Lakesidetrader

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Unusual EK2 ???

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #46
    Originally posted by Douglas 5 View Post
    It's late ... trying to find the pictures . As I remember that re-worked W&L die is from the 1st frame die . .. measurments would verify that .

    Douglas
    I follow.

    Comment


      #47
      Did make an admendment a few posts back . That 1870 EK2 is not from a regular Juncker or W&L . This one has a wrong top bead count . I have seen a regular EK2 with the same features of top bead count , but the corners were different . For a re-strike the crown is realy poor - in contrast to the appearance of the 'W' !!
      More tomorrow .

      Douglas
      Attached Files

      Comment


        #48
        Originally posted by streptile View Post
        Hi Thomas,

        Could you please post measurements to a tenth of a mm of the following distances?

        A = width of the crown (beading) only at the arm.
        B = opening at the center
        C = height
        D = width
        E = outside measurement of the arm

        I do appreciate your help. This may also help us put a maker to the cross, incidentally.

        And a big thanks to Douglas for the measurements idea...
        Hello there.

        I cannnot give you theese measures yet, since i didnt bought it yet.
        Best regards Thomas.


        WWW.CROWMOOR.DK

        Comment


          #49
          First of all, are those zink non mag crosses of early or late manufacture? Late imo when considering the heavy flaws found on the frames. But according to the "iron core" regulations it suggest that they were early?

          A knowledegable forum member taught me once that a brass jumpring, misaligned hump and a "dipping upper right inner corner" was things to consider in a Juncker. Not sure about that anymore since there seems to be a much closer working agreement between W&L, S&L and Juncker? These are getting as hard as the Godet/C F Z to sort out, where no one really knows who made whos parts and who assembled them and sold them.

          Been comparing Thomas exellent pics with the cross from post 23-24 and they are a 100% match. They also match a alledged zink Juncker that Schulze recently sold with a fishy looking Juncker marked packet. Do not understand the core chart in post 29 but all 3 is a match to the core in pic 4.

          The core chart pic 1 and 4 do not match but not sure they suppose to? Are they both believed to be a "2nd type" S&L? Were they found in some 4 or L/16 marked crosses with Zink cores?

          The webbing in the corners seen in post 14, 20 and 21 is imo die cracks, just as Trevor points out. They can be seen in many crosses that was struck with worn dies and are also not present on crosses with the exact same frames. Where are the proof that W&L made the "webbed inner corner" frames?

          Will compare the 'non mag' ones with the 1870/1914 alledged Junker next. Last time did that they did not match but it's good to take a 2nd look sometimes.

          Comment


            #50
            Carl,

            Here are two W&L cores. One is the product of a reworked set of dies. You can see how flaws were carried over from the set of dies, not totally repaired, no. This gives us an evolution in the W&L line of crosses. BTW, the date on the upper cross has the same characteristics as the cross you are selling me.
            Attached Files

            Comment


              #51
              Originally posted by robert pierce View Post
              Carl,

              Here are two W&L cores. One is the product of a reworked set of dies. You can see how flaws were carried over from the set of dies, not totally repaired, no. This gives us an evolution in the W&L line of crosses. BTW, the date on the upper cross has the same characteristics as the cross you are selling me.
              Agree totally, numbers are a 100% match! So the upper one is a S&L core? Need to read up on the W&L's and S&L's.
              Last edited by Roglebk; 10-20-2009, 08:38 AM.

              Comment


                #52
                Carl,

                The upper core is an S&L, yes.

                Edit: No, it is not an S&L. It's from an unknown maker. I cannot get the chart to upload with the photo of the date. I'll try again. The chart below does not list it as an unknown maker. I'll have to resize the chart and post it again.
                Last edited by robert pierce; 10-20-2009, 08:38 AM.

                Comment


                  #53
                  Here is the chart to compare the date with...
                  Attached Files

                  Comment


                    #54
                    Ok Robert! This was confusing indeed. Cross in post 23-24 and Thomas thread starter got a core from a unknown maker. It matches the one in the #4 pic in core chart.

                    Comment


                      #55
                      I cannot get the chart uploaded. It's of a different file than pdf. Anyway, the upper right date (#4) on the chart above is of an unknown maker.

                      Comment


                        #56
                        I wish Douglas would chime in here. We have two charts. One has #4 as an unknown maker. On the 2nd chart it is included with the S&L. There is a slight difference in the dates, i.e., the top of the '1' is slightly hooked. #4's '1' is straight at top. But the rest of the date looks identical. I think I recall Douglas saying the curve at the top of the '1' is from die wear. But this confused me. Let's wait and see what his verdict is.

                        Comment


                          #57
                          Hi Robert, they sure looks close! Biggest difference imo is the back of the 1, it has a distinct wawy pattern on the #1 pic and is totally straight on the #4. This difference is hard to explain with wear and lighter strike imo.

                          Comment


                            #58
                            I know what you mean. Douglas and I discussed this; I thought it was a different core. He explained it as die wear from the same die. If you look at the foot of the '1' it's identical, slightly angled even. So, I'm a little confused as to which maker it is. Thomas's cross has a very slight wave at the top of the '1'. Yours is straight.

                            Comment


                              #59
                              Here's my Juncker's core, which matches #1 in the chart perfectly, because it's the same core. It's a zinc-cored S&L.
                              Attached Files

                              Comment


                                #60
                                And, here is Thomas's core matched with mine. I can see a little wave at the top of Thomas's cross; it's not perfectly straight like #4 on the chart. It may be part of the evolution of the S&L die breakdown...?
                                Attached Files

                                Comment

                                Users Viewing this Thread

                                Collapse

                                There are currently 5 users online. 0 members and 5 guests.

                                Most users ever online was 10,032 at 08:13 PM on 09-28-2024.

                                Working...
                                X