EKI BH Mayer?

[streptile]

In my opinion the cross Stefan shows is also a good fake, and not a real L/18, unfortunately.

I will post some 333 photos later (still at work).

[5tefan]

In my opinion the cross Stefan shows is also a good fake, and not a real L/18.

I will post some 333 photos later (still at work).

I hope, I need not to make a recall action, of this EK1 L/18 2nd pin setup!
If this shown EK1 on item # 28 is a good 333 fake. It would make me worse, because the whole cross looks very authentic.

Than stef had luck not to bought this cross and WVDParis should send this EK1 back to me.
This cross was on more than 5 different foren without any claim!

[normandie]

So my cross is a orginal Mayer?

/fredrik

[5tefan]

So my cross is a orginal Mayer?

/fredrik

Let us wait for the pictures from Trevor for compare!

[Douglas 5]

Here is the worn early Mayer I have ..... coin silver frame .

Douglas

[5tefan]

Here are the pictures of the flaws, it look a bit different to my pictures.
But let us see the obverse of the 333 fake.

[5tefan]

Peter,

additional, I wonder why the back side pictures (pin setup) on Thread #1 and thread # 16 is different! Thread #1 is showing a pin setup of deumer and #16 BHM.

Hope the pictures on # 16 is right!

[VonPeter]

Peter,

additional, I wonder why the back side pictures (pin setup) on Thread #1 and thread # 16 is different! Thread #1 is showing a pin setup of deumer and #16 BHM.

Hope the pictures on # 16 is right!

Yes, post 16 is right. The owner Normandie had posted the wrong pics in his ad and that is the ones i posted in the beginning on the thread. The front pic was right but the reverse picture got mixed up apparently as it came from another cross.
Thats was why i started this thread. The hinge dident look like any other meyer cross i´ve seen. And when i asked for better pics i got the real photo of the rear and then the misstake was realised

So if the seller had posted the right pics (pic 16) in his ad in the first place i never would have started this thread. If that was lucky or unlucky, you decide

[streptile]

Here are some comparison photos of the 333/L/18 fake, and an authentic L/18.

These were all done by Daniel aka grueni.

The obverse (2nd Class, but same frame and core):



Here you can see the common flaws from the 333 and the fake L/18:



The dates (real L/18 and 333/fake L/18)



They got the mark almost exact -- perhaps even the same tool?



Here is another one of their very convincing EK1s. The frame is the same as on the fake L/18 EK2s:

[streptile]

Another point to remember is that the cross that began this thread has almost nothing in common with a real L/18 or 26 Mayer.

• The frame is different.
• The core is different.
• The catch is different.
• The pin and hinge are similar but just a bit different too.

[streptile]

I would add one note:

There is some speculation that the makers of the "333" fakes (thought to be based in the U.K.) got a hold of original dies and tools to make their fakes. If this is true, and if the die tools came from B. H. Mayer, then it's possible that both the L/18 fake EK2 shown above, and the cross that started this thread, and Stefan's cross, are all good L/18 variants, and the "333" fakers inherited the core dies, among perhaps other tools.

For this to be true, we would have to accept that at some point during the middle of the war, B. H. Mayer changed their frames and cores for a very brief period (to make the unmarked thread-starter), then changed their pins to make Stefan's L/18 marked EK1 (presumably around 1941, since these shifts would have to straddle the introduction of LDO numbers to account for the presence of both marked and unmarked examples) and the other one pictured for a very brief period, then changed back to their original frame and core dies, and also changed back to their original pins (which had been in use after the core and frame dies were changed, but were then themselves changed briefly), and their catches. From that point on they made the traditional L/18 or 26 marked Mayers we all know and love. Finally, after the war, they would have sold their (briefly-used) core dies to fakers making the "333" fakes some 60+ years later.

I think this is very unlikely.

[VonPeter]

You argue a strong case there Trevor.
Interesting how they can make a good ek2 copy but totaly miss out on the digits in 1813, especially the number 8.

[normandie]

So is it a fake or not?

/normandie

[5tefan]

So is it a fake or not?

/normandie

it's suspect, give us more time for analyse and additional opinion.

[5tefan]

it's suspect, give us more time for analyse and additional opinion.

Hi Trevor,

I'm back from work and I could see now the obverse pictures of the 333 fake.
Sorry but I'm not able to take your pictures for compare it with my pictures.

I wrote to normandie a PN and ask for sending me the cross for analyse and take some fotos.

Additional I ask wvdparis2 to return this shown EK1 on thread # 28 EK1 L/18 with early S&L Pin back. He will get his paid money back.

Than I need better pictures of the EK2 333 fake obverse, I will ask Grüni or Heinrich66.

At the moment it is very hard to understand why my cross was present in 5 differnet forums without claims and after 1 year it is suddenly a possible 333 fake.

Maybe it's also hard to see the pictures on thread #28 that this could be a 333 fake.

Now I like to clarify this item, but it will take a bit more time.

Sorry, for this inconvenience, but some crosses are very hard nuts.