iron cross 1st class

[sepp]

Hi, could you help me with this iron cross? It's a friend of mine and I'm interested in it. Do you think it's real or fake ("repro", i know )
(Please apologize me for my english.)

Thanks for help!

http://www.angelfire.com/bug/sepp/im...roncross1x.jpg
http://www.angelfire.com/bug/sepp/im...roncross2x.jpg
http://www.angelfire.com/bug/sepp/im...roncross3x.jpg
http://www.angelfire.com/bug/sepp/im...roncross4x.jpg
http://www.angelfire.com/bug/sepp/im...roncross5x.jpg
http://www.angelfire.com/bug/sepp/im...roncross6x.jpg

[Frank Heukemes]

Dear Sepp,

I see good and bad things:

Good:

-maker mark
-pin shape
-hinge
-catch

Bad:

-pin seems to be magnetic???
-date is IMO not ok for 65, especially the spaces inside the 9s
-swastika is a bit too fat IMO
-if something was able to corrode a Neusilber pin so badly, then the iron core should be GONE, yet it appears to be in good shape.

All in all, this one would make me very suspicious. At best an original that has been doctored.

Cheers, Frank

[Frank Heukemes]

Here is a "textbook" 65:

[Frank Heukemes]

reverse

[sepp]

Thanks for the opinions.

To answer your question - the pin isn't magnetic. I could try to make more images if it helps.

I'm curious what will the others say.

[sepp]

I've checked the cross - the swaz isn't too fat actually. It' only seems so, because there are shadows from a desktop lamp

[George Stimson]

I think it's good and I concur with all of Frank's points. I think that the fat swaz and the numbers difference -- and especially the "different" inner loops of the "9s" -- could be caused by the rework of the core. (The "9s" don't look as bad on the last picture.)

[Adrian]

Is it possible the cross could have been taken apart at any time?
The reason I ask is the frames look slightly misaligned and the joint between them is highly visible.

Best regards,
Adrian.

[Dietrich Maerz]

The core is not a "65". I even have some problems with the hinge, i.e. attachement of pin to hinge. Is the core magnetic? If yes, seems to have a cooper coating.

Dietrich

[meriksson]

Hi all!
Its a 65 K/Q but it have been repainted. I did find one thing whit this one
as i also have on my 65 mint shape. Im still not shure this is on all 65´s, but
this is one thing i found odd on 65´ers. A small pimple just out side the rim.
Using picture shown here.
Mikael

[Dietrich Maerz]

The core is repainted and the rim seems to be a 65, but I don't see the core being a 65 - the numbers are different IMHO, even taking into consideration the heavy paint.

[Dietrich Maerz]

This example raises another time a question I have asked already earlier in the Meybauer thread:

What makes the maker? The core, the rim the .pin/hinge/catch or the actual makers mark?

We have cross-overs between makers as seen with the Souval/L15 - L/15, in another actual thread we have a Meybauer mix up and I'm absolutely sure, more will come up in the future (better exchange, better examination with computers). I have two marked Meybauer with different pins, without makers mark, one might be declared questionable.

For me it makes completely sense that this mix up did happen and I tend to go for the beading/rim (in conjunction with makers marking).

Any comments on this interesting development?

By the way, I think the cross is good - the core is not 'mainstream' K&Q however.

Dietrich

[herrgeezer]

Just a thought....

After the war the necessities of life are in very short supply but the demand is high. Germany is an occupied country where barter is the main currency. This cross may have been put together from parts, from many different manufactures, to be used as a trade item with allied soldiers for food. As I said, just a thought.

[Blitz]

Here is my 65..