Flaw-traces again

[Prosper Keating]

OK. Here, to start the ball rolling towards the goal again, is a 1957 pattern Steinhauer & Lück RK with no visible die flaws. The quality of finish indicates a fairly early piece.

[Gordon Williamson]

If I might just make one observation.

It has often been suggested that S&L might have had more than one die and this would explain why some originals might be flawed and some not.

Firstly, as Chris rightly says, the two dies might be very similar but it is unlikely that they would be absolutely identical - this was before the days when lazer cut dies could produce a perfect clone.

Secondly the production quantities need to be addressed. If you consider the numbers awarded each year of the war ( and of course more would be produced than awarded-that is accepted)

1939- less than 50
1940- around 440
1941 - around 786
1942 - around 952
1943 - around 1400
1944 - around 2450
1945- around 1150

Now the highest amount awarded in any one year was 2450 in 1944. There were six firms making these awards for the Präsidialkanzlei. If they were equally distibuted amongst the manufacturers that would require each to make 400. Now of course we don't know if each made the same amount, but lets say S&L alone made as many as 1/2 instead of just 1/6. That would be 1225 sets of frames, or 2450 halves (both halves being identical and coming from the same tool-there was no "front" and "back" half and to answer a question Chris posed earlier, the flawed ones I have seen were flawed on both sides).

Now, I worked for many years as a tool design draftsman designing die striking and die casting tools so I am familiar with the kind of machines used to stamp such components out (components made from soft maleable silver being stamped on hardened high-carbon steel dies mind you).
The cyclic rates of these large presses (the punch being raised and lowered by a large flywheel) was adjustable but for small flimsy thin striking like the RK frame, even 20 per minute would be extremely slow. At that rate, the entire 2450 frames required for that years share of RK production coulkd be stamped out in 3 hours work. The real time consuming part was the assembly, painting, finishing, laquering etc.

I cannot concieve of why S&L would need to invest considerable sums of money and time in producing a second set of dies when those they already had could produce all the RK frames they needed for a years worth of production at the time of peak demand within half a day. Wartime economy was all about just that - economising- not producing unneccesary and expensive additional sets of tooling.

None of this of course proves whether the flawed rim RK are right or wrong, but a really feel the "second set of dies" theory is a non starter.

I am happy to let this thread run if anyone has reasoned theories either pro or con to put up, but lets not just rehash all the old arguments.

Gordon

[Luftm40]

Hi, while as most of you know I'm no fan of the die flawed crosses, another POSSIBLE explanation does come to mind. What if the SL dies were damaged during the war, but the firm had produced a surplus of parts before the dies were cracked, resulting in both cracked and uncracked versions being produced wartime? If I'm not mistaken, at the end of the war SL and other firms had piles of parts and half finished pieces left over, at least some of which were used to make the very early 57 stuff. I've also handled postwar sloppily assembled SL EK1s that were obviously cobbled together from left overs, perhaps for the occupation forces. If there were both flawed and unflawed frames left as surplus, it is POSSIBLE that both types might have been used to make the early 57 crosses. The hole in this is why SL would have used flawed frames to produce wartime crosses when non flawed surplus frames were still around. This whole issue is just one of those collecting grey areas that can only be aswered by SL, and they apparently aren't talking. It just comes down to personal choice, and collectors making informed decisions on their own, and not relying solely on the guarantees and promises of others. For the time being, MY choice is to avoid this type. Others, including some of the dealers mentioned, may see it differently, which is their perogative. Just thought I'd throw that out.

[Dave Kane]

Reasonable and well thought out! It's very hard to argue logic.
Now just to create a "visual" I'm guessing that it was the lower die that cracked from the overhead pounding of the ( for lack of a better term) male die...
John

[Gordon Williamson]

John,

Yes, a crack in the female part of the die produces a raised line on the actual stamping. Once a stress fracture like this occurs -not necessarily through excess use (as silver is such a soft metal it would take many years of constant use to produce significant wear to a die) but through metallurgical faults with the metal, the hardening process etc then subsequent heavy use could exacerbate the cracking so the flaw could start small then develop as the cracking became more pronounced.

Gordon

[Luftm40]

Well yes, the flaws are raised, which indicates to me a crack in the female die. The theory I mentioned above would also mean that yes, any cross produced on those dies after the war would have the flaws. I am quite certain in my own mind that restrikes from the original dies do exist, and it wouldn't surprise me one bit if initially and probably in conjunction with the 57 RKs, SL made versions with swastikas to sell under the table to veterans who wanted a "real" replacement.

[Prosper Keating]

Here is a 1957 pattern RK with the flaws just visible, as if the cracks or faults in the female die are just appearing:

[Prosper Keating]

And here is (sorry but I can only post one image per post unless I host the images elsewhere and as we are working on our website, that is not really possible right now) a 1939 pattern RK. You will see that, like the 1957 pattern cross shown just above, the beading flaws are just visible, again indicating that the damage to the die was in the early stages. This cross is certainly of a superior quality in terms of general finish but the flaws render it questionable because, apart from anything else, the LDO would surely not have tolerated these flaws, no matter how slight they were in this case when compared to the serious ridges seen on other 1939 and 1957 S&L RKs. Could this be one of the under-the-counter 1939 pattern RKs made illicitly for veterans in the 1950s? Could it be a cross constructed from wartime stock parts, including frame rims from a box of seconds?

[Prosper Keating]

Not the clearest photograph but I didn't take it and it is clear enough to show how pronounced the die flaws are on this fake RK, made with the damaged S&L frame dies. The 800 mark and the maker's mark, which is illegible in this snapshot, are also extremely far apart and serve to suggest that is a 1939 pattern RK or, more precisely, a fake 1939 RK made using the damaged S&L frame dies. As is it just a snapshot of the reverse, this is just surmise but the centre looks artifically aged, another indicator of the faker's art. The picture is not clear enough to form an opinion of the centre and whether it was also made on S&L dies. This could be one of the RKs produced and sold with its very own certificate or even seal of authenticity in the 1980s. Who knows? But it's certainly as wrong as a tin of lead pennies.

PK

[moranimal]

If S&L were making illicit copies ...

... for veterans in the 1950s on the original dies, that would go a long way in explaining their silence on the subject. I'm sure the German Government would frown upon such acknowledgement, and possibly jeopardize any existing contracts for other goods and/or services that they may be handling at this time.

[Luftm40]

In my humble opinion, more than one German firm made postwar restrikes of "nazi" badges and medals from their original dies. I think there are more restrikes out there than collectors care to think about..its one of the reasons I have always always always steered clear of "mint" III Reich items, and go for things that show obvious wear and tear. Wear is absolutely no guarantee of course, but when added to other factors helps sell a piece's originality in my mind. The whole subject of restrikes falls into the grey area I mentioned above. The firms themselves would never admit it, so its up to us as collectors to decide. No one will ever really know the extent of the problem I'm afraid.

[Gordon Williamson]

I don't think S&Ls manufacture of 3rd Reich pieces after the war was as secretive as some think. A German collector friend ordered an RK from them for me in the 1980s (meaning of course a 57 piece) and they wrote back asking if he wanted one with oakleaves or with swastika. So it was no big secret.

They also made fake RK using the postwar second type frame with the eye dipped into the frame, and with a new centre with swastika, but with flatter numerals as on the 57 centres.

Gordon

[Luftm40]

also, on the subject at hand, the RK is kind of my "thing". I've had the opportunity, mainly thru website connections and the contact info on my article, to handle and/or see images of literally hundreds of RKs over the past few years. Fakes and originals alike. With the SLs, there is definitely something rotten in Denmark. The original Juncker and KQ pieces I see all follow a pretty rigid standard. They are exceptionally well made, and well....they all look basically alike. The SLs I've seen run the gamet from superb pieces that, when placed next to a Juncker or KQ, are identifiable as different only thru the small die differences (ring etc). Then there are what I'll call so so versions. Nice quality, but not top notch. VERY remeniscent of 57 RKs IMO. Then there are crappy, sloppily soldered types. They obviously came from the SL dies but....they just don't add up as period pieces. I've also noticed wide differences in the finish of the core on SL crosses. The high superb quality versions have a thick, almost stippled core. The so so versions tend to have a smoother "thinner" looking core finish. Again, very much like the 57 RKs. Then of course you throw the flaw mess into the fray. I'm honestly not sure what all of this means, but it makes me wonder

[Luftm40]

Thats really interesting Gordon, maybe one of our German collectors could give SL a ring? See what they say. They might be able to answer the question for us

[Ron Birch]

Gordon, since you were in this line of work, have you ever had a chance to speak to any of the war time badge makers and recieved any opinions on this or other medals that would fall into the "questionable" area?