My new frosting WWI, EKI,L16 made in WWII .

[dornier]

Hello I hope you like it,it has small veins in the iron core.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[streptile]

That's a very nice cross, but I think the mark may be a fake one. The cross is a textbook Deumer (L/11) and not an S&L (L/16). Can you please show a close shot of the stamp?

[dornier]

That's a very nice cross, but I think the mark may be a fake one. The cross is a textbook Deumer (L/11) and not an S&L (L/16). Can you please show a close shot of the stamp?

Dear Sir I think that if I want to do a fake ,if it is a L11 text book,I put L11 in the EKI, and not L16,I am going to talk with the seller.

[streptile]

Dear Sir I think that if I want to do a fake ,if it is a L11 text book,I put L11 in the EKI, and not L16,I am going to talk with the seller.

...if the faker knew the cross is an L/11, then he would put an L/11 mark . But I doubt he knew the cross is an L/11.

Also, the faker would also have to make an L/11 stamp. Probably he had the fake L/16 stamp already, and just marked the cross with what he had.

If you have a chance to return this cross, I would.

PS: Here is an authentic L/16 mark:

[dornier]

That's a very nice cross, but I think the mark may be a fake one. The cross is a textbook Deumer (L/11) and not an S&L (L/16). Can you please show a close shot of the stamp?

Not problem I will put the photo and you will see that the mark is not added
you can see the silver is perfect inside the mark and outside,this variants are normal at the end of the war,you can see that the "C" catch is typical of Deumer,
this can to be a variant to an L16.

[Flemming]

In my opinion, that MM was added at a later stage. You can see the frame have an indent, where the stamp was added. You do not see that on authentic MM.

/Flemming

[Exile]

In my opinion, that MM was added at a later stage. You can see the frame have an indent, where the stamp was added. You do not see that on authentic MM.

/Flemming

I have to agree 100% with Flemming. The mark does indeed look like it was added later and has indented the frame.

While still a nice looking cross, the fake mark takes it down from 'great' to only 'good' IMHO.

Sometimes I wish I could find the guys that ruin nice crosses by adding these fake marks and kick them in the nuts.

Matt

[AndyC]

Its a good Deumer for me exept for the fake mark


Andy

[dornier]

This mark is not added, otherwise the plattered cover will be damaged, and the metal under it will be shown. The mark can be observed with a magnifying glass and can be confirmed that it is not an extra added it is the original stamp.
Paying attention to the detail on the enlarged photo, it is very clear that it is not an added stamp, and even more, the modification of the L/11 into a L/16 seems simply impossible.
Generally in this Iron Cross model of 1914 the manufacture from Steinhauer and Deumer are sharing lots of similitudes; the only discrepancy point is the lock, that in this piece is a type that looks like a Deumer´s. This fact can be explained with multiple reasons. The most faithfull is that this is a variation, something very common in the manufactures of the final production of the war.

The indent can to be a hit too,in this zone,in any case I bought the cross because is an mint and nice condition cross ,no for the mark,for me it is only importan that the cross is authentic.

I am sure that a lot of people,have in this moment text book items with perfect marks and there are fakes, we can to say ,I think,in my opinion, or to say :

" I doubt he knew the cross is an L/11. "
"Probably he had the fake L/16 stamp already,"

¿could you say me the eyes colour to the person who did the fake too?

IT is very sad that one item,lost some valor,for suppositions in things ,I think it is imposible to know.

Thanks to all,but for me is not important the mark is the cross.

[streptile]

Hi Dornier,

Generally in this Iron Cross model of 1914 the manufacture from Steinhauer and Deumer are sharing lots of similitudes; the only discrepancy point is the lock, that in this piece is a type that looks like a Deumer´s.

This is not true. Deumer and S&L used different frames, cores, pins, hinges and catches (or "locks").

Your cross has a Deumer frame, a Deumer core, a Deumer pin, and a Deumer hinge. The cross is 100% Deumer.

Not one component was ever used on a S&L EK1.

Also, the L/16 mark is not correct.

So you have a cross that is 100% Deumer, with a mark (for another company) that does not match the cross, and does not match known original marks for the company that it purports to be.

If you say the mark is original to the back-plate, then perhaps the entire cross is newly made, but I doubt this. The cross, from these photos, looks good to me. But the mark is not original to this cross, in my opinion.

for me it is only importan that the cross is authentic.

It is only you who has to be happy with this cross. If you are happy with it, then great

[dornier]

Streptile ,thanks,how I have said I bought this croos not for the mark ,and I am happy with it.but I think that can to be perfectly L16,it is my opinion.
Thanks again.

[streptile]

Streptile ,thanks,how I have said I bought this croos not for the mark.

The cross seems to be a very nice piece -- felicitaciones

[dornier]

The cross seems to be a very nice piece -- felicitaciones

thanks again and I sorry but I still think that it is possible to be an L16.

[Douglas 5]

Must say that the last number in the mark look strange ?? Looks more like the last 1 that was re-struck with a 3 or 8 ?
May have started out as a L/11 ??

Douglas

[dornier]

Must say that the last number in the mark look strange ?? Looks more like the last 1 that was re-struck with a 3 or 8 ?
May have started out as a L/11 ??

Douglas

More invents not please I am going to put another photo.