schickle RK

[jujuy]

That means that Junckers were also faked as they contain copper, and if I remeber well, juncker's KC are flawed... and not the rounders

Are we sure that this story of destroyed dies is real?

Then it took Dr. Tom approx. 26 minutes to find out that his S&L, Juncker and K&Q also have copper in the frame! So that assertion "what is the little Cu traces doing here" went out of the window! Again!

A marking of 800 is an indication of at least 80% silver. So the Rounders shows at that spot 87% and the Juncker 94%. So what gives ????.

Other then that .... just another Dr. Tom post!

[tom hansen]

Interesting-

More nasty comments, but when one is wrong, that is usually all one can do, as the facts are hard to face. The lack of willingness on the part of the owners of these pieces to test them speaks volumes. If they are not plated, show it. It would be very easy and take away a "con" argument regarding the rounder.


1. The presence of copper does not mean a fake . It is the % of copper. All silver, including sterling silver, has some copper in it. I chose the two pieces with the highest copper content. The rest of the RKs and spots tested had very low copper content. The juncker was the piece showing the most at this point, but it is less than half that seen on the rounder. What a suprise! Note that the % of silver is now at or just under 80%. What is that little bit about the PK regulations? With plating, if it is thin, the base elements will reveal a signal from below. This Cu could be the base metal showing through, which I suspect. It could be just a very high content of Cu in solid silver, but we will never know, as the rounder owners will not check their pieces.

2. Checking the silver- Go ahead, oh seekers of truth , test it. But let's face it- you do not want to know the truth if it is unfavorable to the rounder. Maybe the rounders are solid silver. Who knows. The SEM data and the appearance of the rounder would suggest perhaps this is not true, but only further testing will tell.

3. Rounder RK frame
Elmt Spect. Element Atomic
Ni K ED 0.07* 0.11
Cu K ED 10.38 15.93
Zn K ED -0.15* -0.22
Rh L ED 0.58* 0.55
Ag L ED 87.66 79.20 **** I guess the PK allows a few exceptions
Total 100.00 100.00

"juncker's KC are flawed... and not the rounders"--


Obviously the opionion of one that has not looked at the rounder under 30X loop and compared it to a period piece. If you were objective, which will probably not happen, you would report the lower quality of the beading of the rounder. Just take a little gander at the comparitive SEM photos. There is no comparison in quality compared to any of the period pieces.

"Are we sure that this story of destroyed dies is real? "

Of course not. Maybe they survived the war. However, there is no piece reported so far that has more flawing than the lazy 2 (see the die progression thread). Further, the silver content is well above the 80% required by the PK at ALL points tested.


"and if he'd bothered to read your other post..."plating is very, very thin (16-32 Micron)"...and actually looked a few photos of Rounders, he would have seen several well worn crosses with no traces of anything "peeking" through. But, I forget, me bad, how could they be 'worn'... "


I read the posts. They just do not address the facts. If you guys are so sure, just test the pieces. Now you are an engineer, Dietrich, so you know that an alloy will have variable measurements, depending on where it is measured in a piece. Brian apparently does not know that. 16% is not a trace, it is a major peak. It could be okay, but I think if these pieces are tested, there may be a bunch, if not all, are plated. The "peaking through" cannot be seen visually, Brian . It is by SEM measurement. If there is a thin area where the plate is worn, a signal from the base metal will come through, without there appearing to be any gross defect in the plate metal. And what about the little ridges on the base of the rounder under SEM? Does that not look like the plating evidence seen on the schickle? Or is that evidence of cast molding impression? Whatever it is, it is not seen on the juncker, S&L, K&Q, or even 3/4 ring. It is seen on the schickle- a plated piece.



------Test your pieces and find out. We will never know unless you do so and report your results honestly. If the truth is really of interest, you will want to know one way or another. If it turns out they are all solid silver, it is a big Plus for the rounder. On the other hand..................................

[Brian S]

I am really done with you Tom. You twist facts around your finger as if you really have a grasp of them. This is always such a huge waste of time with you on the other end of a 'discussion'. It just doesn't matter what we have tested for YOUR questions because no matter what comes of it you'll ignore the facts or twist them into your mixed up conclusions. So it's back to talking to yourself Tom. You just don't get it. But that's fine. Address your questions to Dietrich. As if you give him credit for being smart enough to address them as in the end it's always back to your twisted conclusions. You no longer amuse me.

[Brian S]

I am really done with you Tom. You twist facts around your finger as if you really have a grasp of them. This is always such a huge waste of time with you on the other end of a 'discussion'. It just doesn't matter what we have tested for YOUR questions because no matter what comes of it you'll ignore the facts or twist them into your mixed up conclusions. So it's back to talking to yourself Tom. You just don't get it. But that's fine. Address your questions to Dietrich. As if you give him credit for being smart enough to address them as in the end it's always back to your twisted conclusions. You no longer amuse me.

In case you try to bury my last comments to you.

[Brian S]

I am really done with you Tom. You twist facts around your finger as if you really have a grasp of them. This is always such a huge waste of time with you on the other end of a 'discussion'. It just doesn't matter what we have tested for YOUR questions because no matter what comes of it you'll ignore the facts or twist them into your mixed up conclusions. So it's back to talking to yourself Tom. You just don't get it. But that's fine. Address your questions to Dietrich. As if you give him credit for being smart enough to address them as in the end it's always back to your twisted conclusions. You no longer amuse me.

This will keep your graphs and pictures of 400x photos that PROVE IT ALL TO YOU from drowning out my last

[Dietrich Maerz]

Tom,

could you please explain the difference between "Elmt Spect" (Weight%) and "Element Atomic" (Atomic%) and which percentage would be applied to the application of a silver stamp such as "800". Which - by the way - was not an LDO nor PK requirement but rather a german marking law. But that's beside the point.

Dietrich

[George Stimson]

"Test your pieces and find out. We will never know unless you do so and report your results honestly."

I would really appreciate it if everybody here operates on the assumption that all material here is indeed presented honestly. To infer otherwise is unwarranted and disrespectful.

[tom hansen]

"I am really done with you Tom. You twist facts around your finger as if you really have a grasp of them. This is always such a huge waste of time with you on the other end of a 'discussion'. It just doesn't matter what we have tested for YOUR questions because no matter what comes of it you'll ignore the facts or twist them into your mixed up conclusions. So it's back to talking to yourself Tom. You just don't get it. But that's fine. Address your questions to Dietrich. As if you give him credit for being smart enough to address them as in the end it's always back to your twisted conclusions. You no longer amuse me. "
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->__________________


As usual, there is no explanation for the inconsitencies. This is the voice of capitulation. Brian cannot disprove these facts, so he runs away. Great- this confirms everything. Okay- I do not have a grasp of facts? Prove me wrong, If I am right, which I suspect I am, there will not be available evidence to disprove these contentions. If I am right, and so far you cannot prove otherwise, you will simply bitch, like a little girl, which appears to be what is happening. Bithcing never solved anything. All I am asking is for a simple $20 test, yet there is tremendous trepidation, anger, and reluctance. Why bitch over $20? What does that tell you? Does that in of itself, regardless of all the physical evidence,make one suspicious of this piece? Okay- your piece is not plated- prove it with a $20 test. On the other hand, some have an emotional attachment and a questionable story that they need to defend that precludes objective analysis. That is too bad. Perhaps other owners will really want to know the truth. But who are they?

Twisted? What we have here is objective forensic evidence that suggest that all may not be well with the rounder. The only "twist" is that it does not support a wartime manufacture of the rounder. That is good for the truth, but bad for those that just want to believe, regardless of the information. The response for the proponants is not an evaluation of this data, but moaning. If you think it is real, address the physical inconsistencies and all will be well. So far, no objective information has been presented to refute this physical evidence.

1. Paint that has no other match with period third reich pieces

2. No photographic evidence of a rounder in wear

3. Quality of beading under visual observation and SEM that is inferior to period pieces

4. A plated "800" silver marked piece

5. Evidence of physical characteristics of plating under images from SEM

6. A higher copper content in the frame, suggesting a base metal other than silver is under a plating



There you go Brian. Refute it with some evidence other than complaining and moaning. This is the only physical evidence that has been presented so far and it is all NEGATIVE. Where is the positive information? ANY physical evidence, which is objective, would be a breath of fresh air from the rounder camp. Etched frosting appears a bust. What physical evidence, IF ANY, is there that this is a real piece? So far, there is none. I am sorry that this offends you, but please show anyone, ANYONE, why they should believe you when there is NO physical evidence to the positive. Of course, this would require SOME investigation. Just for a start- check to see if your piece is plated. That would be a good start. Yet, there is no impetus to do so. Now if I found someone as irritating as you appear to find me, I would spend the $20 to make them shut up. Prove it. If you want the $20, I will send it to you. But if I already knew the answer................I guess I would pass . The inactivity is one of the most damning pieces of evidence against the rounder, in that the owners really do not care to know the truth. So why in hell should ANYONE believe them? Assume the null hypothesis, that the rounder is in fact FAKE, and make them show SOME evidence otherwise. I would not hold my breath, however.


Brian, your inactivity tells all and reveals what you truley believe, in contrast to what you publicaly state. The funniest part of all is that I would truely love to be wrong, and be proved incorrect that the rounder is fact, authentic. It is like dealing with medical students and residents, I love to be proved wrong, WITH EVIDENCE, as we all learn from that. But too bad. There is no evidence for the rounder and no one looking for positive evidence, so for the time being, we must simply accept the negative evidence until proven otherwise . Again, I really do not see anything postive coming anytime soon, or ever. Better to stick one's head in the sand than to be shown by your own investigation that your beliefs are incorrect . Any fool would see the method to your madness. If it is truely fake, why bother? You already really know the answer so no further expense is warranted . I will try to provide additional evidence, as it comes up, objectively. As the facts usuallly bear out the truth, however, most of this will probably be negative, but will be the only invesitgation that is actually occurring. Etched frosting does not appear to count, as the measuring tool, obstenisibly, was improperly calibrated . So for the rounder owners, here is an empahtic for failure to do ANYTHING to show that the piece is period. Shame on you!!!!!!

Dietrich- elemental atomic information is the amplitude of the signal relative to the atomic weight of the element in question. It is essentially a signal weighting based on AMU and is considered to be the measurement of true elemental % in the piece tested.

[vonStubben]

Tom, I have been reading bits and pieces of what you have been saying, throughout all of this thread, regarding what has again become a Rounder issue, and whether or not Rounders are made of real silver, or if they are all only silver plate, so, I would like to say this.

I have already stated, in another thread on this subject, that I have tested both my Rounders as to their silver content. I have also stated that both are at least 80% REAL silver, and they are not silver plate. How do I base this statement of fact? Well, simply put, 37 years of collecting German medals and badges, as well as having worked during much of that time within the precious metals business in one way or another. During that period of time I have tested thousands of different precious metals, primarily silver, gold and platinum (no I won’t get into all the different ways in which to test each). So, needless to say, I have a very good working knowledge of what silver is, how it tests, and what it looks, smells, and feels like.

Now, in order to properly test an item to determine if it is really silver, or if it is merely silver plate, you must virtually destroy the item being tested, in order it to find out for sure. This is one of the reasons that the proper testing of a Rounder, (or any other KC) is more difficult than what you may think. Why? Well, this is because the item in question must either be deeply cut into, or scraped deeply enough, to expose a possible base metal such as brass, bronze, copper, etc., so, you would wind up ruining the test item. How would you ruin it? Once the item has been scarred deeply enough to expose a possible base metal you must topically administer an acid. This acid will either turn into what looks like a deep blue cloud within the acid, or it will begin to bubble. If it turns blue it’s silver, if it begins to bubble then there is an underlying base metal, in other words silver plate. So, not only do we now have the problem of obviously defacing the item being tested (and who wants to sacrifice a KC either good or "bad"?) by the scarring necessary to conduct the test, we even further damage the test specimen by the acid we must use, which also leaves behind permanent scarring. Because of this you are certainly going to ask, "then how do you really know if the item is silver"? To most effectively answer your question, it’s through experience, plain and simple. Now given all I have just said, I am able to further offer you the expert opinion of a friend of mine, who himself is a collector (American, items only), and is one of south Florida’s foremost trusted coin and precious metals/bullion dealers. He too has 30+ years experience behind him when it comes to the testing of silver, and has absolutely no opinion, one way or the other, in regard to our debate, except to say that he is willing to explain to you exactly what I have, and in particular, in regard to the two Rounders that I possess, which he has personally inspected, and also believes to be made of real silver. He is willing to accept either e-mail, or telephone contact from you, in the hope to try and help you fully understand the above.

Chuck Stubben

[Brian S]

Chuck, experience, obviously, counts for nothing to Tom. As I too have stated my cross is worn and in no place are the microns worn down to expose the base metal. But that too matters not to Tom. Destroy a Rounder? Why would Tom care. I've listened to your explanations now two or three times and as always you are perfectly clear and concise and your experience comes through loud and clear. But that doesn't matter to ... Tom. Tom has another agenda. We all know it and it's tiresome. It's easy for Tom to say these are fake because the people he has purchased from won't say it's genuine. So, is it Tom's collecting knowledge of 12 months talking or his sources. It's not Tom's knowledge, because, as we all see, he has none.

[Dave Kane]

Thanks Chuck for the 'real life' experience and frank description of how a silver test is accomplished....


Those who have some years of experience with the narrow field of Knight's Crosses surely recall numerous pieces with a 'scar' or 'gough' in the frame and commonly found just below the ring....other places as well but for some reason the older collectors took the penknife to the ring area.

I've seen numerous S&L pieces and a handful of Juncker crosses with evidence of this testing method albeit probably done when these things were selling for $1k or less.

Does anyone own a Rounder cross showing this rudimentary method of testing/authentication?

[vonStubben]

Tom has another agenda. We all know it and it's tiresome. It's easy for Tom to say these are fake because the people he has purchased from won't say it's genuine. So, is it Tom's collecting knowledge of 12 months talking or his sources.

Out of curiosity then, if this statement is true, Tom, have you purchased one of your crosses from Stephen Wolfe?

Chuck

[tom hansen]

Chuck-

Yes, I have purchased one cross from Steve Wolfe. I know he believes in rounders because he sells them. He offered me one about a year ago and I turned it down. I also have bought doctored crosses from Weitze and Kai Winkler. Why has Detlev not sold any rounders? Perhaps because he has a lifetime guarantee. There is a wonderful site on the internet where an expert on authentic and fake ancient coins explains why, without formal testing, it is nearly impossible to tell plate from solid silver, without multiple spot testing SEM (yes, Brian, that is what they used to look for base metal signals) or nitric acid applied to the exposed base metal. Solid silver will create a creme color while plate with a Cu based metal will turn slightly green.The Cu SEM peak on the rounder (double the value of the next highest measurement on another piece for Christ's sake) is a presumptive evidence of this, which can be dismissed (as most data is that is negative), but apparently cannot be proven by its owners.


I have a 3/4 ring cross where a small defect has been exposed on the inside of the ring. It is barely noticeable and appears to have been done to analyze for plating. The rounder could be tested similarly, with little if any evidence of testing, if the owners were so inclined to do so. If these are found to be solid silver, I would love to proven wrong, as I have no agenda here at all except to know the truth.

Brian- Seeing as how you will never test yours, partially to protect your dubious acquisition story, I will set out to buy the next rounder I can find for sale and have the piece thoroughly tested. I will report the results whether the piece is solid or plated. I have no agenda here. I do not care whether the rounder is fake or not. I just want to know. You, on the other hand, have a story that needs to be explained if the rounder is found not to be wartime. That is an agenda. Given the extensive testing you have conducted of your piece (ZERO), I would expect nothing less. Perhaps instead of just bitching, you could actually look into this piece and generate some meaningful data. But so far, none has been presented.

Also, the majority of the RKs I have were purchased from forum members, not dealers, including Rich Moran, Chris Jenkins, Mathias Zimmer, Albert, and Bo Bremer. Which one of those guys is telling me the rounder is fake? I think that Chris Jenkins has said quite the opposite on several occasions.

Now, some shots of the "high quality" beading of the rounder. Yet another of the many inconsistencies with the piece.

[tom hansen]

Another. It looks more like low quality beading to me, particularly when compared to one of the other wartime makers. The ridges seen here is very similar to that on the schickle, which is plated.

[vonStubben]

Chuck-I have a 3/4 ring cross where a small defect has been exposed on the inside of the ring. It is barely noticeable and appears to have been done to analyze for plating. The rounder could be tested similarly, with little if any evidence of testing.

Tom,

The ring of both my crosses is one of the places which I have tested. Both are soft and pliable, each testing of a strong grade of silver, with no sign of any underlying base metal.

If made of silver plate, with the base metal supposedly being made of brass, then this area would not exhibit this kind of "softness", the sort of which silver possesses, indicating even further, that it is nothing short of being true silver, at least with my examples.

Chuck