EK1's "Juncker" or "WL"

[90th Light]

Could I please ask if these EK1 are Junckers or not ???

One appears to be a "Juncker" made from "WL" parts or may be it is made by "WL" and not Juncker at all ???

Any help or advise would be much appreciated,

Chris

[Rich G]

I think the easiest way is by looking at the hinge/pin/catch. When you have problems distinguishing the frames/cores, the pin will always differiencate them.

The left one is Juncker, the right W&L.

[90th Light]

Pin open & close up,

Chris

[plaut]

As Rich said, left is Juncker and right W&L.

[Thomas Durante]

I think the easiest way is by looking at the hinge/pin/catch.

BLASPHEMY!!! Don't you know Rich, its impossible to tell a maker by looking at the hinge/pin/catch

Tom

[AndyC]

Good Juncker and W&L EKI crosses


Andy

[Robert P.]

In my personal collecting of Juncker crosses I found that the Juncker company used many cores in their crosses - W&L, S&L and unknown cores by other manufacturers. Below is a chart/montage Douglas put together with cores we found in Juncker frames. I personally found type 5 and 6 core types to be found regularly in Juncker's early 3-flaw frames, although other cores were found also. 5 and 6 core types have the 'teardrop 9' style in their dates. This style core(s) I have always attributed to the Juncker company, true Juncker cores. By no means am I saying that Juncker had no other cores later on in their cross evolution, but these two cores, type 5 and 6 were their early cores.

The early Juncker EKII cross in the lower photo has type 5 core in Juncker's 3-flaw frame. Circled are the flawed areas on the frame.

Robert

[streptile]

Juncker did use multiple cores -- that much is certainly true. But in my opinion that core chart needs some revision or updating. It makes some artificial distinctions and also some doubtful claims.

[Rich G]

BLASPHEMY!!! Don't you know Rich, its impossible to tell a maker by looking at the hinge/pin/catch

Tom

Nice try Tom but in this case there are already marked Juncker EK1's to reference against whereas in the other area you refer to, there are none. So here we have a proven connection whereas yours is just a theory.


I do hope one day you find that elusive maker marked example but until then you have no conclusive connection.

Rich

[Douglas 5]

The only error I see immediately Trevor - is ' F ' - which is a core in a flaw frame EK1 ... and so far has not been seen in a an EK2 .

Douglas

[Robert P.]

Juncker did use multiple cores -- that much is certainly true. But in my opinion that core chart needs some revision or updating. It makes some artificial distinctions and also some doubtful claims.

Perhaps you are right. I can only speak for myself when I say that I found all of the numbered cores on the chart in the early 3-flaw Juncker frames, both 1st and 2nd class. This is quite true.

Robert

[Thomas Durante]

Nice try Tom but in this case there are already marked Juncker EK1's to reference against whereas in the other area you refer to, there are none. So here we have a proven connection whereas yours is just a theory.


I do hope one day you find that elusive maker marked example but until then you have no conclusive connection.

Rich

Hehe Rich, I just like to stoke the fire every now and then

Just the fact that you realize that different makers can be determined from the hardware means we are making progress

There certainly are connections to the makers, but whether they are "conclusive" or not is up to each person to decide for themselves.

Tom

[Robert P.]

The only error I see immediately Trevor - is ' F ' - which is a core in a flaw frame EK1 ... and so far has not been seen in a an EK2 .

Douglas

Douglas,

When you say 'flaw frame EKI' are you referring to the 3-flaw Juncker frame? If so, why is there an issue? The chart simply states that the cores therein are found in Juncker frames...?

Robert

[streptile]

The earliest core Juncker used is no. 1 in the chart. This is no S&L core, but a Juncker core in my opinion. Further, I think cores 1, 4, B and F may be the same die at different stages of life and photographed under different conditions. Also I think 5 and 6 may be the same die, and possibly E and C also. Just my opinion

[Douglas 5]

Yes Robert ... when typing I left out the 3 as I see now . Trevor has an issue with it ... not me .

Douglas