knights cross with oakleaves from Dickfeld !

[Brian H]

Dietrich examined the cross in person, took scans of the cross and is very familiar with the piece. I assure everyone this is the same cross. The paint on L/12 pieces is known to flake over the years, which this one did. Perhaps that is why they changed the paint on the later Junker marked "2" crosses.

[Brian H]

Yes, that is the dent. The signed photo from Dickfeld is dark but in the original you can clearly see the dent. It was there in both pictures. The markings on the cross & EL alone should be enough to tell you it is the same piece, and obviously, since they are soldered together, they are the same items pictured.

[Brian H]

Here are some more of the signed photos from Dickfeld from 1998 when the set was purchased from him before he died. As I said he also sold my friend the formal Oakleaves document.

[tystgaard]

Value?????

Is there any opinions on expected value of this nice KC and oaks... I know with a item like this it will be a guess. As I understand.... we talk the KC, Oaks, KC case, signed photos, and off course a set with nice history attached to it.

???

[Brian H]

20,000 Euros + . I am sure the reserve will be at least that based on the selling price.

[tystgaard]

...

It is a really nice set... soo would not surprice even it is alot of money... I see another nice oaks kc set on the next auction(KC 2 and Oaks 21)... do anyone have any opinions about this set?????

[Dietrich Maerz]

This is a very nice and also extremely significant set because IMHO this set of oakleaves is the real L/12. And it is not one of the FOUR different L/12 variations Niemann showed in his catalog and most likely sold over the years as real. Well, nobody could say otherwise (apart form asking jim why there are four different dies - which led to possible expulsion).

In our magazine I show why I think the set is the genuine one. One very strong indication - apart from the period pictures itself - is the "900" stamp which is exactly the same on one /12 Knights cross I have in my archive.

I hope it will end up in some hands who appreciate the significance of the set, apart from the fact that it is 100% with provenance.

Dietrich

[Steinar]

wonderful set. One can only dream about owning a set like this..

[Bob Hritz]

It reminds me of this set.

Bob Hritz

[Leroy]

I believe we have seen these before, Bob?

[Bob Hritz]

I have not posted these until now. The knight's Cross is a zinc cored, unmarked, Juncker.

Had I posted this set prior to the Dickfeld set, I would have been the object of scorn and ridicule.

Bob Hritz

[Leroy]

Perhaps I was confused with a set attached to a Schickle...

[StefanK.]

In our magazine I show why I think the set is the genuine one. One very strong indication - apart from the period pictures itself - is the "900" stamp which is exactly the same on one /12 Knights cross I have in my archive.
Dietrich

There exist Juncker RK with "900" mark?

Stefan

[Les50]

Dietrich examined the cross in person, took scans of the cross and is very familiar with the piece. I assure everyone this is the same cross. The paint on L/12 pieces is known to flake over the years, which this one did. Perhaps that is why they changed the paint on the later Junker marked "2" crosses.

I understood it was the "2" crosses that had this problem not the L/12s or are most Juncker KCs vulnerable to paint flaking?
Les

[Dietrich Maerz]

There exist Juncker RK with "900" mark?

Yes, at least one.

I understood it was the "2" crosses that had this problem not the L/12s or are most Juncker KCs vulnerable to paint flaking?

Yes, the Lazy 2 have the paint problem and "no" not all Juncker are subject or vulnerable to paint flaking - only the Lazy 2s. Here in this case it might have been handling.

Dietrich