S&l 800/4 Rk... Interesting!!!

[VIPER]

Touchee

[Dietrich Maerz]

It's all in good jest. It's a hobby and it's fun

[Stephen Stout]

Well, I guess that did leave them enough time after all for those 935/4s and 800/4s and maybe one or two other of those pesky B types.......

I think the 800-4 is postwar. It has no good source of prestige and at best is an unawarded RK with has much prestige as my '935' and should have the same dollar amount because it is just a representation of Third Reich bravery.

[VIPER]

I think the 800-4 is postwar. It has no good source of prestige and at best is an unawarded RK with has much prestige as my '935' and should have the same dollar amount because it is just a representation of Third Reich bravery.

Are you saying that any mint cross,never awarded is sort of second rate unless it was taken right off the Germans neck

[Stephen Stout]

Are you saying that any mint cross,never awarded is sort of second rate unless it was taken right off the Germans neck

From a few of an United States Army Officer, yes. From a view of a collector it is a nice cross at is period made but has no bravery attached. Personally when I get my wartime RK it will be shot to hell and an awarded piece.

[VIPER]

I understand.....Thats how I like helmets

[Brian S]

Jimmy,

if you read my answer carefully you will notice that it was in response to Brian's remark that the die collapsed in several days or a week.

I certainly don't believe that - and evidently neither do you!

Is this your opinion Dietrich or more scientific 'evidence'?

And however convenient, please do not misquote me. I suggested it was a possibility the die broke down faster than a period of from 1944 to 1957 and could have been mere months.

For the record:

1) What is the evidence the die broke down over several years?

2) What is the evidence to your timeline? How many crosses of each to prove your conclusions?

3) Are there crosses of such pristine dent flaws that show the timeline is wrong that you state. I would say yes based on a pristine '57 dent row example. Shows a bin of of unused frames used when required.

But you're holding cards for Dietrich's Big Book of RK's, then I guess we'll all have to wait.

As YOU say, 50% awarded in a short period calling for increased production.

Please don't take my comments out of context...

I applaud your finding of the A type and B type. We all appreciate that.

But your timeline theories are mere theories and not fact. But, then you hint at holding back evidence...

[Dietrich Maerz]

And however convenient, please do not misquote me. I suggested it was a possibility the die broke down faster than a period of from 1944 to 1957 and could have been mere months.

This is what you said: "So yes, I believe the die was fixed for a short term fix and that short term could have been a week or a month."

In my book a week is 7 days and a month is about 31 days! At any rate - not very long!

1) What is the evidence the die broke down over several years?

The undisputed evidence of unflawed B-Types for the 57 cross. Made 12 years after wars end. Both with silver frame, stamped '800' with the 'regular' S&L stamp and not an incuse one. The undisputed evidence of heavily flawed unmarked frames for those ugly unmagnetic late crosses.

Or have all those frames been stamped in one month or several month or even a year? Before May 45? With three types of materials, i.e. 800, 935 and Neusilber?

2) What is the evidence to your timeline? How many crosses of each to prove your conclusions?

The dent row. How many crosses? Surely not enough to please you! And the one who proves you correct would always be missing anyway.

3) Are there crosses of such pristine dent flaws that show the timeline is wrong that you state. I would say yes based on a pristine '57 dent row example. Shows a bin of of unused frames used when required.

Haven't seen a pristine one. Show me and compare to the pristine 935-4! They are not there!

But you're holding cards for Dietrich's Big Book of RK's, then I guess we'll all have to wait.

Belitteling, sarcasm, ironic statements and firing up the discussion will not change anything and doesn't even make me angry. It comes with the territory!

As YOU say, 50% awarded in a short period calling for increased production.

This is not what I say, it's what everybody can find out when taking the time to do so. Now what YOU conclude out of this, is your thing.

But your timeline theories are mere theories and not fact. But, then you hint at holding back evidence...

If you would read my post, you will find out that I stated several times that it is my OPINION - or theory, if you prefer that. You are more than welcome to dispute that (which you do), but please be rational about it.

And I'm not holding back evidence. The evidence is in the pieces itself and I had so far enough to come to my OPINION. I did not have, however, two B-Type crosses so far:

- the B-Type 800 (yours, as published in Gordon's book)
- the incuse 800 (I don't even know who has one)

Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

""- the B-Type 800 (yours, as published in Gordon's book)
- the incuse 800 (I don't even know who has one)""

.....Time to step up Brian

FedEx overnight and have it back Wed...nothing could be easier and of course it's for the good of the hobby!

[Brian S]

What I said Dietrich is that a thousand frames could be stamped in a few hours or certainly within a month.

Frames were then stamped with silver content at the time of assembly as I would hope you would agree, not at the time of die stamping them out.

And to you Dave, no matter what my cross holds in appearance is of no import, you already have your conclusions and a better photo at 299x will only support what you believe now, so what's the point?

It's not about my cross. It's about the hobby. It's about conclusions that are not based on fact but supposition. And Dave, you should know how there's always that jury member who doesn't like suppositions unsupported by anything more than theory when there's an opposing theory that makes it just that, theory. Not fact.

Find an SL guy who worked there. Get the story from the source before it's too late.

[Brian S]

Theory: BLow holes in it, prove it wrong, do what you will.

Theory: SL produced a thousand frames in '44 for the obvious increase in demand. Juncker was blown to hell at some point, that left them in the catbird's seat to produce crosses. Quick, repair the die and start cranking out frames. Six months, one month, one week (yes Dietrich a week is 7 days thank you) produce more. War ends. Frames sit unused. Frames used and get stamped. Postwar perhaps die gets used by someone with incused silver stamping tools.

It's as good as your story and all the photos of crosses at your disposal don't yet blow holes in it, do they??? If so, shut down the theory and you prove yours.

[Dietrich Maerz]

What I said Dietrich is that a thousand frames could be stamped in a few hours or certainly within a month.
Frames were then stamped with silver content at the time of assembly as I would hope you would agree, not at the time of die stamping them out.

I absolutely agree. Stamped in bigger numbers, marked when assembled. However, I don't think that later in the war any company would have run lots of sheets of silver thru a press w/o having firm orders behind it.

The costly process was the assmbly process, apart from the material.

So what did they run first? The 935 silver? Or the the 800 silver? or the Neusilber?

This question cannot even be answered by a still surviving employee of S&L.

So here's what I do: I look at the physical evidence. In this case the dent row. And logic tells me that the less pronaunced this row is the later the frame was stamped in the repaired die.

Then I take the two fixed point we have: the 935-4 (Klessheim) and the 1957 (= 1957) and mark those two point as as what they are in my opinion: points in time: pre-45 and 1957.

Even if all frames were stamped pre-45 (I doubt that) and even if S&L did run 3 different materials before May 45 (I doubt that) they surely didn't assemble all before May 45.

So some were assmbled after 45. We agree on the 935, we agree (obviously) on the 1957.

So we do not agree on the 800-4 and 800's.

So the task is to find out why (to use your line of thinking):

- the 800-4 was assembled before May 45
- why S&L used an incuse 800 for that model (having an 800 stamp for 5 years)
- why S&L also stamped regular 800
- why S&L also used another incuse 800 type (having an 800 stamp for 5 years)

... all before May 45!

Why they did not produce any of those types after the war (that is what needs to be proven) but went back into the stock and used the 935.

Why they used the old stamp again for the 800 1957 edition.

Nice questions. Maybe one day we will have the answer. Meanwhile, I just stick with the dent row but will clearly say that this is my OPINION and my THEORY!

[Dietrich Maerz]

War ends. Frames sit unused. Frames used and get stamped.

That makes them postwar in my opinion. Or?

[ChrisJ]

Stiegert RK

OK....here is the story of the "Stiegert" RK.

I purchased it from Jamie Cross in 1998. It did not come with any written provenance or documentation. Jamie informed me that it had been obtained from direct from Germany ...but as Stiegert died in 1981 I had no idea of where the cross had been in the intervening period.

If there was provenance other than the "verbal" I was not aware of it. But that doesnt mean that the history of this particular cross was not tracable....just that nothing was available at the time of purchase.

It had a zinc core and incused 800 stamp minutely off centre to the frame. The frame was beginning to split quite badly due to (IMO) swelling/degredation of the core. As far as I am aware, there were no visible die flaws in the the 3 o'clock arm.

I passed the RK back to Jamie, and at that point I believe that Gordon Williamson took possession of it. We had been in discussion regarding the cross previously, and he was aware of it, before I purchased it. Older members will recall that Gordon and Jamie had a close relationship at that time, and had produced jointly a number of "collectors guides."

The pictures that I have are not clear enough to distinuish the presence or absence of the dent row. Gordon probably has much better pictures in his archive, and perhaps someone with a direct line to Gordon can enquire and get better pictures. Gordon might still have the cross for all I know.

Chris

[VIPER]

I still say it is just as probable that 800/4 were ASSEMBLED first although later coined than 935/4s. In effect first out = bottom of the working pile. Later coined = First assembled. There also appear to be considerably less 800/4s arround than 935/4. Id bet left over silver sheets were used from before the die went bad Its not like produce in a super market, it wont spoil if its not rotated...Jimmy