S&L Die Flaw on I/C 2nd Class

[Tony Barto]

Is this flaw area common for these?

[ChrisJ]

IC2 Flaws

These flaws look identical to the type discussed on earlier threads for S&L RK's.
My bet is that they will appear in the same place on others.
Thanks for the picture.

[Tony Barto]

Hi Chris;

Thank you for the response. I've read the thread on the RK but I'm not sure how the flaw would transition from an RK to an I/C 2nd class. Any help you can give would greatly be appreciated.

Tony

[Dez H]

Perhaps the Second Class dies were also damaged, maybe in transport, bombing during the war or this was deliberately done after the war to enable people with the "know" to pick out pre-war and post war produced S&L pieces. Who knows?


Dez

[ChrisJ]

IC2

Mmmmm....
Think that's stretching it a bit Dez.
My opinion is that these effects are a common feature of S&L pieces, and are a result of a wear process inherent to the particular grade of material S&L used for their dies.

Cheers,
Chris

[Dez H]

Chris; I do not mean to stretch wild unfounded claims or what we Aussies call pub talk, but expanded on possibilities. In the end it all comes down to fact and information. How many pieces could you expect one set of dies to produce? I am sure there are forum members who can elaborate on these processes. Did S&L overuse their dies? As opposed to other makers who had a tolerance levels on how many pieces should be produced from one set of dies.


Dez

[ChrisJ]

Well, I think that there are too many variables involved to ever get any answers to these questions, Dez. No one is every going to know the full story after so long unfortunately.
One thing I do know,.. manufacturers undoubtedly used different grades of material for their dies, and often varied the material the used for the base material for EK's from time to time..... so we are not on an even playing field in the first place when comparing one manufacturer with another.

[Mike Kenny]

Hi,

For the discussion, my slightly worn but nicely frosted 4 stamped EK2 does not show indications of flaws (die cracks).

Regards
Mike K

[Gordon Williamson]

These sorts of die flaws are far from being uncommon on EK2 and EK1 from various makers, not just S&L. Even early Schinkel style pieces will have them.
Eventual die wear/failure is possible after continuous use, but it would take a helluva lot of use to achieve this. Dies are usually capable of stamping out hundreds of thousands if not millions of pieces.

I trained as a toolmaker with a UK subsidiary of a US engineering firm, and part way through my training, "graduated" from the toolroom to the drawing office, moving on to designing rather than making the tools, and have some oxperience of both die stamping and pressure die-casting both of which were of course used in badge/medal making.
As Chris suggests, it would all depend on the quality of steel and the quality and type of the hardening process. I know from experience that one a high grade tool-steel die is hardened (the firm I worked for used cyanide case-hardening which gave the metal an incredibly hard outer "shell" ), if an error is found it is, to say the least, difficult to correct without using specialist equipment. These dies ain't going to fracture after a few thousand stampings - unless there is an inherent impurity/flaw in the steel itself.

Gordon

[Tony Barto]

Should I return the piece to the seller then?

Tony

[Skipper Greenwade]

Tony beat me to the punch...are the EK's with the die flaws viewed with the same suspicion as the RK's?

An observation: Gordon has probably forgotten more about die stamping, tool making, etc. than I will likely ever know, but the flaw on Tony's EK is in almost exactly the same spot and is very similar to the flaw on the examples of RK's appearing elsewhere on the forum from Detlev, Kai and me. Any chance that area of the die(s) is subject to greater stress during the manufacturing process, resulting in the flaw beginning there and worsening to the point observed on the '57 RK's?

Skip

[George Stimson]

EK 2 flaw location

On an RK, where the suspension ring is an integral part of the frame, the three o'clock arm of a frame is always the three o'clock arm. Is the same true for EK 2 (and 1) frames, where it doesn't really matter which arm of the frame is over a particular arm of the core?

George

[Mike Kenny]

Hi,

I don't think flaws on EK2s or EK1s (for which the beaded frame would have been produced from the same die as the EK2) should be viewed with anywhere near the degree of suspicion as flaws on an RK. As Gordon has re-stated, beading flaws on EK2s and EK1s are not that uncommon.

Further, think about the number of EK2s awarded - 4.5 to 5.5 million (aside from private purchase, which may increase the number by half again). That's a mimimum 9 million frame halves. Add another 3/4 million for EK1s and you're quickly looking at around 10 million frame halves. Divided by a hugely overestimated number of EK manufacturers (lets say 100), you're still looking at 100,000 frame halves per maker (as opposed to RKs which would probably be more like 10,000 frame halves per maker, assuming that production was evenly shared, which it almost certainly was not).

Any die would be hard pressed (pun intended) to produce that many items without showing some signs of stress. So for me, die flaws in EK2s and EK1s are not a major concern.

Tony, it's up to YOU whether you want to return the cross. Keep it as an interesting example or return it and wait for a more common non-flawed example - it depends on your collecting direction.

For George, you're probably right about a 3 o'clock arm not necessarily always being in the 3 o'clock position (ie it could be rotated around) for a "Gablonzer" EK but not for one of the "earlier" examples with the lug for the ringloop.

Regards
Mike K

[Skipper Greenwade]

Mike,

I agree with that logic, but think a reasonable follow-up question (not directed solely at Mike) might be why, given the small number of Schinkel-form crosses that exist, there are - per Gordon's post above - examples with the flaw(s)?

Skip

[Mike Kenny]

Hi,

Good question. As far as I can figure it out, Schinkels and other early 1939 EK2/1s were produced from EXISTING (pre 39) dies - I'm talking about frameworks here, not the iron cores. These dies would have been used for quite some time previously, knocking out 1914 EK2/1 private orders. How many times they had previously been used would be a guess. Whether they were designed for large orders or prolonged heavy use is open for speculation imo.

As an example, I have a classic Schinkel EK1 (same reverse as in "The Iron Time" p249) which has exactly the same framework/hinge/pin/catch as a 1914 EK1 that I own. The 1914 EK1 shows no indications of flawing (I can't see any strong flawing on "The Iron Time" example either but difficult to be 100% sure from a book image) but my 1939 Schinkel is severely flawed. I don't think the Schinkel beaded frame die would have been used for many more crosses after my example before being scrapped.

Regards
Mike K