S&L RK Die Repairs

[ChrisJ]

Fascinating

1960 - with swastika! Into the US-market. Have about 30-40 like those. Between 1959 and 1962.

Thats fascinating Dietrich. The invoice doesnt actually say they are "with swastika", but maybe you have info to show that it was the case (?)

Publications like "Exchange and Mart" in the UK advertised reproduction EK's and KVK's in the 60's and early 70's.

I have no doubt that RK's were fake produced and sold into the collecting market....and quite possibly that S&L were engaged in that activity, prompting them to dispose of the dies (possibly really messing them up first). Pure speculation on my part, and to be treated as such.

[Dietrich Maerz]

My point was rather that S&L could hardly get away with producing 1957 RK's from same dies that had been used to chuck out 1939 version post war (even disregarding the fact that the original dies probably deteriorated rapidly)...to do so would be to confirm they had been the source, something they maybe would be reluctant to admit with the ink just dry on their authorization to produce the new versions.

Chris,

they did use the B-Type die to produce the 1957 version! Attached are pictures from a "800" marked 1957 version. Same dent row. And look how good this row looks in 1957 or later!

[Dietrich Maerz]

Thats fascinating Dietrich. The invoice doesnt actually say they are "with swastika", but maybe you have info to show that it was the case (?)

If one accepts the word of the USA-based recipient of the pieces, then yes. I certainly do!

Here's another interesting piece of written exchange. Just think about all the implications.

Also, the town where Mr. Schiffer resided is about 5 miles away from the shop of S&L.

[Brian S]

Dietrich, always interesting to read your posts and enjoy the conclusions you have made. If everyone agreed there'd be no discussion there'd only be photos and 'conclusions'. I won't color my comments with sideways words that suggest anyone who owns one wants it to be real therefore anything they have to offer is therefore tainted by their irrational desire to prove it anything other than postwar given previous 'conclusions'.

We see three crosses exhibited with dent rows. The 935-4 dentrow is pretty 'crisp' as you say. It's also UNWORN, fresh in the box since creation. As we all know, simple handling over a half century by collectors creates wear as well as actual wear. So can the dent row be lessened in crispness by wear either pre forty five or collector created?

Is every cross pressed in every pureness of silver going to be created with the same dent row crispness? Is the softness of the silver going to help enhance the crispness? Is the variation in die pressure gong to influence the dent row?

Finishing. Getting out the burrs, cleaning up the frame, etc. Is it not possible the dent row gets 'touched' at the factory during this process?

By virtue of the fact that the dent row in the fifty seven looks every bit as crisp as the example found at K. Kastle, I would suggest the rent row in the die was resilient throughout the period from forty four or five when the drips created the row up until fifty seven and that the dent row crispness through the early production of the fifty seven may not have eroded or degraded enough to create a difference until the die was literally destroyed in the fifty seven process.

I think too many variables in the crosses in terms of wear and finishing suggest looking at the dent row indentations, proved by the fifty seven version, are not a clue as to production date until the die is destroyed beyond reason in the fifty seven runs.

[Dietrich Maerz]

Brian,

always nice to hear from you! Honestly!

Now what conclusion did I make?

Dietrich

[Dietrich Maerz]

By virtue of the fact that the dent row in the fifty seven looks every bit as crisp as the example found at K. Kastle, I would suggest the rent row in the die was resilient throughout the period from forty four or five when the drips created the row up until fifty seven and that the dent row crispness through the early production of the fifty seven may not have eroded or degraded enough to create a difference until the die was literally destroyed in the fifty seven process.

Which actually means - in your reasoning - that the models 935-4, 800, 800-4 and 935 all fall between 1944/45 and 1957. Out of this roughly 12 year period only 10 month or so are legitimate.

[Brian S]

I don't profess to know the date of the drip, forty three? And yes, they did come after the A type, whenever that was. Of that I am comfortable. But are they post forty five with any definity? No, I don't think we do the collecting community a favor by saying they are. You can suggest it but you cannot place the dent row post forty five nor can anyone say here is a dent row progression. There is no progression as proven by the fifty seven example. Therefore, believe what you will or want to believe but the facts to not exist to prove a theory, yet.

My other expression from the past threads was that it was such a shame that the man who generated so many RKs from so many vets, many many SLs, are not shown in absolute clarity to prove B types were awarded. Detlev wasn't interested in A types and B types? Why should he have been. But there was the evidence you seek sold off over the years without the clarity of photos. How many B types in all those SLs he sold over the years? We will never know, but to say none were in the pile he sold is absurd. Dietrich discovered the dent row and it was not documented throughout the years...

[Dietrich Maerz]

I don't profess to know the date, either. If I gave you the impression, I apologize. However, 1943 is stretching it, IMHO.

- there are flawed A-Types awarded end of 1944
- there were 935-4's at the Klessheim Schloss
- so far no proven recipient for any of the B-Types
- 935's have been considered post war already before the study
- it is proven beyond any doubt that S&L produced on the B-Type die after the war well after 1957

Everything else is speculation and discussion. I don't know whether the 800-4 or the 800 is post-war. I truly don't! But I can have an opinion about it.

Dietrich

[ChrisJ]

Post 1945

Everything else is speculation and discussion. I don't know whether the 800-4 or the 800 is post-war. I truly don't! But I can have an opinion about it.

Dietrich

Dont agree entirely, Dietrich. If the definition on any 935 or 800 "B" type shows significantly less definition in the 3 o'clock dent row, or has any classic arm flaws then it is post 935/4 and clearly needs to be treated with great suspicion.

Some curve balls ~

1.
A 935 could just be a 935/4 with the accidental omission of the "4". It is not unknown for mistakes to have been made. Any 935 needs carefull study of the dent row defect.

2.
There might be 800/4's out there with dent row definition equal to the 935/4. Which could place it with the 935/4 timeline, or anytime up to when the 1957 frame you posted was struck

3.
Fakers seem to have loved the 800/4 marking....a faker faking a fake, (I love it )

But the guideline has to be to stick with the "A" type or the 935/4 if you want something that is WW2 era

[ChrisJ]

If one accepts the word of the USA-based recipient of the pieces, then yes. I certainly do!

Here's another interesting piece of written exchange. Just think about all the implications.

Also, the town where Mr. Schiffer resided is about 5 miles away from the shop of S&L.

Hi Dietrich....now that is really a fascinating letter. As you say, with your contact information the noose seems to be drawing tigher and tighter around S&L. Any "B" type other than a 935/4 is looking increasingly

Interesting to note that it refers to Oakleaves being delivered in real silver as opposed to "new silver" with a corresponding price increase.

Have you any information as to what Mr. Ron ***** of Florida was doing with all these (?)

[VIPER]

S@l 8004

Here is another curve ball for you. After comparing both sides of my 800/4 the definition of the dent row varies not only from cross too cross but from side too side. On my example the definition appears sharper on the front side and slightly less distinct on the reverse. It also looks closer too the 934/4 Dietrich illustrated than too the 800/4 shown. Might the key lie with the iron center of the cross, perhaps an analysis of the paint as in the case of the rounder. If we are going to set a timeline would not a part constant throught the production run be a better base from which too start. Rather than a die which had who knows how many reincarnations.............Jimmy

[ChrisJ]

Here is another curve ball for you. After comparing both sides of my 800/4 the definition of the dent row varies not only from cross too cross but from side too side. On my example the definition appears sharper on the front side and slightly less distinct on the reverse. It also looks closer too the 934/4 Dietrich illustrated than too the 800/4 shown. Might the key lie with the iron center of the cross, perhaps an analysis of the paint as in the case of the rounder. If we are going to set a timeline would not a part constant throught the production run be a better base from which too start. Rather than a die which had who knows how many reincarnations.............Jimmy

I cant fault your logic at all, Jimmy. A paint test would be very interesting indeed..

Presumably when S&L (or whoever) dumped the frame dies they also got rid of the original core die, and hence the awefull later 1939 version that were produced with the flat swaz.

[VIPER]

S@l 800/4

Here is an idea. With the penalty during De-Nazification being rather stiff, would S@L sign their name to every cross with that 4 stamp which would point the finger right at them. Maybe all marked 4 pieces are pre May of 45 and the unsigned ones are post war.......Jimmy

[Dietrich Maerz]

Have you any information as to what Mr. Ron ***** of Florida was doing with all these (?)

Yes. He sold them. He was a dealer.

[Dietrich Maerz]

A 935 could just be a 935/4 with the accidental omission of the "4". It is not unknown for mistakes to have been made. Any 935 needs carefull study of the dent row defect.

The 935 is always centered. The 935-4 is not.