L/11?

[Darrell]

Hi all, Not a setup that I'm used to for an L/11. This one was on Detlev's update today.

[DavidM]

Hello

The rear set up looks more a Zimmermann or Godet than an L/11. I've never an Deumer EK with that set up.

Regards
David

[Darrell]

Hi David. My thooughts as well.

Why this one caught my eye, was .... several years ago I took a picture of a Cased EK1 in an old LDO case. It had the same reverse setup but also marked L/11 (this one in the more common square box). It was vaulted.

I wonder if there was some cooperation between Deumer and Zimmerman .. or did Deumer use this setup on some of it's earlier crosses? Very interesting.

[DavidM]

Hello

It is known that the Zimmerman and Godet EK1s are the same, (for a case study see 'The Iron Cross of 1939' by Gordon Williamson, page 145 and 146), so if they were using common parts why not Deumer? Perhaps Deumer hadn't initially been able to set up the required machinery or tooling to produce the pin and hinge set ups, and so bought them in. Again, we will probably never know for certain, but I suppose as long the piece is a genuine wartime produced EK it adds to the interest of the hobby.

Regards
David

[Darrell]

Here is the obverse:

[Peter Wiking]

Are we sure that each iron cross manufacturer, had there own "hardware" production in house? How about subcontractors? To stretch it far, could an arms manufacturer produce the hardware (needle, hinge and catch) for a certain award producer?

Peter

[Rich G]

Hi all, Not a setup that I'm used to for an L/11. This one was on Detlev's update today.

Darrell,

I think is the missing link to distinguishing L/11 from 11 because what some refer to Grossmann (11) EK1's other refer to them as Deumers (L/11).

I think it would be very useful if the buyer is from the forum and can make close comparisons to an 11 marked EK1 and other L/11 marked EK1's.

I, at one time, had a KvK1 marked L/11 that had the hine/pin/catch like this. I have a 'standard' L/11 and an unmarked 'Grossmann' (I put that in quotes becaue that what some say it is) and the cores are very similar.

Will be very interesting to see this one in closer detail.

What do you make of it?

Rich

[Darrell]

The two pictured in this thread are clearly L/11's. One in a box the other not. The second one I posted I never owned, and it has been sold long ago by the owner. I wish I could have taken some clearer closer pics at the time.

I would hope the new owner of the top one will post some pics when it arrives

[Rich G]

For continued interest, he is my 'is it Grossmann, is it Deumer' EK1

[Rich G]

Front on

[Rich G]

Now compare with an L/11 (in a box). Frame looks very similar. Core obviously different especially in the position of the date.

[Darrell]

Hi Rich,

Is the Grossman marked?

[Motorhead]

Gentlemen,please have a look at this thread in the GMIC forum! The EK from the DN update is the missing link!
Micha

http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=2172

[Darrell]

Gentlemen,please have a look at this thread in the GMIC forum! The EK from the DN update is the missing link!
Micha

http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=2172

That's a great thread Micha. I can't remember reading it over there.

So .. if my speed reading is up to par ... I would assume the final thoughts were that the reverse setups on the Zimmerman/Grossman are "similar" but yet different than the Deumer. As well ... it appears that although different, Deumer must have had two different reverse setups for their EK1's? One early one later?

[Rich G]

Hi Rich,

Is the Grossman marked?

Darrell,

No, not marked which is why I am unsure if it is Grossmann or Deumer.

FYI it weighs 15.5g and is magnetic.
My L/11 weighs 15.5g and is also magnetic

Is that just too much of a coincidence?

Rich