DKiG from Panzer Wrap

[Frank Heukemes]

Dear Calvin,

Yes, that was also what we concluded last time I posted these pics.

Cheers, Frank

[WWIIBuff]

DKiG from Panzer Wrap

Thanks Frank. I appreciate the pics. You're right, mine is not the same. Seems like everything else that was on this wrap when I got it is original except maybe this DK.

My dilemma is what to do now. Do I return the entire wrap because of this or do I request a partial refund since the DK was a deciding factor in the purchase and now it apprears to be a repro. Or do I just do nothing and chalk it up to part of the hobby?

If I do keep it, should I attempt to purchase an original panzer DK and reapply in place of the repro?

Let me know what you guys think.

Rolf if you do a search on this forum you'll find some great shots of the "9" flaw on past posts. I did the same thing last night.

John

[George Stimson]

Rolf

I'll save you one trip.

[Mark S.]

It disturbs that when people ask for opinions on a cloth DK, the topic always ends up back at the flaw in the '9'. Although I agree that a cross with the flaw is a pretty safe bet, I think it behooves us to explore 'different' crosses with a little more scrutiny than which we are sharing. All to often such a premise results in false "truism's", leading to every cross with out the flaw labeled a fake. I think we can agree that Frank's cross is just fine, but what about others?

What if someone got a hold of a ratty cloth DK, moth eaten and all that, and took the wreath from it and put in on one of these cloth DK? Being so focused on the date, we would excuse other potential issues, because if it has the flaw, then it must be real......

How long was it before the flaw in the GWL logo started appearing on fakes? I am sure it is just matter of time before someone catches on.

Now your probably thinking "Uh-oh..Mark must have one of these.." well, I dont, I have no defense at all on this cross. I dont like it either. I just think we can get a little more explicit when we discuss these curious creatures.

For the record, this cross leaves me flat, I really dont like the wreath at all. I have seen wreaths similiar to this, and to me they lack the flourish that is normally seen on real wreaths, by any maker. To me it looks like tobacco leaves, not laurel leaves.

I also dont like the starburst embroidery work, either. It seems to be missing a bunch of rays? Kind of odd for a cross in minty condition.

This is surely not a cross I would want in my collection. Here is a another cross I believe to be fake. Although not exactly like the one being discussed here, it shares enough similiarities to take notice.

[Mark S.]

same cross.........

[Mark S.]

one more.........

[atcase]

Here are my D.K.s in cloth, all standard except for the wehrmacht one which has a different backing to any others ive seen
Ashley

[atcase]

Befor the talking starts on the WH cross it was purchased in 1977 from a dealer and friend of mine for the extorinate fee of £3.00

An apparently good friend of mine wanted to borrow it to compere with his at home.

When i eventually got it back to my dismay it had been tampered with and i was told seversl years later that it had been dismantled to use as a template for copies the particular copies that were made were the one with the wreath being woven in wire thread (completly useless) so though it has been put back together it is not quite right but to me completly origional.

Ashley