What makes a Schinkel a Schinkel

[streptile]

Personally, I would rather see a generic name for ALL 1939 EK's with a WW1 frame and maintain 'Schinkel-form' as the name for the existing sub-set within that catagory...

Hi Marshall,

Increasing categorization is, I agree, a good thing. It both reflects, and helps us refine, our knowledge of the subject. I would, however, suggest leaving the word "Schinkel" alone, and coming up with a name for the slimline examples within the category (Maybauers, Deumers, etc.). In fact, "Slimline Schinkel" isn't too bad.

As far as the grey area between what is and what isn't Schinkelform? Well Bernie innadvertantly nailed it in one, simply by looking at the top row of Bens collection (below) and realising that, compared to the bottom two rows, there was a distinct and easily identifiable visual difference that didn't fit with his perception of a Schinkleform cross.

Yes, Bernie perceived a difference in shape. But I don't believe categorizing any cross a Schinkel should be the function of any one collectors "perception," and here is our fundamental disagreement. It should be based on verifiable criteria. And who is to say that everyone would perceive the same differences, or that any one person's "perception" would be correct? But I will stop before I begin to repeat myself any further

Let's try one thing. Bernie -- without seeing the cores, can you identify which of these crosses is a Schinkel, using solely the visual definition? Why?

Trevor - your points and concerns are excellent and well justified - there's a whole group of Imperial framed 1939 EK's out there missing out on their rightfull notoriety and collectibility.

Thanks Marshall. Yours, too Interestingly, I don't think there's a whole group of Imperial framed 1939 EK's out there that has gone unrecognized. They are quite rare. If you can find another one, please let us know. I myself know only six Schinkels () :

1. Meybauer
2. Deumer
3. Schickle one-piece
4. Juncker/AWS
5. Unknown Maker (previously known as an "Intermediate" -- only EK2s known to me)
6. Unknown Maker (In my opinion either an L/54 or an Assmann, and the ones that started this thread)

As for "Prinzen Spangen" -- good luck on that one. I tend to call them "Reduktions."

[Bernie Brule]

The one on the left seems to have ever so slightly slimmer arms with slightly more curvature than the one on the right and it appears to have finer beading. So, final answer: the one on the (viewer's) left.

Do I win the cross if I'm right?

[streptile]

The one on the left seems to have ever so slightly slimmer arms than the one on the right and it appears to have finer beading. So, final answer: the one on the (viewer's) left.

Do I win the cross if I'm right?

Yes, you win the cross if you're right!

And I agree -- using solely the visual definition, the cross on the left qualifies as a Schinkel. So everyone who owns an L/56 EK1 or EK2, get 'em out, because they just soared in value.

In reality, though, both crosses are what we consider normal, regular old EKs. Their frames vary in size, shape, contour, flare and curvature. The left is an L/56, the right is an L/11.

So, I say again: The only way to consistently determine what is, and what is not, a Schinkel, is to look to the origin of the frames.

Thanks for playing, Bernie. Honestly, I appreciate it.

[Bernie Brule]

No problem Trevor,

Even though I didn't win, my L/56 just soared in price.

[streptile]

No problem Trevor,

Even though I didn't win, my L/56 just soared in price.

That's right!

[Snni]

So everyone who owns an L/56 EK1 or EK2, get 'em out, because they just soared in value.

Great news, guys! I can sell my double L/56 Ek2 then

[George Stimson]

Trick question!

"without seeing the cores, can you identify which of these crosses is a Schinkel, using solely the visual definition? "

Not to pick nits, but doesn't that question imply that one of the crosses is what the question asker considers to be a Schinkel? Wouldn't it be better phrased, "without seeing the cores, can you identify which of these crosses looks like a Schinkel, using solely the visual definition?"