S+l Rk

[BobI]

HI,
I was looking at this cross and a question arose? I know some post war RKs by S+L have a flaw. Firstly, could you guys give me your impression on this cross? Secondly, could someone please post a picture of what to look for in the S+Ls with the flaw that is seen (I think) in 1957 issue pieces?
THANKS!
Bob

[BobI]

The front

[Erich B.]

S&L

Bob,
The flaws are the thin lines running perpendicular to the beading on the (from the viewer's perspective) right arm and bottom arm of the frame.
Erich

[jujuy]

S&L

2 questions:
Is the core magnetic or not (from the pic, it doesn't seems to be zinc)
Is there a gap between the rib and the core?

here is a pic of a post war S&L made from original dies but without the flaw!

[jujuy]

Sorry

Forgot to resize
Philippe

[jujuy]

resized

2

[BobI]

Erich and Juju,
Thanks for your response! The core of the cross is magnetic and there is not a gap between the core and frame.
Thanks!
Bob

[Brian S]

Juju, you can RESEND a photo. The problem leaving a huge photo there is that some of the 'slow' guys will not bother to let the photos load and the thread will get fewer views.

If you search for flaws in this RK you'll find long and lengthy and heated discussion. No one knows when the flaws first appeared. No one knows when the flaw got 'worse', before or after the war. There appears to be consensus that a flaw was evident before war end but to what degree...

It's a question that's not answered by the guy who shouts loudest, or shouts last.

The question remains and will only be answered by the examples of vets who share their crosses with the likes of Gordon Williamson.

[jujuy]

same resized pic

New try.
I feel Bob's RK is right.
I post for the trird time the 1813 marking on a S&L made from the original dies. Check the differences

[Skipper Greenwade]

I can't believe I'm doing this, but what the hell...July 4th is a great day for fireworks!

Bob,
The flaws in the example shown in your post at the top of the thread are very similar to the ones on the example in my collection with respect to the extent of the apparent damage to the dies.

I remain convinced that my RK is a pre-May 1945 piece, but few threads on this forum have been the subject of more - let's just say 'lively' - debate than the die-crack-flawed S&L RK's. There has been a softening of the "any flaw = fake" stance here on the forum, but there are certainly more questions than answers in the minds of many.

Skip

[Brian S]

Skipper, I'm sure your RK is pre-May.

Jujuy, I am confused. You say your RK is a post war done on SL dies. I see the core looks very good but from what little I can see of the silver frame you have cross hatching on the corners, the SL does not have cross hatching. I can't see the picture of the corners clearly, it's not the size (!). Thank you.

P.S. Happy Independance Day!

[Erich B.]

Are you sure it's crosshatched? It looks to me like it meets without crosshatching. It's hard to tell because of the reflection.
I've read through all the threads on S+L RKs, and it looks like there will never be a consensus--some known pre45 pieces have no flaw, some post 45 pieces have no flaw, some pre45 pieces have a minor flaw but if it's pronounced it's deemed post 45. Some feel that any flaw is post 45, others show flawless post 45 pieces. Aaaargh! Is this pretty much the situation?
Erich

[Brian S]

Could be reflections. I'm hoping Jujuy posts pics of the front and back inner core. I for one was not aware that post war SL were created from original die without flaws and I'd like to see more!

[Erich B.]

S/L

If I recall, the thought was that there may have been unused silver rims made pre 45 that were used post 45 for the 57 pattern RK and possibly for reproductions as well. At least that was a possible hypothesis. The only other explanation would be that new dies were cut, or old dies were purchased from another maker.
Erich

[jujuy]

Original rims..

The one I posted could be made from original rims, but the quality is not here. Very badly finished, gaps, details, polishing...
New dies could not be identical to the originals. Just a question of workmanship.