war' cross.

[VIPER]

Well it is nice to see progress has been made in that direction. It finally looks as if a consensus is forming......Jimmy

[Dietrich Maerz]

...and how many 'b' types did he get marked '800' that he knew were 'b' types in YOUR vernacular. That's a rhetorical question, because we don't know and never will...

..and now you tell us about 'b' types with provenance where before you stated ony the Schloss pieces were 'maybe' inclusive of 'b' types.

Dave, it's not a secret club you need to belong to know the difference, hints... It's pretty damn obvious.

Brian,

I'm not talking about '800' B-Types. Those can only recognized since the article, clearly. I was talking 800-4, which could be recognized already before.

Yes, now I tell you about B-Types with provenance because live and research goes on. Klessheim, by the way, is also confirmed now - no longer 'maybe'. And further research may even show up 800-4 with provenance.

Dietrich

[VIPER]

Were there doccumented cases of 800/4 marked crosses at Klessheim. Dietrich, Were there 935/4s there as well.

Brian,

I'm not talking about '800' B-Types. Those can only recognized since the article, clearly. I was talking 800-4, which could be recognized already before.

Yes, now I tell you about B-Types with provenance because live and research goes on. Klessheim, by the way, is also confirmed now - no longer 'maybe'. And further research may even show up 800-4 with provenance.

Dietrich

[Dietrich Maerz]

Were there doccumented cases of 800/4 marked crosses at Klessheim. Dietrich, Were there 935/4s there as well.

I only know of confirmed 935-4 found in Klessheim.

Dietrich

[Brian S]

Dietrich identified a 'landmark'...

You talking the 'a' and 'b' types?

[Dave Kane]

Brian the 'landmark' is the 'weld splatter' or 'dent row' or any other words used to describe the series of craters below the 3oc arm.


Accepting that the faults were created as a result of the die repair AND accepting that the 935/4 were 'later' made crosses this 'landmark' is a great jumping off point for one to assess a cross.

If indeed it is a 'late' cross as suggested by this series of faults then one should consider everything about the cross to include the core (magnetic?) frame (silver?) quality and depth of strike, marking, finishing and soldering.

I think that it is a very good hint that the cross should be looked at closer and if found to be non magnetic, non silver frame, unusually marked or any combination of what we would consider a 'negative' in a Knight's Cross it should be left on the table!

[Luftm40]

Since we are discussing post war produced SL products, what are your opinions about these two items? I have my own suspicions, but will wait for comments...

http://www.wehrmacht-awards.net/foru...9&page=1&pp=15

[Dave Kane]

Good post Andy! I wanted to stay away from that because I don't collect IC1st.


Some of the 'flags' we look for in POST WAR S&L Knight's Crosses are poor paint, rounded numerals and CROOKED core.

[Luftm40]

Dave, to truly discuss this issue I think we need to include ALL SL products. Given the magazine article you posted, it seems they restruck a number of things...and I'm sure they weren't the only firm that did this.

ps..the "raw" unfinished appearance of the EK1 is another red flag IMO.

[robert60446]

I

Dave, to truly discuss this issue I think we need to include ALL SL products. Given the magazine article you posted, it seems they restruck a number of things...and I'm sure they weren't the only firm that did this.

ps..the "raw" unfinished appearance of the EK1 is another red flag IMO.

I agree! Please check this thread:http://www.wehrmacht-awards.net/foru...1&page=1&pp=15 . There is no doubt in my mind that S&L was selling post 1945 awards (RK, EK’s and badges) on the black market. In my opinion more research must be done especially on the badges field…

[Dave Kane]

Robert, feel free to cut and paste the pictures from the 1953 article and place them in the badges section!!!


It's entirely possible that the follks who visit and participate there do not visit the Crosses section etc etc.