800 marked KC

[David C]

I think the rust split the seam and someone tried badly to put it back together. Or, the rusting split the frame and it just filled in with Schmutz.

The solder joint looks uneven to me. Narrower @right wider @left. Could be a result of resoldering around corroded core,

but,

look at the ring. Lower left. It is thicker than the rest of the ring. This indicates misshapen frame. I cant see how that could be as a result of any corrosion. Would an RK frame be this poorly made?



David.

[David C]

I don't think the rust did it. Mine has no rust at all.

Now that looks more like it. Greg what are the 3 OC and 9 OC solder joints on yours like?


David.

[Brian S]

Here is the top of my rounder, perfect.

Not a hint of a seam. Are the those rounders with the weird seam gaps? Were they rusted?

[Brian S]

Now this wear makes perfect sense to me. The ribbon worn for a few years has worn down what was an invisible seam until worn by the ribbon which I own. Now the seam visible but due to the wear.

[Brian S]

You know the spectroscopy could again be very useful on Sergey's and the Rounder crosses. I hadn't handled my Meybauer (what was I thinking Deumer...) in a while and it was great to see the EGG SHELL paint so typical of Reich Crosses.


Come on you guys, vote for the spectroscopy, get some interest up in it or SOME scientific basis as we have so little photographic evidence.

[Dietrich Maerz]

Checked my cross again and all the others in my library. Absolute clear and nice solder lines and no indication of any thickness variation on any arm. Absolut straight, top and bottom.
Allan also checked his again and the same there. Have not the foggiest idea what that is or could be.

Dietrich

[Charlie_Vaughn]

I'm bringing this item back up for discussion - the original KCIC that was posted at the very beginning of this thread by the Russian collector.

I wanted to mention that I recently came across an identical version - detail for detail and no questions asked IDENTICAL to the one in question.

Its clearly a fake. The one that I handled was in fact marked with the upright "2" and this is clearly NOT a Junker KCIC.

A few details about this very fine fake and probably a very old fake:

1) The dates are lower than they should be.

2) The "0" marks for the 800 are in fact not correct - very oblong in shape.

3) If this cross is found with a "2" it must mean all the others simply marked "800" are also a fake - this could never be a Junker.

4) The interior of the iron center is finished in egg shell texture.

I would guess the following - this KCIC may in fact be a 1945-46 made product by one of the German firms that produced them for war trophy's for Allied occupation troops. I admit, the quality is very, very good - but clearly it could never be original with the markings I found on it. Probably a handful of these were produced after the war and sold to Russian, British, French, and US troops stationed in Germany - today, they are considered by some as possible variants that might be original - but clearly they are not wartime produced crosses.

Something to tuck away in your files.....

[Dave Kane]

Thanks Charlie for the info. and there are lots of folks who fell for this FRAUD!!

Some promulgated it, while some believed it and even some made up stories to 'autheticate' the piece. A great many collectors fell for it.....

The victs. here are the folks who bought them, or were duped with a 'switch' and truely believed they had the 'original' item brought home!!

All of these 'frauds' were fostered in greed and disrespect.....