Knight´s Cross "4"

[Leroy]

Don't drop that on your toe, Dave. It would hurt something fierce!

[Darrell]

Seems to me I've seen a bunch of WAR SERVICE - SHIP BUILDING medallions flooding the market of late ....

[Dave Kane]

Don't drop that on your toe, Dave. It would hurt something fierce!

Funny you say that Leroy!!! I walked in to the garage and in fact tripped...all I could think of was (it) flying out of my hands and landing on the trunk of the Bee!!!!!

Darrell....shuuushhh

I will only offer ORIGINAL pure lead reproductions!!

It is an attractive badge and the definition is incredible

[Darrell]

[Dave Kane]

Just to keep things in focus....

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...ight=s%26l+die

[Leroy]

In all seriousness, Dave, there have been some interesting comments made on this Forum, by people who at least seemed to be familiar with die techniques, regarding the use of a "master die" from which working copies were made. I seem to recall the suggestion that these "working copies" would pick up many very small defects from the "master" (not necessarily all) but could also have their own individual flaws, as well. Maybe some of these folks could "chime in" here.

Again, I don't have any personal knowledge of whether S&L actually worked this way or not, so I'm not competent to pass judgment. I understand from Dietrich that ,in the "old days", repair was preferred to replacement and could be fairly easily accomplished. Others, however, have said replacement would have been just as easy.

All I am saying is that, whatever happened, an "award date" only conclusively establishes that certain flaws were in existence when the frames for that particular cross were made (and we don't know with certainty when exactly that happened or how fast certain flaws, like the beading flaws, spread).

[Leroy]

OK, so if there was a proven award of an 800-4 in June 1944 - as Niemann alleges - AND if there was only one (repaired die) why don't we see more 800-4 and 935-4 awarded?

We don't know how many "B" type crosses were made or awarded before war's end. As has been noted, records from that period are sadly lacking.

Just with our own Forum members, we have accounted for at least eight 935-4's and four 800-4's, plus at least one other "B" type (Bob's Kitzingen cross), and we can't claim to represent all collectors who may have any of those types, but who never even think of posting here. Both 935-4's and 800-4's were noted in Vern Bowen's old book (long before the idea of "A" and "B" types). How many of these crosses were dispatched to the Eastern Front for award, never to be seen again? How many languish in vet's attics or garages?
We can only speculate. Our old friend Detlev says the 800-4's are the rarest of S&L crosses, followed by the 935-4's. That's just his observation after seeing "hundreds" of S&L crosses (his words) over the years.

We don't need to fight anymore here about whether the 800-4 came before the 935-4 or whether the order was reversed. In the end, it doesn't really matter. What does seem clear is that the date of manufacture of the frames of a particular "A" cross cannot be determined with exactitude (except that "more beading flaws = later stamping than fewer beading flaws") and that the frames of a cross awarded in 1945 may have been stamped in 1942 and the cross assembled and shipped to the government in 1943. With flaws being definitely linked to a cross awarded in 1943, S&L had ample time to notice the problem and either repair the "A" die or make a new one and begin producing and shipping "B" types before war's end. The TRUTH is that we have NO IDEA how many crosses S&L made in 1944 or 1945. Maybe K&Q made the most crosses during that time.The provenance for 935-4's, 800-4's and other "B" types (like Bob's) may not be acceptable to some, but it is certainly acceptable to others. In the end, it all boils down, for the award date of ANY cross, to who you are willing to believe regarding provenance. There is, however, no longer any physical or time barrier to the manufacture and award, during the war, of "B" type crosses.

Best,
Leroy

[Darrell]

..... In the end, it all boils down, for the award date of ANY cross, to who you are willing to believe regarding provenance. ........Best,
Leroy

That's what I said 11 1/2 pages ago.

[Leroy]

Congratulations, Darrell, you were ahead of your time!!!!!

[Darrell]

Congratulations, Darrell, you were ahead of your time!!!!!

Leroy, I've seen about 20 of these threads since I joined 4 years ago. They all end up with the same conclusion. Good information exchange and some decent theories and "what if's" tossed around ... but it comes down to what you "believe" is correct and what you "believe" actually happened.

Until that Time Machine is offered for sale ... I doubt anything will ever be revealed as Black or White.

[Dave Kane]

Leroy, I strongly disagree with a portion of your post!!!

"With flaws being definitely linked to a cross awarded in 1943, S&L had ample time to notice the problem and either repair the "A" die or make a new one and begin producing and shipping "B" types before war's ......"

The multi-die suggestion is just an easy 'out', 'excuse' or as we have seen 'dealer speak' to explain all sort of Crosses and markings....heck the old fall back for the zink core was a SHORTAGE of iron in the last few months of the war!!

We need to accept the evidence as put forth in study and photographs that the idea of 2 EXACT die being cut, portraying the EXACT minute flaws etc etc is beyound absurd. Once that is done the question of these Crosses being period gets easier to answer as many (obvious post war) Crosses can be eliminated.

[Leroy]

Dave,
I have no big personal dispute, at all, with the idea of one repaired die! I only mentioned the other possibility because others have held it out as a possible alternative. I don't know what they did.
Best,
Leroy

[Darrell]

Besides Leroy ... you taking Dave away from pouring lead into his pride and joy