Announcement

**Peter J.** · 05-15-2005, 03:27 PM

Gentlemen, excuse my ignorance, but after more than 40 answers here and more than 600 in the other thread, I totally lost.
"Yes, That is crisp! The unmarked, unmagnetic is for sure not like that!

Dietrich"

Please help me with two questions.
1. Is the cross pictured by me crisp?
2. Are there unmarked, non-magnetic crosses of both A- and B-type?

KR
Peter

Originally posted by Peter J.

Is this crisp too

KR
Peter

**Dietrich Maerz** · 05-15-2005, 03:56 PM

Originally posted by Brian S

Nor is this even REMOTELY logical if you believe in your multiple die opinion. S&L survived the war, isn't it likely the first die survived too? So by your account how do you KNOW flawed crosses were produced to the great extent many are wartime? Many many FLAWS in your statements.

Brian,

there are so far no crosses exhibiting the die characteristics of the A-Type and the other post-war characteristics shown by Dave. All are B-Types, even the very heavily flawed. So my therory is that the die was disposed or recycled or whatever.
Furthermore, there are flawed A-Types with provenance which locks the "die status" in at around mid 44. There are no B-Types with provenance.

If it was repaired, as you say, my opinion about the A-Type is even more valid.

As I said earlier already, I don't know which is true but based on the evidence so far, the A-Type is a very safe cross, IMHO.
And I don't see MANY MANY FLAWS in my working thesis and findings. I find it very consitent so far.

Dietrich

**Dietrich Maerz** · 05-15-2005, 04:01 PM

Originally posted by Dave Kane

The 935/4 shows the 'spidering = die repair' ONLY on the 3oc arm while all other surfaces are smooth and sharp. It seems incredible that if indeed the 935/4 are such late crosses that so many flawed crosses would be produced before war's end.

Dave,

so the die repair is out of the window in your own words? Now I don't think that you can take the "repair theory" and apply it only partially. So for you it seems incredible that the 935-4 are late war crosses? I wonder how they could be not late?

Dietrich

**Dave Kane** · 05-15-2005, 05:39 PM

No, possibly I wasn't clear! I really believe in the repaired die...I do not believe in multiple die.

Given this it seems impossible to me that crosses would have been produced that were so badly flawed if there were other die to be utilized...

Then I consider the apparent repair of the 3oc arm on 935/4 as a 'stop gap' before it got bad again.

I think that I have clearly shown with all of the pictures posted that the crisp small, crisp large 800 and the 935/4 were from the same die.

But here we are again going around in circles....

Back to the post header.....

What do you look at to determine post war...we have beaten the die to death so just share your visual and tactile clues

**Dietrich Maerz** · 05-15-2005, 06:18 PM

Dave,

you should try to get access to a 1st model 1957 S&L (the 'step' one) and look for the minute features on that model also. This would be very interesting!

The 'stop gap' repair, i.e. a repair on the die after only the 3 o'clock arm was flawed and then the manufacturing of the 935-4 at an earlier stage does not work:

- the dent row would then be visible on (again) flawed A-Types
- the later flawed A-types would need to develop the EXACTLY same flaws starting at the 3 o'clcok again (after the 1st repair) and then jump over finally to the 6 o'clock AND they would show the dent row (which they don't)

The 935-4 is clearly after the A-Type, not between.

But you are right - let's go back to the topic of the thread.

Dietrich

**Dave Kane** · 05-15-2005, 06:23 PM

A B...It's making me nuts!!!

Yes, let's get to the chase here...

Tell us what do you consider to determine a post war made Cross utilizing the S&L die?

**George Stimson** · 05-15-2005, 06:31 PM

"A B...It's making me nuts!!!"

I hear you, Dave.
Yes, let's stay on topic.

**Dave Kane** · 05-15-2005, 06:35 PM

....Ok, I've shown some obvious 'flags' but here's another area that I look at closely; the SOLDERING can be very telling!

**Dave Kane** · 05-15-2005, 08:01 PM

Last Post On The Subject!

This will be my last post on the subject boys!!

As we know there is more information discussed via PM and Email than what appears on the Forum proper. Via these medium I have learned that there is INTEREST but most are reticent to voice opinion or state their experience.

I'm not shy in voicing my observations so here is what I suspect are 'post war made' hints and facts!

NON MAGNETIC....showing a flat strike, poorly voided ring, poor finish, excessive solder, lack of solder, SILVER frosting, rounded edges to the numerals and Swaz., silver plated frame, unmarked or stamped with 935 and having a loop which is rounded at the tips or cut cleanly at the tips and lack of accepted weight. These crosses may be marked with a small 800, large 800, incused 800, incused 935 and any combination therafter.

MAGNETIC...those showing the above 'flags' but including the excessive flaws and having the 'rough' appearing paint utilized later in the war.

NON MAGNETIC / MAGNETIC...showing a 'rough' surface to the frame on more than the 3oc arm and excessively 'frosted'. Those that are SPRAY painted and those that show excessive OVERSPRAY and UNDERSPRAY. Glossy paint and very flat paint.

COST....those that are 30% less than the going rate and offered as late war, lack of material to include IRON and SILVER and the most insulting EARLY war with ofcourse other than razor sharp strikes...

FLAT as a pancake but offered by a dealer as EARLY war and pre PK regulations...

I'm absolutely jaded lads so take from it what you will!

**Brian S** · 05-15-2005, 09:02 PM

Originally posted by Dietrich

There are no B-Types with provenance.

Again, a very irresponsible statement! Probably your most irresponsible.

Until you pointed out the material spill WHO WAS LOOKING AT THE DENT ROW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is NUTS..

How many crosses with provenance have you examined from S&L?????

**Dietrich Maerz** · 05-16-2005, 05:50 AM

Brian,

I do not need to look at all S&L's, with or without provenance.
For me the 935-4 is the first strike of the B-Type. You agreed at one point to that, too. Now there are no 935-4 with direct awardee provenance, but they have been alledgedly found in Schloss Klessheim.

So, if the 935-4 as the first B-model have no provenance I conclude, without looking at all S&L crosses, that later models of the B-Type also cannot have provenence. Based on a strict sequence and passing of time.

I don't think this is NUTS nor is it irresponsible.

Dietrich

**Brian S** · 05-16-2005, 09:01 AM

To say there are NO B Types with provenance is premature. Thanks to you this distinction is now weeks old.

To say it as a conclusion is entirely too soon. Have you emailed Detlev to see if he noticed this dent row? And asked him if he has did he have one with provenance?

Entirely premature as this forum has a very small number in absolute numbers of crosses with provenance. And if you study the vet photos, the majority are Juncker and S&L. Unfortunately many RKs seem to have gone to collectors unnamed but unless you are in some great hurry, time will tell.

**Dietrich Maerz** · 05-16-2005, 09:27 AM

Brian,

I did contact Detlev and I did discuss the issue of the S&L types in question with him. I will not post in public what he wrote me since I promissed not to do so.

It is only weeks ago that one can identify for sure the B-Type, but it is not weeks ago that there are lot's of unmagnetic, unmarked S&L's and all the other types Dave listed.

In all previous discussions it was also always very clear that there is (maybe so far) no 935-4 with provenance, something that always puzzled at least this collector community. This is not just my opinion, I have talked with a lot of people about this.

Based on this I made my remark regarding the lack of provenance. I understand very well that this is a 'snap shot' of the current knowledge and might need possible revision later on. For me this is as it stands right now and nobody needs to follow that reasoning.

Everything we assume might be premature, based on future findings. It was also premature to call the flawed A-Type post war and it might very well premature to call the Rounder post war.

I duly note that you disagree and as soon as a 935-4 with solid provenance turns up I will revise my opinion. Till that day comes or not, I can only go with what we all know so far.

Dietrich

**Brian S** · 05-16-2005, 07:20 PM

But all B-types are not 93x marked. Any that were a simple 800 would have been overlooked.

**Dietrich Maerz** · 05-16-2005, 07:48 PM

I only mentioned the 935-4 because I think - based on the 3 o'clock weld splatter and pristine condition of the dent row and the pristine strike - that the 935-4 was the first B-Type model.

Dietrich

Announcement

HOW to determine pre/post S&L!

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread