Zimmerman DK- Gold

[R_Hessian]

No trade!

Gentleman,
I have elected not to trade my uniforms for this DK, not to be mean to the owner but because I want to own items leaving no room for doubt.
I read the article on DK's "4" times ( no joke ) and the fourth time things started to stick out. Things that caused concern... but the fact remains that it is your input that helped put on the brakes and finally the stop sign.
I have much to learn about these badges and medals and really it has become a science unto itself, But I will learn!
If you put me in room with a rack of K98's, lugers, p38's or other German weapons I could point out concerns that the average firearms collector would not notice, that’s not to be arrogant but its just true. I know that stuff, I've handled items only found in museums. Its my niche if you will.
I turned to you guys for help because its your niche and I suspect you know it well.
Thank you to those who took the time ( we all have not enough ) to respond on the forum and private emails.
Kind Regards,
Robert

[martin]

Nein

Way too many alarm bells ringing with this to even consider risking a four figure sum on it.

This does not conform to any of the Zimmerman examples that I have seen.

I wouldn't touch it.

[Frank Mills]

*

****

[Mike Kenny]

Hi,

The images were posted for opinions. Opinions were given. I don't see a problem.

From two people who have looked at it though, I am hearing that "it was put back together from original parts", but yet it is original. I'm missing something here, as those statements ring alarm bells for me.

I don't pretend to be able to tell a pre-45 from a post-45 S&L DK - that was clearly stated. I, like others who have replied, can tell the difference between a Zimmermann DK and an S&L DK though. What the replies above, including mine, were stating is that the DK in question IS NOT A ZIMMERMANN.

If you really want to know what it is, please post some large, clear images, obverse and especially reverse, and we'll let some members who DO know the difference between a pre-45 from a post-45 S&L DK have their say. Everyone then learns something, including the current owner who finds out whether he has a wartime cross with a bogus stamp (not a major pill to swallow) or a post-war badge with a bogus stamp (a hard pill to swallow but we've all benn there and will sympathise with you).

Can we please go back to being civil and address the DK in question?

Regards
Mike K

[Mike Kenny]

Hi,

Being a bit more proactive, here is an image of the reverse of my 57 S&L DKiG. It's the largest I have with me. Take special note of the hinge/pin/catch and rivet setup - I understand that this is one way of determining pre- vs post-war production, as the quality on the wartime examples is better.

Regards
Mike K

[George Stimson]

"I doubt that this post will last long with out some damned moderator determing that my post is out of line!"

Sorry to disappoint you, Frank, but your remarks are not inappropriate at all. I think this is a very good thread -- all of it. (Reasonable discussion is what this place is about! )

[Frank Mills]

*

****

[George Stimson]

Do whatever you like, Frank. I, for one, look forward to seeing you back here whenever you're ready.

[martin]

'Experts'

I certainly have no allusions as to being an expert, not my bag.

But when presented with an award, we can surely only offer an honest opinion based on what images we have been given in the hope that we can help create a constructive discussion. That is the purpose of any thread I think.

I had been looking at the S & L DK in Gordon's book when I posted and could see the similarities to the award posted at the start of this thread. The possibility of it having been reconstructed from original parts did cross my mind.

I think it was reasonable to argue it was not a textbook Zimmerman and subsequently point that out to someone about to shell out a wad of cash.

What's more I think quite a few people here would argue that an award made from pick and mix parts (original as they may be) is less than desirable.