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

[Brian S]

B Type photos available upon request.

[Brian S]

Detail of loop.

[Brian S]

Bob,

make it a big one...

I fully agree with you on the set-up procedure and all. Also on the economics of it, i.e. set-up time (unproductive) to stamp time (productive). From that on we all speculate. Did they stock frames or finished crosses? Did they use FIFO or FILO?

I would think the only other certain thing is that they run 'material batches', i.e. 800 silver and then 935 silver. Put those frames in separate containers/shelfs.

Now, if the 800-4 is basically a parallel model to the 935-4, the 'soft silver' is out (I never believed that anyway)

We might never know. I think we can be happy already that we know about the A and B type which at least made the flawed A-type (as found from veterans and recipients) now a undoubtfully good piece! And gave us at least a little bit of a time line...

Dietrich

Yes, Dietrich, you made a huge contribution. You, you first, no one else, put one before the other. In this there is no question and we all acknowledge the contribution and discovery.

I completely agree with a core study need. Plus you may learn more about war/postwar from the paints...

[Sal Williams]

If Detlev has found them from vets than he has found them from vets, end of story.

The dent row is NOT an indication of assembly, it's an indication of frame stamping. So entirely irrelevant.

I do have the same problem that Dave has with some of the crosses. I do not doubt Detlev's comments but would suggest the die was used postwar with wierd stamps.

As Dave and I have always agreed on is the fit and finish of the S&L has always been the defining determination of war/postwar. We differ now on the dent row on a well finished cross, I think we disagree, but so be it.

I think you are entirely honest and I highly respect your experiences over the years buying from vets.

Brian, I don't think that is the "end of story" at all. I don't care who it is, I would want a bit more info than he has so far given. Somebody just saying" I got it from a vet" is not good enough on any other items we collect and ity is not good enough here. I hope Detlev finds the time to look in his files and tell us who what when where why about items he has had/has. I was not even 100% clear on which types of crosses he got from which vets exactly. So "end of story" is WAY premature if you ask me. I think that it would be nice to know all the info about a particular cross in question and perhaps Detlev would allow Dietrich to test it as well. That might help a lot.

Best, Sal

[ChrisJ]

It's not only the dent row that defines the B-Type. It's also the 6-9 o'clock knee flaw which can sometimes bee seen even better on pictures. That cannot come from a male die...

Agreed 100%, Dietrich...but we defining the timeline on the definition of the dent row, so views as to what it caused it is important.

Bob...with the benefit of your experience, do you feel that the dent row couold be a male die feature, rather than excess material in the female (?)

Regards
Chris

[Bob Hritz]

Chris,

I feel pretty secure in believing the dent row is a flaw in the female die. If it were from a distortion in the male die, the distortion would probably lead to a massive movement in the frame material to fill the female die, causing warpage or distortion of the beading rows.

The dent row appears to be from the residue of a weld in the die and a quick, and imperfect, job of recutting the beading rows. This can be explained if the recutting of the beading rows might weaken the repair. When inspecting a B type (thanks again Dietrich for a term we can all use) Knight's Cross, I don't think the tiny dent row would be enough for any inspector to disqualify the medal. Not to mention, the B types are later manufactured and the painted frosting (would love to have some of that to analyze) would camoflague the tiny flaw to the point of disinterest. It is when the medal's finish is worn or beading deeply toned that the dent row is most visible.

I have shipped 6 St&L Knight's Crosses to Dietrich, for his studies. I look at some and cannot determine if A or B types, as my eyes (even with a loup) are not as fine as in my youth. I am sure Dietrich will have some fun with them. I believe all to be authentic, wartime made, but am sure Dietrich will disagree. That is debate and debate is healthy. At least I know that these 6 all have the veteran provenance that is important to me, if not to anyone else. When Dietrich is done with this batch, I may have to dig out the rest of my Steinhauers for his studies, should there be more questions. I can't wait for Dietrich's views about the neusilber (unmarked) with zinc center. The fit and finish is probably the finest I have seen, even in comparison with a mint micro 800 unflawed A type.

All in all, I still have my flak helmet firmly strapped on.

Bob Hritz

[Dave Kane]

Good for you Bob!!

[Bob Hritz]

I had often though about the possibility that some of the variant, non ferrous centers may have been made for display pieces, etc. Using my old accountant judgement, I would have to dismiss this. It would be more cost efficient to just take one from inventory to use or sell as a display. The time and material switch, to make a variant display piece, would be counter effective to production cost. So, this still leaves the question as to why a variant center would ever be made. Malleable iron does wear a die faster than a noble metal such as brass or copper and certainly much more than pliable zinc. Were these just test pieces to assure die accuracy? Not impossible. Even more possible, and certainly more cost effective, would be to finish these and place them into inventory. That is every accountant's dream; no waste and all production!

I still search for the answers. We have variant center Junckers that are accepted as original and now we must wade through variant center Steinhauers. I hate to say it, but too bad St&L wasn't bombed out on May8th, 1945. That would help clear a lot of mud from the waters.

Bob Hritz

[Sal Williams]

Yes, as always Bob shares his pics and items and information! Bravo!

Best, Sal

[Sal Williams]

By the lack of comments to my other post I wonder, does everyone else also feel it is "the end of story" as brian put it?

[Sal Williams]

Brian, is the one you show magnetic or not?

[ChrisJ]

Chris,

I feel pretty secure in believing the dent row is a flaw in the female die. If it were from a distortion in the male die, the distortion would probably lead to a massive movement in the frame material to fill the female die, causing warpage or distortion of the beading rows.

The dent row appears to be from the residue of a weld in the die and a quick, and imperfect, job of recutting the beading rows. This can be explained if the recutting of the beading rows might weaken the repair. When inspecting a B type (thanks again Dietrich for a term we can all use) Knight's Cross, I don't think the tiny dent row would be enough for any inspector to disqualify the medal. Not to mention, the B types are later manufactured and the painted frosting (would love to have some of that to analyze) would camoflague the tiny flaw to the point of disinterest. It is when the medal's finish is worn or beading deeply toned that the dent row is most visible.


Bob Hritz

Thanks a lot Bob, for your input. Much appreciated and accepted.

Regards
Chris

[Brian S]

Brian, is the one you show magnetic or not?

Yes, magnetic.

[Dietrich Maerz]

...and the painted frosting (would love to have some of that to analyze)

I already have some data in. It's in the works at the SEM department at the University of Michigan. I will not blast out with something after having only a very few data points. I need more to be fairly sure what it is.

Dietrich

[Stephen Stout]

If Detlev has found them from vets than he has found them from vets, end of story.

The dent row is NOT an indication of assembly, it's an indication of frame stamping. So entirely irrelevant.

I do have the same problem that Dave has with some of the crosses. I do not doubt Detlev's comments but would suggest the die was used postwar with wierd stamps.

As Dave and I have always agreed on is the fit and finish of the S&L has always been the defining determination of war/postwar. We differ now on the dent row on a well finished cross, I think we disagree, but so be it.

I think you are entirely honest and I highly respect your experiences over the years buying from vets.

With all due respect my '935' has tarnishing on the swastika side from looks like from cotton, and may have been worn postwar upside down (no swastika showing in accordance with German law). Does that make it a real RK or just another 'postwar' issue if was worn for bravery?

Just a couple things to think about.....