KVK-1st no mm

[Douglas 5]

That is correct George .
Pat: I have gone over this cross some more . A S&L design looking at this fake first appeared no good .
Some of these are bad but it depends on the pin mount and as George indicated when it was made is tricky at times .
S&L had a lot of left over parts used in 57 types . And what I came across first was this Floch with the matching front .
He must have bought/obtained this front die and added a flat back plate die so he could add his own pin set to it .
In the end yours may be a war time piece - if that is the consensus of the majority .
Just dropping in the partial matching Floch comparison .

Douglas

[Chet Sowersby]

Pat,
I am primarily a Heer badge collector though I do pursue EK's time to time. In my opinion, ALL late war S&L products should be viewed with skepticism. They and Souval kept producing items after the war from left over stock. We now refer to such examples as "wartime compatible" If you only want one or two examples in your collection obtain one by another maker. Or if you absolutely want an example by S&L go with a tombac piece. It should be quite easy and there are thousands of these crosses available by al the makers in tombac or zinc.

Chet

[pdawg1911]

Thanks for all the feedback from all.

[Frank K]

Pat,
I am primarily a Heer badge collector though I do pursue EK's time to time. In my opinion, ALL late war S&L products should be viewed with skepticism. They and Souval kept producing items after the war from left over stock. We now refer to such examples as "wartime compatible" If you only want one or two examples in your collection obtain one by another maker. Or if you absolutely want an example by S&L go with a tombac piece. It should be quite easy and there are thousands of these crosses available by al the makers in tombac or zinc.

Chet

The cross in question looks like a good S&L to me as well.

If it's produced in April or June 1945 is hard to tell. The advice to go with a tombak piece, well 95% of S&L crosses ws in my files are zincers so can be difficult to find

If I should worry about something then it's the like straight-out-of-the-factory shining zinc crosses that exist. Why hasn't the finish been absorbed like the majority of crosses? Because they're younger than the rest or..?

[pdawg1911]

The cross in question looks like a good S&L to me as well.

If it's produced in April or June 1945 is hard to tell. The advice to go with a tombak piece, well 95% of S&L crosses ws in my files are zincers so can be difficult to find

If I should worry about something then it's the like straight-out-of-the-factory shining zinc crosses that exist. Why hasn't the finish been absorbed like the majority of crosses? Because they're younger than the rest or..?

Frank,

I have also wonder the same. It would seem to me, (granted I don't have a chemistry major) that if the zinc is absorbic, that over time, even a well stored example would absorb the zinc.

Regards,
Pat