EKII on e-stand...good?

[Robert P.]

Are both these marked '6.' to the ring? (I assume yes if it is being called a Zimmermann)

Any side shots showing seam/finishing? Any traces of frosting front or rear? Is the confirmed Zimmermann frosted chemically or the brused on type? (I don't have one so don't know). Is there any to compare?

Just so I understand, it's being labelled fake because the frame is identical to Zimmermann but core is not...that's all or is there more I'm missing?

This is confusing me...




...One saying it's not the same, next saying it is the same but subtle differences.

Perhaps it is a new generation '333/666/999', perhaps not but I think it needs to be analysed more before the sentence is announced?

Bear in mind Maybauer had more than one EK core as does K&Q…

Rich

Rich,

There were no ring marks, no. The frame was of a stamped metal that looked different than nickel silver, yet the flanges were shined to a luster from being machine-polished, as can be seen in the photo I posted. No frosting. I wish I had taken more shots of it's seams when I had it inhand. The thing that led me personally to believe that it was a copy of a F. Zimmermann was the near exact features of the frame beading, along with it's overly wide frame, 30% wider than a standard '6' EK. Presently Douglas5 has one of these crosses in his possession, and I am extremely interested in his analysis/opinion of the cross. Others exist. Another member has written and volunteered photos of one that he has in his possession also. The date and swastika on his core are perfectly detailed, not worn and 'broken' as mine and Douglas5's are. I'm thinking that if this is a copy, perhaps the maker's dies have broken down prematurely from not being of the same quality of TR dies.

I am very aware of the makers of TR crosses mixing frames and cores, yes, and their variants also. But, Rich, this cross I held had the feel of something that was made yesterday. That's all I can say. I wish now that I could have studied and photographed it more when I had it. But, from what I saw of it, I was determined to send it back.

Robert

[Robert P.]

Rich,

I forgot to address your other question regarding the true Zimmermann's bead finsih. It appears to be the chemically-treated finish opposed to the hand-brushed type, although the surface has lost nearly all of it's frosting from wear. I see no evidence on the sides of the beading that would indicate that the frosting had been hand/brush-applied.

Robert

[Rich G]

Rich,
I am very aware of the makers of TR crosses mixing frames and cores, yes, and their variants also. But, Rich, this cross I held had the feel of something that was made yesterday. That's all I can say. I wish now that I could have studied and photographed it more when I had it. But, from what I saw of it, I was determined to send it back.
Robert

Robert

I know you know that, just mentioning it as it could be relative to the discussion.

Gut reaction is an important thing in this hobby and the truth of it is, even if this does turn out to be a good piece (and at this point I don't know as I can only see a pic on my screen) you'd never have been personally happy with it.

As for the cross, it's interesting that the frame looks cleaned yet the core seems untouched. This could well be genuine as we do not know the history of this piece and how it has been treated until it reached you.

Pity you don't have more pics but hopefully Douglas5 will provide more along with weight and dimensions.

Rich

[Robert P.]

To all the members who have followed this thread, and thought me to be someone to follow in my knowledge of EK's, I owe a sincere apology for misleading and misguiding you in respect to this particular EK. Through proper study and much more experience than I, Douglas has revealed the hidden truth behind what I so improperly called a copy. I know Douglas personally. He is a very seasoned collector of the EK, and an avid student of the EK. He's a real credit to this forum. He approaches every EK scientifically. I've been amazed at the lengths he goes to in solving mysteries that I never thought possible. He really digs in to his hobby, and I admire that. Once again, my sincere apology to all of you on this. In simple terms, "I was wrong."

Robert
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

[Stu W]

Robert...still someone to follow in my opinion.

Hello Robert,

I have been one of many following this thread. I do not believe you have any need to apologize. Better to say what you think in a respectful manner and let us all learn from that. In this case you did and it's to your credit. Had you remained silent none of us would have learned as much from this thread as we have.

Best regards,
Stu

[Robert P.]

Thanks Stu,

From this experience it has really taught me to research things out further before letting go with a premature and uneducated opinion, which could have negative effects upon the collector community. Douglas did things right, the reason for my respect for him.

Thanks Stu,
Robert

[zambrotta11]

To all the members who have followed this thread, and thought me to be someone to follow in my knowledge of EK's, I owe a sincere apology for misleading and misguiding you in respect to this particular EK. Through proper study and much more experience than I, Douglas has revealed the hidden truth behind what I so improperly called a copy. I know Douglas personally. He is a very seasoned collector of the EK, and an avid student of the EK. He's a real credit to this forum. He approaches every EK scientifically. I've been amazed at the lengths he goes to in solving mysteries that I never thought possible. He really digs in to his hobby, and I admire that. Once again, my sincere apology to all of you on this. In simple terms, "I was wrong."

Robert
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

Robert,

You have no need to apologise. It is always better to make your opinions know to others so we can make the hobby better for everyone. Sure a forum is for discussions after all.

Regards,
Stephen

[gasschutzgerate]

Thanks Stu,

From this experience it has really taught me to research things out further before letting go with a premature and uneducated opinion, which could have negative effects upon the collector community. Douglas did things right, the reason for my respect for him.

Thanks Stu,
Robert

hello Robert
you honour this forum in the collector community
best regards
Roland

[Robert P.]

Well,

If the French, Irish and Canadians like me I don't have much to worry about after all!

Thanks guys,
Robert

[fugpaw]

Well,

If the French, Irish and Canadians like me I don't have much to worry about after all!

Thanks guys,
Robert

Robert,

You can add the English to that - you started a positive and informationally informative discussion, from that we have all learnt - no need for any apology on your part!

Mike

[bobcam1]

Thanks Stu,

From this experience it has really taught me to research things out further before letting go with a premature and uneducated opinion, which could have negative effects upon the collector community. Douglas did things right, the reason for my respect for him.

Thanks Stu,
Robert

See?.....as I said, you're a TRUE gentleman, Robert !

Bob.

[Robert P.]

You guys are great!

Robert

[MH184]

Well,

If the French, Irish and Canadians like me I don't have much to worry about after all!

Thanks guys,
Robert

And the English, I like you too.

[Sal Williams]

What exactly did Douglas do that proved this genuine Robert?

Best, Sal

[Robert P.]

What exactly did Douglas do that proved this genuine Robert?

Best, Sal

Sal,

There's another thread on this cross also. Douglas showed that some period cross maker's frame dies had been reworked/reground, and used again to produce this frame. It is not a copy after all. As to when is the question still, and by whom.

Robert