Early Juncker replacement 1914 EKI...

[streptile]

I have a question: where the called "common L/12 type frame" comes from ? is it a frame that Juncker designed and produced ?

Good question and I don't know the answer. I believe it was a frame Juncker designed and produced, but I have no proof. I know I've never seen it on anything but a Juncker, and I don't think it comes from any of Juncker's other frames but this research lies in the future. It's commonly found on L/12 marked EKs although the "crunch-bead" frame can also be found marked L/12 on both EK1s and EK2s.

[fabri-online]

thanks Trevor. I have asked it because typical details of this frame type are cutted corners and 5 o clock inner edge, like it was too big to contain a swaz and to do not pass on date. This let me think that it was not planned and designed for these cores, almost looks an adjustament. And.. why normally they have flawed beads ? quite strange to find this frame just on some marked L/12.. I think we 'll remain surprised when we 'll find all answers about.

[Robert P.]

I'll post two different L/12-marked crosses, both with the same frame and same core. One has the 5:00 corner filed for a good core fit while the other has no filing at all, but fits inside the frame nicely...? Same cores, same frames. Food for thought...

Robert

[Douglas 5]

Interesting crosses Robert !

I have been looking at flaws and features to match the frame dies .
The magnification has somewhat bleared the points of interest that I have to ask you to have a look - just to verify the points of interest .
As you see I rotated the one cross to match the 'In-dent flaw'( over time which has been forgotten) .
The bead 'mis-alignments ' on the one cross is something seen with a few makers - and is either
a: the result of using miss-matched top or bottom working dies . .. or b: both matching working die halves were not lined up with both "tops" not being in the same place/position .
It is a lot of fine/ preceise work to set up a transparent bead tracing - but one could find out which senario applies here to your cross by rotating the transparency to find a position that matches .
Now just as a wild guess ... as only 2 oposite arms show this mis-alignment - that n die was rotaded 180 degrees .... just my thought .
Hope you don't mind all the question .

Cheers, Douglas

[Robert P.]

Douglas,

I'm sorry, I don't see the frames being rotated or out of alignment with one-another. I've attached a photo showing identical flaws in the corners of three of my L/12-marked EKI frames. The arrow points to a corner which has a corner/web flaw which resembles the Juncker Schinkel corner flaws, and in the smaller red circle a series of horizontal line cracks (flaws) on the beading, which are evident on all three L/12 EKI crosses, and only in one corner of the frames. No, no rotation.

No sign of lug removal on any of the three L/12 frames.

And, no vertical 'crack lines' where you indicate.

Robert

[Robert P.]

This is a poor photo but I think it illustrates well the orientation of all three of my L/12-marked frames being the same and not rotated. There are slight variations due to die wear in each frame but I have circled the more obvious of corners to help with the comparison of the three.

This has moved far from the original intent of the thread, but I just wanted to lay to rest this point and move forward.

Not to step on anyone's toes here; just to state my opinion. Please don't take offense.

Robert

[Douglas 5]

Every thing is fine Robert .
In a hurry I messed up the picture and the question I tried to make . As pointed out it is deviating too far away on this thread and will make a new thread .

Douglas