Announcement

**StefanK.** · 01-13-2008, 11:43 AM

I always thought my knowledge concerning KC was not the worst, but in this time the opinion of the "pros" really makes me wonder.

There are many RK fake existing but this special piece does not belong to the 0815 fakes. I di not any research yet, but the core is in my mind 100% made by Schickle. The frame really looks odd and so does also the 800 marking, but still I think this cross is speacial and worth to discuss.

**Darrell** · 01-13-2008, 11:54 AM

Originally posted by Flak88 View Post

........ Even DION learned how to pick them without fail with Dietrich's book!

Love you Dion...

EXACTLY ... and he is at Stage 5 of Mark's Smilie scale

**robertdmountfor** · 01-13-2008, 12:33 PM

Originally posted by FrankS View Post

Robert,

could you please show us a fake Ritterkreuz which is better or as good as an original in quality.

Ritterkreuze/Knights Crosses are not risky to buy. They are actually easier to determine than Iron Crosses first or second class. There were only a handful of makers for the original Knights Crosses. Once you know their designs, no problem anymore. Iron Cross 1st and 2nd classes were produced by several different makers. Its difficult to know all these different patterns.

Actually new collectors are keep on posting the same sh***ty Ritterkreuz fakes. Before investing money they should better be investing time to read this forum and/or Dietrich's book.

Regards,

Frank

We have all seen them....my point still stands, is it ever worth the risk with so much investment, when we all know that there will always be a nagging doubt in ones mind... I know its original...I know its original...isnt it? until the immortal ' IMO fake' 'not for my collection'
Safer to buy some moon dust.

**Marc Garlasco** · 01-13-2008, 01:03 PM

If the heat is too hot, get outta the kitchen...

**robertdmountfor** · 01-13-2008, 01:06 PM

Originally posted by Flak88 View Post

If the heat is too hot, get outta the kitchen...

Or, just replace the Arga...?

**Marc Garlasco** · 01-13-2008, 01:19 PM

Robert,
I really don't know what to say. Obviously many collectors are very happy with identifying real KCs. Perhaps you just need more study? I think it is not so hard as you make it out - it requires no arcane powers. I for one could not ever tell what is good cloth - I have never studied it. I can tell you which of 50 variant Flaks one is by looking at the front. Study your stuff and you will not go wrong.

Regarding fakes. Once you know what is real, everything else is not. So you are insulated from any new fake.
Marc

**Jørgen E** · 01-13-2008, 01:28 PM

Originally posted by robertdmountfor View Post

We have all seen them!

I have not.. I have seen OK copies of RK's yes, but not anyone that have been able to fool me if you study them closely!

But hey, buy that moondust, and I'll take the RK's coming up

**zambrotta11** · 01-13-2008, 02:24 PM

Originally posted by robertdmountfor View Post

We have all seen them....my point still stands, is it ever worth the risk with so much investment, when we all know that there will always be a nagging doubt in ones mind... I know its original...I know its original...isnt it? until the immortal ' IMO fake' 'not for my collection'
Safer to buy some moon dust.

What are you talking about? It is quite easy to tell the difference between a fake and real RK. I have been collecting for less than a year and I can point out most fake RKs. All you need is to spend time researching. It will make the hobby more fun in the long run.

Anyway, getting back to the disscusion at hand. I do believe Stefan has a point. It certainly does look idential to a Schickle to me.

Regards,
Stephen

**JRA** · 01-13-2008, 03:33 PM

Originally posted by StefanK. View Post

I always thought my knowledge concerning KC was not the worst, but in this time the opinion of the "pros" really makes me wonder.

There are many RK fake existing but this special piece does not belong to the 0815 fakes. I di not any research yet, but the core is in my mind 100% made by Schickle. The frame really looks odd and so does also the 800 marking, but still I think this cross is speacial and worth to discuss.

I agree, I have compared it with a schickle and this looks identical to a schickle core.

Jeroen

**Dietrich Maerz** · 01-13-2008, 05:20 PM

Originally posted by tegunn View Post

I agree Robert, they are getting better! With Maerz' book as excellent as it is, it in turn gives the forger an instruction book on how to make his work
"better"...I'm sure there are some artisans that will produce dies corresponding to the known cross characteristics. The cost used to be detractor in making excellent copies; but now with the ability to cut dies on a CNC, keeping the data files stored for different variations, one can easily reproduce orignal items much cheeper. It just hasn't occured to them not to flood the market with their fakes
-Back to my cross-I've known about this cross for about 15 years. -This cross has the frame die flaws that "bridge" the raised portions of the ribbing. The detractor in my view is the 800 mark-the numbers don't look like they came frome the same stamp. The wear I can accept, the number "font" match up to the Maerz description, though the wear of the paint make the numbers appear different in pics.

If you really believe that then you are completely wrong! And - I'm sorry to say so - you have no idea about die making ... The usual myth about CNC machines...

As Marc said already: There was nothing to stop "the Forgers" to buy a real Juncker and copy it. I guess that it is evident to you that it might be better to copy from a real three-dimensional piece then from pictures. Wouldn't you think.

Albert said it also correctly! Just study what is real and don't focus on fakes. You will never learn all fakes, but if yoy study you will know the real ones.

And it is known what is real!

Dietrich

**robertdmountfor** · 01-13-2008, 05:26 PM

Originally posted by Dietrich Maerz View Post

If you really believe that then you are completely wrong! And - I'm sorry to say so - you have no idea about die making ... The usual myth about CNC machines...

As Marc said already: There was nothing to stop "the Forgers" to buy a real Juncker and copy it. I guess that it is evident to you that it might be better to copy from a real three-dimensional piece then from pictures. Wouldn't you think.

Albert said it also correctly! Just study what is real and don't focus on fakes. You will never learn all fakes, but if yoy study you will know the real ones.

And it is known what is real!

Dietrich

I'm afraid to say that your no doubt excellent book would be ten times better to use as a 'blueprint' for forgers. With enlarged pictures and specific details and current repro mistakes explained, the potential forger will also love it, how could an original RK be better than that?

**Dietrich Maerz** · 01-13-2008, 05:33 PM

Originally posted by robertdmountfor View Post

I'm afraid to say that your no doubt excellent book would be ten times better to use as a 'blueprint' for forgers. With enlarged pictures and specific details and current repro mistakes explained, the potential forger will also love it, how could an original RK be better than that?

You just confirmed what I said earlier. I'm sorry but you have no idea what it takes to copy a real Knights Cross. You are in a stadium - I think - where you think that counting the beading, having a three piece construction and a silver stamp is already 98% of the way.

Let me tell you - it's not even 20%!

You just confirmed that you don't know where to look at all!

Since the invention of photography or the scanner nothing has prevented the fakers to buy a cross, scan and photograph it day and night for weeks on end and blow the pictures up to 6 x 6 feet! I don't think I invented the color photography in a slightly magnified scale.

Dietrich

**robertdmountfor** · 01-13-2008, 05:43 PM

Originally posted by Dietrich Maerz View Post

You just confirmed what I said earlier. I'm sorry but you have no idea what it takes to copy a real Knights Cross. You are in a stadium - I think - where you think that counting the beading, having a three piece construction and a silver stamp is already 98% of the way.

Let me tell you - it's not even 20%!

You just confirmed that you don't know where to look at all!

Dietrich

I dont know where to look, I know that. I am not an RK collector, three piece construction, beading count, silver stamp...this may well be 20% , but your book will provide both collectors and, sadly forgers too, the extra 80%. Cant you grasp that simple deduction?
by the way, whats living in a stadium? an American term?

**Dietrich Maerz** · 01-13-2008, 05:50 PM

Originally posted by robertdmountfor View Post

Cant you grasp that simple deduction?

Yes! I can! But that doesn't mean its correct. Which it clearly is not. Not even close. You say you don't even know where to look and in the next sentence you say my book provides all this to the fakers.
Wouldn't you think that you disqualified yourself out of the discussion by your first admission?

by the way, whats living in a stadium? an American term?

Sorry! I used a latin term. I should not have done that. It means 'state of mind' in english and this context.

Dietrich

**Albert** · 01-13-2008, 05:56 PM

Originally posted by robertdmountfor View Post

I dont know where to look, I know that. I am not an RK collector, three piece construction, beading count, silver stamp...this may well be 20% , but your book will provide both collectors and, sadly forgers too, the extra 80%. Cant you grasp that simple deduction?
by the way, whats living in a stadium? an American term?

You admit you know nothing about what you are talking about yet you do so very stubbornly. Now that tells a lot about the quality of your input. "Can you grasp that simple deduction?"

Announcement

KC for review

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread