Announcement

**George Stimson** · 08-05-2002, 09:12 PM

And here's another cased L/11 EK 2 Spange.

George

**Dez H** · 08-06-2002, 02:45 AM

Could others post weights for comparison?
Mine is 15.1 grams.

Thanks in advance.

Regards

Dez

**Tim Calvert** · 08-06-2002, 03:34 AM

15.6

**Jan Arne S** · 08-06-2002, 06:00 AM

My EK 1 "3"

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 . )

**Sebastian Bianchi** · 08-06-2002, 09:27 PM

The L/11 shown early in the thread - 16g.

Seba

**George Stimson** · 08-14-2002, 07:27 PM

For some reason I overlooked this "3"- marked EK 2 for this thread....

George

**Frank Heukemes** · 08-15-2002, 07:25 PM

...yes, that´s what it says.

Cheers, Frank H.

**rkoy** · 08-17-2002, 02:27 PM

hi all

the L11 w/o the box are wrong? also if the catch is flat wire rather than round? look at colins on the estand and tell me if its right? thanks rodney

**Tim B.** · 08-18-2002, 07:42 PM

Rodney,

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

**Sebastian Bianchi** · 08-18-2002, 08:18 PM

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,

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/reserach_tools/ldo.htm

Seba

**Tim B.** · 08-19-2002, 01:46 AM

Seba,

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

**Bruce Simcox** · 08-19-2002, 11:27 PM

Finally.....

....got around to taking pics of my Deumer. Here they are and I hope that they are ok.

--------------------

Bruce

Attached Files

ek1_deumer_frnt.jpg (35.3 KB, 487 views)

**Bruce Simcox** · 08-19-2002, 11:28 PM

Image 2.....

.....here:

Attached Files

ek1_deumer_reverse.jpg (25.0 KB, 486 views)

**Bruce Simcox** · 08-19-2002, 11:30 PM

Image 3.....

oops

**Bruce Simcox** · 08-19-2002, 11:31 PM

Image 3.....

really is here:

Attached Files

ek1_deumer_date.jpg (30.8 KB, 482 views)

Announcement

Wilhelm Deumer L/11 (more minters)

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread