Rounder for Sale!

[Dietrich Maerz]

Yes!

[Darrell]

... As per request.

[Peter Wiking]

This is the center area of a the L15 marked EK1 and the RK "Rounder". They have been taken from the provided scann from the site of the seller. Both the EK and RK was scanned at the same time as far as i could tell. Both pieces are thus in scale to each other.

Peter

[Bob Hritz]

Darrell,

The percentage of collectors and dealers who view these forums is very tiny, compared to everyone who collects/deals with militaria of the 3rd Reich.

I am still waiting to learn the final conclusion on the paint analysis on the rounders. There seems to be a disagreement in the interpretation of the results, or so it seems to me. There are only a limited amount of existant elements, from which everything is made. The actual combinations and percentages must be carefully studied to make sure the current interpretation is absolutely correct. I have read everything about the paint, but the analysis does not lead me to believe that an epoxy polimer was used, but the paint certainly is not what I would expect in comparison with an unquestionable original. With the loss of Dr. Hansen, from our forums, a lot of information has not been made available, or further discussed.

Also, 'deemed' fake or original by the WAF forums is not echoed thoughout the collecting world. It takes a lot of time for information to trickle down to everyone; and for collectors, time is not a huge obsticle.

Bob Hritz

ps: Remember that many ancient mummy wrappings glow, too!!!!!!

[Peter Wiking]

*

[Harry]

Notice the RK rounder has some cross hatching at the outer extremety corners. The Zimmermann cross does show this to some extent.....

[Dietrich Maerz]

Bob,

I value your opinion highly, as you know. You also might recall that I was the most outspoken pro-Rounder member.

Dr. Hansen and his FTIR investigation and the parallel one done by Allan Pilch in England all showed the same results. In total 4 crosses (which you can determine as "randomly selected") were tested. All 4 did show the same results.

Now one can argue that the paint is not exactly the one Dr. Hansen pointed out to nail the cross manufacturing to a specific date which was convenient for other reasons. But one cannot argue, based on strict and straight forward science, that the paint on four randomly selected crosses is epoxy based and that this material was not in use in Germany (or elsewhere) before May1945 in paints. And that's about it.

For me the case is definetely closed. Combine this with the lack of provenance it is even more so.

However, if you want to discuss the details of the paint analysis with Dr. Hansen, since you think some information was not made available, I will gladly supply you with his e-mail address. He might even contact you after reading this.

Dietrich

[StefanK.]

Darrell,

The percentage of collectors and dealers who view these forums is very tiny, compared to everyone who collects/deals with militaria of the 3rd Reich.

I am still waiting to learn the final conclusion on the paint analysis on the rounders. There seems to be a disagreement in the interpretation of the results, or so it seems to me. There are only a limited amount of existant elements, from which everything is made. The actual combinations and percentages must be carefully studied to make sure the current interpretation is absolutely correct. I have read everything about the paint, but the analysis does not lead me to believe that an epoxy polimer was used, but the paint certainly is not what I would expect in comparison with an unquestionable original. With the loss of Dr. Hansen, from our forums, a lot of information has not been made available, or further discussed.

Also, 'deemed' fake or original by the WAF forums is not echoed thoughout the collecting world. It takes a lot of time for information to trickle down to everyone; and for collectors, time is not a huge obsticle.

Bob Hritz

ps: Remember that many ancient mummy wrappings glow, too!!!!!!

very wise post indeed!


both crosses have round corners, thats obvious but comparing an on-piece ek1 with a 3-piece RK is like comparing apples with oranges.....

if we want to link these rounders to floch we should better compare floch's 3piece EK1/ek2 with rounders but these are very very different....

[Peter Wiking]

Here is one more compare with another "Floch" and the L15 marked EK1 in question.

Peter

[Harry]

However, if you want to discuss the details of the paint analysis with Dr. Hansen, since you think some information was not made available, I will gladly supply you with his e-mail address. He might even contact you after reading this.

Dietrich[/quote]


Why don't we get Tom back on here, he is wasted on 'the other' forum......

[Dietrich Maerz]

...both crosses have round corners, thats obvious but comparing an on-piece ek1 with a 3-piece RK is like comparing apples with oranges.....

Stef,

now we are mixing two things: the Rounder being a proven fake based on FTIR results and saying that Floch made them. Nobody said so!

The point is that Mr. Cross uses a Floch fake (obviously) which he says is made by Schickle (obviously not) to come up with (another possible) maker for the Rounder.

It has a certain irony to it that one fake is used to legitimize another one, sure. But nobody said that Floch is the maker of the Rounder!

Dietrich

[Dietrich Maerz]

Why don't we get Tom back on here, he is wasted on 'the other' forum......

You want to discuss the "Harry fake" with him?

[hagwalther]

.

[StefanK.]

Stef,

now we are mixing two things: the Rounder being a proven fake based on FTIR results and saying that Floch made them. Nobody said so!

The point is that Mr. Cross uses a Floch fake (obviously) which he says is made by Schickle (obviously not) to come up with (another possible) maker for the Rounder.

It has a certain irony to it that one fake is used to legitimize another one, sure. But nobody said that Floch is the maker of the Rounder!

Dietrich

i think someone misunderstood something...


sorry to everyone.

Stef.

[Peter Wiking]

Note as well the thin fluting/lines running across the hinge and needle on both of them.