Wieght on my EK 1 maker marked "3" is about 16 gr. My electronic letter scale only has a division on 2. gr .
Lillegutt
(PS ! All my original EK 1 have a weight about 16. gr . I checked my L 15 , EK 1 copy , and this has a weight about 18 gr. , and a freind of my has also a L 15 with weight about 18 gr. Look like the L 15 copy is heavier than originals EK 1 . )
Are you saying that all maker's mark that have the L/11 w/o the box are bad, or asking that question?
Of all the EK1's (crosses themselves) I have seen, they all have had a box, but I have seen other pieces, including my EK2 Spange in this post, which do not have the box. Are there original EK1 crosses that have the L/11 mark w/o the box?
I have seen the boxless L/11 stamp on other items like War Merit Crosses (1st class) and miniature Mother's Crosses that Deumer had made and wondered if this was a change made during a certain time period or if the crosses were the only items marked within the box.
Does anyone know when and why Deumer shifted from the L/11 mark to the number 3 or vice versa? It is my opinion that the "3" came later, is that correct?
Tim
Actually, two different systems - the "L" numbering was used for private purchased items, where the "Arabic" number was used for issued pieces. For more clarification, see this link,
Thanks for that, as I should remember reading that somewhere before as well.
I was still under the notion that firms did in fact change their LDO #'s due in part to dropping out of and re-entering the LDO listing during the war and wondered if that might have happened to Deumer as well. Is it possible that the change in the L/11 (boxed) and (unboxed) occured sometime after something like this occured?
Your point on the two numbering systems is fully noted and agreed upon.
I guess what I was trying to get to was that the quality of the L/11 items, in general, seem to be of much better quality and more commonly found on earlier metals compared to the pieces with the number "3", (at least on the items that I have seen). I should not have lumped the two issues together.
Tim
Comment