schickle RK

[bratwurstdimsum]

Getting back to the topic at hand, I would agree that if these RKs were not struck from the same dies then they were struck from dies that were nearly identical. But if they were struck from the same dies, how do we account for the apparent "wear" on the presumed later example? Are we to believe that Schickle struck so many "period" crosses that the die got worn down? If we are, how many "period" crosses do you suppose would have to be struck in order to account for the wear? Dozens? Scores? Hundreds? Where are these crosses, then?

George and Tom,

It maybe premature to suggest wear on the dies just from these pictures. Henri's pictures even with a 6 megapixel camera are clearly not sharp enough when compared to Tom's and the flash also complicates the edge detail as well.

I think perhaps Henri, if you could eyeball (with a glass) your cross and compare it area by area, with the pictures kindly provided by Tom, we'll have to take your word on the matter...how about it?

BDS

[Henri S]

I'm off to hospital this morning, but I hope to be out by the afternoon. I will get better detail photos, as the photo I posted here was reduced in resolution. If needed I will send a high res photo. Just send me a pm with an email address, maybe Tom you would like this . Must rush off. More later

[Henri S]

Ok, I'm back and tests results came out good . I took some better shots. Hope these help. First is the top left inner corner

[Henri S]

Top right

[Henri S]

Bottom right

[Henri S]

Bottom left

[bratwurstdimsum]

Hey thanks Henri, good to see you're in one piece

Top Left Arm...

Tom's conclusions appear to be correct, the beading in the area lettered A & B appear to have the same wear spot as the wartime cross but more pronounced, more fragmented, and C appears to be a brand new "chip" on the beading.

The beading peaks have seen considerable flattening, how could this have happened ... Dietrich?

[bratwurstdimsum]

Top Right arm...

Beading seems to be less pronounced all round with the squashing of the peaks here bringing them very close to the valleys themselves.

Note also the section marked 'A' , the triangular valley has become a rectangle, again more sign of wear and use.

everything points to use and overuse of old dies...unless, copies were made of the old dies leading to the degradation of the quality seen with Henri's cross ... is that possible?

[bratwurstdimsum]

of interest is the same die flaw exhibited across both crosses and the fragmentation of parts of the bead peaks (circled) - again I'm not sure whether fragmentation occurs from overuse or a copy being made

[tom hansen]

WOW!!!!!!!!

Thanks guys. That is a great side by side comparison. I can really see the differences in the flaws much better now. Again, these are the same dies, yet the '57 has more flawing and a less sharp strike, implying that it is later in production. The degree of difference is fairly marked, but it is obviously impossible to tell how much the difference in the quality of the strike equates to number of years, or for that matter number of strikes, difference between the pieces. Thanks very much for the nice photo comparison!


Marshall-


The '57 piece is mint, therefore the less sharp strike is not due to wear in my opinion. I think you are correct in stating that this simply means that the '39 was struck before the '57 and does not definitively imply that the '39 was wartime, only before the '57. I can say, however, that the more information that comes up, it appears better for the schickle as far as wartime production. The fact that the wear and flawing on the '57 is greater, and the fact that the paint matches wartime production pieces, are both favorable toward the presumption of wartime production.


Even the inner corners are less sharp on the '57 as well, as seen below.

[AlikN]

Here is an unmarked Schickel RK, which came from vet's estate sale about two-three weeks ago.
There are going to be many pictures, ... so hold on....

[AlikN]

Ribbon

[AlikN]

...

[AlikN]

....

[AlikN]

.....