333 Marked EK2.

[Hank C.]

Okay, if we're going to prove it's fake, I'll use your own picture of this 333 marked cross.

Find me ONE more cross, where the rim is so grossly uneven. The lower part is "frighteningly Nicole Richie" thin, while the left side is "Anna Nicole Smith at her fattest" wide. This sort of quality wouldn't cut the mustard for Germany's most prestigious combat award.

And as I said in the other thread, 333/666 aren't gold marks, and 999 is too fine to do anything with but hoard.

Edit: Apparently, gold can be "333" marked. However, this doesn't strike me as a gold cross. Thanks, however, for pointing out it's theoretically possible to see .333 gold.

best
Hank

[valsente]

OK Hunk, your prove is good and acceptable and it's what I was searching about. Probably someone else will offer us so technical proves more. I wrote that my theory ( a gold plated iron cross with .333 titre ) was a crazy and provocative one and I was 99% convinced that it's a fake. Sure as a fake it is perhaps the best fake offered on the marked after the end of the war.
Measurements and other particulars ( it has 32 lines on the rims ) are exactly those we find on the best originals ( 30/32 ).
Other question: why the forger has marked "333" on the ring when he could marks with any other number near 135 and so makes his crosses more credible?
Why nobody can tell us where these fakes were originated from?
These and other question are still pending even if we all are sure or have kept it for sure that these crosses are fakes.
Val

[speedytop]

Hi Val,

"I remembered that 333/666/999 are German marks for golden or golden plated items."

That is predominant wrong.

"Many European countries mark silver and gold with numerical fineness marks in thousandths,... 333, 500, 585, 750, 875, etc. for gold."

That is better and correct.

"What do you think about the possibility that one or more producers, on request, made some golden plated crosses and marked them with the gold titre used?"

Nothing

These marks as 333, 585 and 750 are only for golden items, absolutely never for golden plated items.


Regards
Uwe

[Sonderkommando]

Hi Hank,
Your different outer flange widths mean absolutely nothing, as Zimmermann EK1's have exactly the same traits and that is one of the ways to prove they are ORIGINAL!

The only things that make these 333/666 crosses "fake" is the markings, other than that they are the perfect fake.
Remove the section of the ring with the markings and re-join it and nobody would even know that these crosses are not original. (unless they compared it to a marked 333/666)

[Adrian]

The only things that make these 333/666 crosses "fake" is the markings, other than that they are the perfect fake.

Hi Brett,
Sorry I disagree on the quote above. There a a few distinguishing features on these crosses that make it perfectly easy to identify them even without a makers mark.

[Sonderkommando]

Hi Adrian,
My meaning was if the fakers never marked them 333/666 in the first place then nobody would ever have known they were post '45.

[Hank C.]

Hi Hank,
Your different outer flange widths mean absolutely nothing, as Zimmermann EK1's have exactly the same traits and that is one of the ways to prove they are ORIGINAL!...edit...

Hi Brett,
Well, it wouldn't be the first time I've had to eat crow, but can you please post a pic of the Zimmerman frames? -edit:Also, is it only the EK1, or all Zimmerman's. Remember, I'm talking about the EK2 shown here, not an EK1.-end edit

I've honestly never noticed that. And is it perhaps a millimeter or so, or is it double fat like this one?

thanks in advance
Hank

[all1knew]

Hello,

To put my little two cents in the frame reminds me of the 55 marked crosses with their uneven frames. I stay away from all of the 333 and of course 666 marked crosses as I will let the other take the gamble and keep a textbook cross in my collection. I was told that they haven't been proven yet so I will await until further information is out there.

William Kramer

[Danny70]

Also, is it only the EK1, or all Zimmerman's. Remember, I'm talking about the EK2 shown here, not an EK1

I've honestly never noticed that. And is it perhaps a millimeter or so, or is it double fat like this one?

Hi Hank,
While I can't show you a Zimmerman, I do have a marked '21' (Godet) EKII, (courtesy of e-stand), which has major differences in outer flange widths, as do other examples of this make I have seen (note 3 o'clock arm - skinny or what?!!).

Regards - Danny

[all1knew]

Hello again,

Here is my marked 25 that has differences all over.

The lower part is "frighteningly Nicole Richie" thin, while the left side is "Anna Nicole Smith at her fattest" wide. This sort of quality DID cut the mustard for Germany's most prestigious combat award.

@ Hank - I am not saying that 333 marked crosses are original, just an observation about what you typed.

William Kramer

[Hank C.]

Thanks Gentlemen! I do stand quite corrected. If somebody would please help me remove my foot from my mouth, I'd appreciate it.

Perhaps there is a chance these 333 marked crosses ARE original! There's certainly enough evidence to argue in their favor.

best,
Hank

[SwordFish]

These 333's and 666's (which I havn't seen on yet) are really good looking copies generally speaking.

If the ring were removed, it would be enough to fool me (i'm not a EK pro at all but am pretty sure I can spot a Floch) and I'm sure many novice EK collectors. They sure do look quite good. Take away that yellowing, and you've got a great looking repro.

I'll stick to collecting primarily TR sabers. That's what I know.

[Glenn McInnes]

............and it's the same old story! PROVE it isn't period

Makes a guy just want to give up and stop offering advise!

And so in the same breath, can you PROVE that anything in your collection is original,manufactured during the period?

[Mike Kenny]

Hi,

Sorry for the small pics, but does anybody else see a strong resemblance in the frames between these two? The 333 Adrian posted for Gian is on the right. Exclude the die flaws on the 333 for now. One or more 90 degree rotations may be required.

Regards
Mike

[Bob Hritz]

I saw these for sale by two French dealers at the last Great Western Show in Pomona, California. I don't remember how many years ago the last show occurred, but someone might.

They were all in blue packets, unmarked on packet reverse, and had original ribbons. They were $65 each and there was what appeared to be an original type carton of them. I bought one and never looked at the mark until I heard the controversy. I have discarded it somewhere in one of my 'mistakes boxes'.

The workmanship is very nice, but the marking left me with considerable consternation that I never looked before buying. I would not have bought one if I had paid attention to the 333 mark.

Bob Hritz