Unmarked Cased EK1 is it good ?

[leibregiment]

Welcome your thoughts on this, many thanks, Paul

[leibregiment]

case

[BonzaiCam]

Hi

In my opinion it is a original Grossmann & Co EK1.

Thanks

Cameron

[leibregiment]

Thanks Cameron

[streptile]

In my opinion an original by Deumer.

[BonzaiCam]

Hi

See link

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...ann+ek1&page=2

Thanks

Cameron

[streptile]

Hi Cameron,

This EK1 is a Deumer.

Some -- very few, in fact -- of this same type are known marked "11." There is some debate about whether those stamps are mis-stamped "L/11" stamps, or whether they indicate some relationship between Grossmann and Deumer. However, some well-known facts militate against this latter interpretation:

1. The cross itself is pure 100% Deumer;
2. Grossmann EK2s are totally different in design from this cross;
3. Grossmann presumably had some relationship with L/19, as L/19's EK1s use the same frame and core as Grossmann's EK2s.

All of this is irrelevant, however, on an unmarked cross such as the one under discussion here. Absent the "11" mark, the cross has no putative link to Grossmann, and is considered a Deumer.

Best,
Trevor

PS (edit): In my opinion the "11" stamped crosses are in fact early mistakes -- a misunderstanding of the LDO instructions by Deumer. This is likely in my view because all "11" stamped crosses seem to have Deumer's early/mid pin type -- later than the Schinkel but earlier than the final, swollen Deumer pin we all know and love. This would place that particular pin type in use somewhere right around the introduction of the LDO in very early 1941, when some early misunderstandings of the coding system would have been possible.

[BonzaiCam]

Hi

OK thanks I will try and remember that for the future.

Thanks

Cameron

[leibregiment]

Trevor, great information, many thanks, Paul