L/21 marked RK?

[bratwurstdimsum]

Hi guys,

I was doing an update to my RK database (pinned to this forum) when I realised I was calling a detlev photo of a L/21 marked RK the same name as a L/52 marked RK : ie Zimmermann - I am obviously wrong with one of them.

Can you please tell me who the maker of this cross is? It cannot be Forster & Barth can it?

There's already been discussion on this previously...
http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=102309

[Dietrich Maerz]

This cross is a Zimmermann. The other two crosses I know which are marked L/21 were S&L A-Types.

It seems that the company Förster & Barth received or bought crosses from S&L (in which case F&B marked the ring with L/21) and at least one example from Zimmermann (the one shown here). Please refer to page 226.

This cross here was already discussed in the crosses forum. It belonged to Chrisjenkins and was sold to Niemann. Niemann in turn elevated the L/21 marked cross (which he should have recognized as a Zimmermann) to a new maker and showed it in his price book with a sticker of $ 13500 ....
( http://70.87.163.50/forums/showthread.php?t=313202)

So, for the database:
- F&B is no maker
- F&L used S&L and Zimmermann to sell crosses during the LDO time (March 41 - Oct. 41)

Dietrich

[bratwurstdimsum]

Thanks D. as always! I should have read your book a bit more closely.

[Biro]

Interesting set!

I also find it interesting that perfectly genuine crosses from a known 'manufacturer' (Zimmerman/Juncker) which are marked by a known 'supplier' (Förster & Barth/Meybauer) are treated with such trepidation when dealing with the third reich era...

Case in point, the well known 'L/13' marked Juncker RK.

As collectors, we naturally seek out the unusual, the variant, the elusive maker mark... it's what makes collecting so intoxicating.

Surely among the high end collectors, this rare F&B marked set warrants a premium of some sort over and above that of a 'normal' Zimmerman. I would include that L/13 marked Juncker in that catagory too. That cross checked out, the L/13 maker mark checked out, yet the rumblings of ...''post-war application''... seem at odds with just how commonplace 'product sharing' has been since the Napoleonic wars!!

Yes? No?...


Marshall

[George Stimson]

Yes!

[Dietrich Maerz]

I also find it interesting that perfectly genuine crosses from a known 'manufacturer' (Zimmerman/Juncker) which are marked by a known 'supplier' (Förster & Barth/Meybauer) are treated with such trepidation when dealing with the third reich era...

I don't understand it either. When Winkler sold the S&L with the L/21 loop, nobody even saw that it was an S&L! I find the whole thing absolutely normal and it is: Godet RKs are made
/supllied by Zimmermann. Klein DKs are made with part from Zimmermann. Why not Foerster & Barth?
However, waht is NOT right is when such a cross is announced as a new maker with an absolute premium. That is just not right and most likely because of that the set never sold.

Case in point, the well known 'L/13' marked Juncker RK.

That was talked down without any reason whatsoever!

Surely among the high end collectors, this rare F&B marked set warrants a premium of some sort over and above that of a 'normal' Zimmerman. I would include that L/13 marked Juncker in that catagory too. That cross checked out, the L/13 maker mark checked out, yet the rumblings of ...''post-war application''... seem at odds with just how commonplace 'product sharing' has been since the Napoleonic wars!!

Yes, a premium is justified. Just like a premium is justified with the Type 1 obverse and Type 2 markings of Godet OL. But not under the wrong description of a new maker and not by 18%. Would it have been announced as what it really is, it would have sold!
But price-making is a black art I do not understand anyway Why ould an early '800" Zimmermann be € 1000 cheaper than a later, not even awarded, "20" marked one. It seems, the marking is the value, not the time and use!?

Yes? No?...

Yes!

[ChrisJ]

L/21

Hello All...I've been a way for a while, so its nice to be back.

Ref the L/21 RK & Oaks, they remain with me, and I believe they are rather special. There has been some debate whether they are Godet...but then the question still remains (for me anyway) open as to whether Godet made Zimmerman's or Zimmerman made Godet's.

The quality of the piece is superb, and the Oakleaves display the very early marking, and in my view will be from some of the first produced.

Regards
Chris

[Pieter Verbruggen]

...don't see anything wrong with this maker mark.I also thingk you may pay some extra for this supplied cross. To me it is a cross made and stamped L/21 by Zimmerman.

Godet dit their own assembling IMO. These are of higher quality when it comes to paint and finish.

A Godet will fetch more than a premium!
Pieter.

[ChrisJ]

Well Pieter, my view is that the whole Godet/Zimmerman tie in is rather a nebulous question.

Godets seem to be exclusively very early presentation pieces, of high quality, whereas the early Zimmermans use the same pieces but are quite rough in assembly. Later 20 marked crosses are much better than the early ones.

This RK is exquisite, and streets ahead of my L/52, which has a loose fitting of the core (it rattles) and failing soldered joints.

Returning to the set in question, for me the likely hood is that they were obtained as an unmarked set other than the Godet 900 stamp on the Ol. The positioning of the L/21 on the OL would be consistent with it having been applied after the ribbon ring had been fitted, as the tool would foul the loop due to the curvature of the piece. The 800 and L/21 on the RK also would be consistent with having been applied after assembly....so prior to that point the pieces were unmarked apart from the 900 on the OL.

I purchased the set with an RK case that had been closed on the RK/OL for many years, together with a DKIG, all of which left heavy imprints on the internal padding. The hinges of the case had sprung open due to the DKIG.

So, is this a Godet set made from parts supplied by Zimmerman ? Only the paint texture of the core would be against this. Or was it a Zimmerman assembled piece supplied unmarked to F&B....but then of much better quality than their L52 crosses appear to be ?

It has been suggested that the set are a shop display item, but frankly there is nothing that would make this any more likely than other possibilities

I continue to find this to be a fascinating set, and I might add there is no attempt on my behalf to talk it up....it is what it is, and is absolutely not for sale.