Rk ?

[John M B]

Gentlemen,

I am what you class as a newbie.

I have been following your discussions for the last few weeks and have tried to use your information to check the pieces I have aquired but still find it difficult to spot some of the points you mention. However, I have a few peices I would like to share with you. The first couple are pieces I have been offered so I am limited in the images available.

I will start with the RK with the pictures attached and eagerly await your comments.

[George Stimson]

Imo

Not a Zimmermann RK.

[M. Zimmer]

I don´t like it too

Mathias

[Dave Kane]

John, unfortunately it's a repo! This is the 'type' that is marked anything from yours to a Lazy 2 and they are thought to originate from Latvia.

Dave

[Kloster]

Im new in this field aswell - it may be the pictures, but for me, the swares looks huge when compared to the cross itself and when comparing with org. RKs

Kloster

[ChrisJ]

Gentlemen,

I am what you class as a newbie.

I have been following your discussions for the last few weeks and have tried to use your information to check the pieces I have aquired but still find it difficult to spot some of the points you mention. However, I have a few peices I would like to share with you. The first couple are pieces I have been offered so I am limited in the images available.

I will start with the RK with the pictures attached and eagerly await your comments.

Sorry John
This one is not a recognisably Zimmerman (which it pertains to be with the 20 mark).
Unfortunatley, in my opinion this is a post 1945 repro.
Hope you havent been burnt too heavily.

[Dietrich Maerz]

This seems to be the same one. Marked L12 (sic) and 835 (sic).

[Dave Kane]

DM...where in the depths did you drag that one from??

Man, that's just rude!!

I just edited this.....BUT isn't this resembling a K&Q??? Look at the different beading and the thick ring......I hope I'm not the only sick one who sees this!

Dave

[Dietrich Maerz]

Can't be a K&Q - is marked L12!

What made me think that thios is the same was the big Swastika and the lower right corner nearly or actualy piercing the swas. I see the same thing in both, but have to admit that I didn't devote a lot of investigation into it.

One of the many, many pictures in my fake files...

Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

Maybe it's one of those super rare 'contract' crosses that Juncker bought and later sold for a 20% markup!!

Seriously though...although I'm not a fan of K&Q doesn't it have some similar points??

Dave

[ChrisJ]

DM...where in the depths did you drag that one from??

Man, that's just rude!!

I just edited this.....BUT isn't this resembling a K&Q??? Look at the different beading and the thick ring......I hope I'm not the only sick one who sees this!

Dave

No Dave... you are not... I would say that this is almost certainly from the K&Q frame die, but the core (?). For the frame the bead count is spot on, and the die characteristics are all there. But for the core, MMmmmm that "1" is rather odd isnt it....
Come on your younger guys (Dietrich) with better eyes and computer skills, what do you think ?

[John M B]

Thank you for comments gentlemen. I did not think it was real either so it did not burn me at all.

However, I do not agree with Dietrich's comparison to the picture he has posted. I see the core and numbers as different on the pictures of "mine".

[Dave Kane]

Thanks Chris!!

Dietrich, do you have a pic of the back of the cross?

This could be interesting as there was a similar cross offered on Ebay a long time ago and discussed on this Forum...the frame, I think it was agreed to was K&Q but the core didn't appear to be!

Anyone maintain pics of that one?

Dave

[Dietrich Maerz]

Dave,

here's the reverse of the cross in question. I will look closer into it later, as Chris requested.

[Dave Kane]

Wow! That's really something and I think confirms the belief that K&Q frame die survived the war.


Very interesting to say the least...thanks Dietrich

Dave