Hi fellow collectors. I need some advice on this. I am saving money for an expensive purchase. I am buying a Ritterkreuz soon, in august, and I would like to know your opinions. Do you prefer a minty KC or a well worn one? And what about buying a named one or not? It's an expensive purchase so I would like to make sure before buying. Personally I find more interesting well worn crosses, used during the war. I find unissued examples less interesting. What do you think?
-
-
I'd prefer any I could get my hands on to be honest. If you have one with a history in your sights then that would be even better than a "never issued" piece. The history behind it makes it extra special. Looking forward to seeing the RK when you're able to get it. -
nice
You lucky man.If only i had the money to get one.I do not know enough to tell a real from fake .I will say this ,one that is as good as the day it was made does not give me the same feel.These pieces lack the feel of battle and more than often the power of command.The build up of dirt and smoke from combat looks great.( its a nice honest worn one for me ) i wish.Please post when you have it.All my regardsComment
-
I would get a worn RK every time; it would just have a way different "feeling" to having a mint one that had never been issued or seen any action.
Perhaps you have to ask yourself the question:
are you buying it for its looks
or are you buying it for its history
To me a mint badge or cross just doesnt "talk to me", there is no substance to it apart from aesthetics
where as one that has seen action makes me wish it could talk!
what do you think>?
cheers
daveComment
-
100% wrecked up worn down bad boy war horse
regards
jonComment
-
Thanks for your answers! Yes Dave, you are right. I prefer a well worn one. Those crosses can "talk". Minty examples are gorgeous due to the aesthetical appearance but they don't have any story behind. Personally I love those RK's with the modified ribbon to wear it around the neck and a nice patina. That gives them personality.Originally posted by DaveNZ View Post
Last edited by Gernika81; 02-16-2012, 08:02 PM.Comment
-
Worn, every time. The mint ones are pretty but have no "feel" to them.Comment
-
My preference would also be a worn example preferably with provenance. If you are stretching for funds it should also be much more affordable than the minty cased example.Comment
-
They're all good, in my humble opinion. I prefer the minty ones, but then again, I am partial. -GerComment
-
I like the look of a well worn medal/badge...but then again, I also like the look af a nice minty medal/bagde.
But if I ever get the money to buy a RK, I think i will go for one that is worn, and have a modified ribbon, where you can see the actual wear.
If provenance is possible, then that would just be even better. But is has to be rock solid provenence, where you can see the actual cross on a photo. Not the kind of provenance, where a dealer says it is from that guy or that guy. That provenance is in my opinion useless.
That is my opinion on this subject.
Have a nice weekend all of you.
/FlemmingComment
-
Unused, mint and still in its cellophane for me
NickComment
-
One of each
But if I should choose only one, I'll go for a minty one, they are just gorgeus
Comment
-
Im curious: whats the attraction to own a minty unworn KC?
surely you'd rather one that has seen the blood and iron of war
Comment
-
Dave , good point but I would rather have a brand new Ferrari than one with 100,000 miles on the clockOriginally posted by DaveNZ View PostIm curious: whats the attraction to own a minty unworn KC?
surely you'd rather one that has seen the blood and iron of war
Poor analogy I know mate
NickComment
-
Haha good point Nick. But having a piece that has been worn during the war is more attractive I think. And if it has known provenance even more.Comment
Comment