Dipping ring S&L Knight's Cross

[Dave Kane]

I recall that my measurements and such showed that if the lower part would have been filed away to make this cross look like a regular S&L that most likely a gap would have appeared. This is due to the fact that the hollow ring extends well into the frame aera. As can be seen with the picture of the inside of the frame. Just not enough material.

I recall that we came to different conclusions in what we 'saw' but agreed about the thickness....don't forget that the 1/2 frame I pictured above is so different in material and a product of years of service on the die, coupled with unknown incidents of repair.

I surely don't have the answer but I do suspect that the dipped ring S&L frame was made by the same die that produced the war time S&L Crosses...

Consider the first 3 pics in this thread...fairly sharp pocks in the 3oc arm but surely not a newly cut die!

[VIPER]

Bob..Am I correct in that this incuse 800 stamp is NOT the same as encountered on the 800/4 series. it does not look like it from here...Jimmy

[Bob Hritz]

Jimmy,

The incuse relief 800 mark, on the dipping ring Knight's Cross, is completely different from the 800 4 Knight's Cross.

Bob Hritz

[Dave Kane]

I remember now - I had the frame, too. here is the 'dent row area' without a dent row.

No, the dents/pocks are indeed there, albeit, worn down from multiple stampings and repairs...

One just needs the correct angle and although the following aren't the best the pics do show the 'remains' of the row!

Dietrich, I'll highlight your pic first and then post a couple more...

[Dave Kane]

1

[Dave Kane]

2

[Dietrich Maerz]

Dave,

we went thru this before and this frame - which I had at my home and could look at very intensive - never had any dent row nor does it show any remnants of the dent row. Not even close.

If you look at your 935-4 you will see that the 'real' dents are on top of the beading rips - not where you show them here, i.e., in the valleys.

It's just not there.

Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

Dietrich, no! The movement of metal (flow) whatever type coupled with the die repairs may have shifted the impression of the imprint over several years...but it's hard to argue 'fingerprints', 'landmarks' and the obvious....

Are you suggesting that you don't 'see' the pocks or dents in the pics? I can make more pictures in better light

Try this..

The angle may be better!

[Dietrich Maerz]

Are you sure we are talking about the same frame? This is the frame I had. The one in your last picture (the white one with lots of dents) - where is that suppose to be?

But there seems to be no use to argue. All I can say is that I just don't see what you are seeing. I can't help it. And metal shifting over years is new to me, too.

[Dave Kane]

Dietrich, the EXACT frame!

The row is there plain and simple and I'll send it back to you if you wish to do further study.

We have never argued However, we have 'seen' different things and discussed. I think in this case it's a repeat.

Do you see dents?

[DavidM]

Hello Dave

Is the 57 RK shown here a first or second patterned core version? I ask as I have never (yet) seen a first pattern 57 RK with the dipping ring, whereas this is a standard feature of the second pattern.

Aside from the 'dent row' on the 3 O' clock arm, what other die flaws does this 57 RK exhibit?

Many thanks.

Regards
David

Hello

Dave, could you please let me know what style of 57 RK you referred to at the begining of this thread please. I would really like to know.

Many thanks.

Regards
David

[Dietrich Maerz]

The row is there plain and simple and I'll send it back to you if you wish to do further study.

Dave,

I have seen at least 20 different original dent rows, ranging from the very pristine on a 935-4 to the absolute weak on a very late, unmarked, unmagnetic and heavily flawed B-Type frame.

I did look again at all the pictures (scanner and microscope) and made from your frame and - by the love of god - I can't see anything. Since sending me the frame will not change what I already have as pictures of this frame on fiel, you can save the money.

I don't see it, I'm convinced this frame has no dent row (since I just can't see it!!!!!!!) and I'm very glad that this actualy has nothing to do with my main area of study: the pre-45 S&L crosses.

Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

Dietrich, I understand...

All I'm attempting to uncover is the possibility that the period S&L RK frame began life with a dipped ring AND that the same die was used over and over in to possibly the 80's.

I don't understand why you can't see the remains of the row but it might have been the angle. Be that as it may, to answer (your) question " The one in your last picture (the white one with lots of dents) - where is that suppose to be?" it's the Cross depicted at the start of the thread and of course it's on the lower portion of the 3oc arm of a '57 S&L (early) Cross!

I forgot to add that the frame also exhibits the 'split' bead on the 6oc arm.

DaveM....pm sent!

[ChrisJ]

Dietrich, I understand...

All I'm attempting to uncover is the possibility that the period S&L RK frame began life with a dipped ring AND that the same die was used over and over in to possibly the 80's.

I don't understand why you can't see the remains of the row but it might have been the angle. Be that as it may, to answer (your) question " The one in your last picture (the white one with lots of dents) - where is that suppose to be?" it's the Cross depicted at the start of the thread and of course it's on the lower portion of the 3oc arm of a '57 S&L (early) Cross!

I forgot to add that the frame also exhibits the 'split' bead on the 6oc arm.

DaveM....pm sent!

I'm with you on this one Dave.....to me its obvious that the S&L pieces were heavily filed down around the loop ring (in fact for me it was a distinguishing feature). Only one die for me !

[Dave Kane]

Bead split!

I'm with you on this one Dave.....to me its obvious that the S&L pieces were heavily filed down around the loop ring (in fact for me it was a distinguishing feature). Only one die for me !

Here's a couple of pictures of the split bead on the 6oc arm! This is a flaw found on all period S&L Crosses and of course those made after '45 through and including the 70's+