The 3 Types of Rounder RK's

[Dietrich Maerz]

Tom,

I honestly do not know what risks or not any producer of any item during the Third Reich were prepared to take or not. And I admit that there is a difference beween using zink as core material and wrongfully (unintentional or intentional) or mistakingly hallmarking a plated frame. The latter being the bigger offense, for sure.

If that would be the case with all Rounders one might really come to different conclusions. True!

But the company who did this cross reversed this practice (if it was one, maybe this is the only cross that was hallmarked incorrectly) and went over to produce the same cross with the same core with a silver frame, in an etched version, a 'painted frosting' version and a plain silver version - exactly as all the others that produced 'from the beginning'.

Now why would any diabolic faker (who only wants to make money and already commited himself to hallmarking fraud) do that? Without destroying the cross one would never know. And even if one finds out after whatever time, the faker and his money is gone, gone, gone...Why etching, why painted frosting?

Please give me any good reason for a possible faker going thru that time line! It just doesn't make any sense at all. Not even close! Apart from the fairly safe assumption, that in the early 80's thiose production steps were not known to the general public...maybe not even to the initiated...

Apply some common sense and forget the heated Rounder issue for a moment!

Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

Dietrich, Johannes Floch DKFM was indeed keenly aware of the process and so were his associates

[Dietrich Maerz]

So Floch and his associates did it .

Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

Heck every other reproduction medal is 'attributed' to him so why not!


Kidding aside though...locate one of the KvK 1st from the big plastic bags that he dragged out of his 4 suitcases.....only a handful sold because they were 'plain'.............next show 6 months later.......all beautifully frosted and burnished highlights. This was 1976-1977!!

The 'knowledge' was there alright!

[Dietrich Maerz]

Sure, there where people "knowing" this. Former employees, early collectors, .. but what I meant was the general puplic who buys or bought this - the possible target for fakers. They for sure did not know and most of them (the targets) don't know today. Just look at Ebay.

So your theory is that the fakers of the Rounder were driven by collector demand to have (after the silver plated brass frame with iron core):

- an etched frame, and
- a painted frosting frame and
- a plain silver frame

Which model did you see in the early 80's?

Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

Dietrich, you must go back and read my post....that's not what I said at all nor did I even allude to that!


I suggested that in 'businessl' the finest comes first and then the manufacturers find ways after recouping their investment to lessen their costs by making an object utilizing cheaper materials....

I don't recall which 'type' of Rounder I saw first BUT I do recall and for some reason made a graphic mental note that each was very nicely frosted and were attached to an equally (heavy) frosted Oaks.

Forgers, fraudsters and confidence men ALWAYS do their homework and get the item as close as their ability will allow....

[Dietrich Maerz]

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I was more refering to my time line, not to your earlier post.

So you think the fakers started with the frosted one(s) in the early 80's and then switched to the plain silver one and then to the silver plated model? So Tony's cross would be the latest model, silver plated brass?
Was the heavy frosting on the Rounder of the painted or etched type?

Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

I just don't know! I saw the influx, made a mental note ( they sure looked good ) and continued to run around chasing K98k sniper rifles and visor caps!

So, after 25 years...when most is forgotten....utilizing logic of course.....WHY would a faker introduce MINT (original????) crosses attached to just as MINT fake Oaks?

Surely someone remembers these Crosses and the Oaks attached as they were at all the shows.....the last I priced was an RK w/Oaks for $1,500.00 while the going rate for even an S&L /Oaks was $12,000.00.

Someone said if it's walkin' and quackin' like a duck....it must be a duck!

Who here...prior to the Forum experience bought one of these Rounders at the typical going rate for an original Knight's Cross?????

[Dave Kane]

Sorry Dietrich I didn't mean for this to turn back to a Rounder...


That said however and your strongly stated assertion that the 'knowledge wasn't (known) in the 80's about frosting application just jumps in the face of what we have experienced just in the last year right here.....

Again, I'll remind everyone of the Oaks debate....the speckled DKiG.....the (unknown to most) refinished Lazy2! Let's not forget the mint but FLAT S&L RK!

The knowledge is out there and even more refined than 25 years ago...

[tom hansen]

Just regarding the whole issue of a "time line", I think that the use of progression of die flaws, as Dietrich showed on the S&L thread, is a progression that is logical and accepted, based on the premise that flaws increase in size over time. The use of externally applied material, such as frosting, is less reliable, as there is not an accepted and well recognized time line regarding this process. Die flaws cannot revert, unless repaired, and a progression shows later pieces. I do not see how the same can be said of the frosting process.

[Dietrich Maerz]

I paid about the going rate at that time for my Rounder from Steve Wolfe.

But coming back to the (your) experience. You said they sure looked good. So you were put off because of the oaks which were fake, as you say. Two questions:

- would you have thought differently about the Rounder if no oaks would have been attached and the price would have been higher?

- what type of fake oaks were attached. Any markings? What made you beleve or think they were fake?


I don't understand what you want to say with "That said however and your strongly stated assertion that the 'knowledge wasn't (known) in the 80's about frosting application just jumps in the face of what we have experienced just in the last year right here....." I honestly don't. If you mean that we are just now able to detect clever fakes, then I agree with you. The more so I find the Rounder variants suporting the genuity rather then the fake theory.


And this is a Rounder thread - not a frosting thread!

[Dave Kane]

Dietrich....speaking of 'flat'...have a look at Tony's "early" cross and one with lots of frosting...


Surely the early cross will demonstrate higher and sharper ridges and lower valley areas in those spots NOT commonly found to be in (naturaly) worn crosses.

Let's apply the same 'science' and research that we do with the S&L crosses

[Dietrich Maerz]

Just regarding the whole issue of a "time line", I think that the use of progression of die flaws, as Dietrich showed on the S&L thread, is a progression that is logical and accepted, based on the premise that flaws increase in size over time. The use of externally applied material, such as frosting, is less reliable, as there is not an accepted and well recognized time line regarding this process. Die flaws cannot revert, unless repaired, and a progression shows later pieces. I do not see how the same can be said of the frosting process.

A time line can be established looking at the pieces i.e. the models and the application of frosting type. It is very rough, I agree. At least I know that the etched frosting was the officially described method and logic tells me that this was used immidiately after the guidelines were establiseh. Then it somehow slipped into painted and none. So far this is a theory and the evidence I have supports that theory clearly.

The frosting is not a deterioration process as a die flaw is. The etched does not morph into the painted or the reverse. It is a procedure that seemingly was used at certain points in time during the production run.

For sure one would not think that the etched frosting was the last type if no K&Q, no Lazy 2 (so far..) and no 935-4 (so far) has this applied, but earlier crosses (like the S&L 800) has it. Thats all I can gather at the moment.

[Dave Kane]

I paid about the going rate at that time for my Rounder from Steve Wolfe.

But coming back to the (your) experience. You said they sure looked good. So you were put off because of the oaks which were fake, as you say. Two questions:

- would you have thought differently about the Rounder if no oaks would have been attached and the price would have been higher?

- what type of fake oaks were attached. Any markings? What made you beleve or think they were fake?


I don't understand what you want to say with "That said however and your strongly stated assertion that the 'knowledge wasn't (known) in the 80's about frosting application just jumps in the face of what we have experienced just in the last year right here....." I honestly don't. If you mean that we are just now able to detect clever fakes, then I agree with you. The more so I find the Rounder variants suporting the genuity rather then the fake theory.


And this is a Rounder thread - not a frosting thread!

Yes, today we are not so gullible....answers ARE a keystroke away! Photos are instant.

[Dietrich Maerz]

Dietrich....speaking of 'flat'...have a look at Tony's "early" cross and one with lots of frosting...


Surely the early cross will demonstrate higher and sharper ridges and lower valley areas in those spots NOT commonly found to be in (naturaly) worn crosses.

Let's apply the same 'science' and research that we do with the S&L crosses

That is not true. The cross is worn but the strike is well defined. Don't forget, the Rounder has a less defined beading anyway. In all fairness, I could not find the deterioration of the beading being that dramatical between the Rounder models as one would find with the very very late S&l's. But even with pre-45 models the difference between an 800 and a 935-4 is not really there (even if one goes with your repaired die theory ...), it starts relatively late.

I would be hard pressed to hang a time line on the Rounder beading - it would be wishfull thinking - one way or the other. Pure speculation in areas of sub-0.01 mm.

Dietrich