Klein & Quenzer A.G.

[tom hansen]

I am sure the guy would not mind at all. He seemed like a very nice fellow and was actually very interested in the whole issue, as he said the standard stuff he gets is pretty boring. I was suprised at how cheap it was for a SEM- this may be something, based on these results that some of you fellows may want to have done on other items. We will see.

[milsurp]

I am very interested in the results as well, I think as time goes on the more and more we will have to rely on technology to help.

[Rich G]

This probably doesn't mean much but there is a K&Q RK in the 'for sale' forums which is said to belong to Horst Naumann 3. / St.Gesch.Abt. 184. While the seller states he cannot confirm that that is true, if it is that would mean that K&Q RKs were being produced before January 1943. Does that not blow the 'late war' theory clean out of the water?

I'm curious as to what is the earliest date that a K&Q RK can be attributed to? Of course, it doesn't mean much if the award photos are not clear as the cross could be a later replacement, for whatever reason.

[Peter Wiking]

I am sure the guy would not mind at all. He seemed like a very nice fellow and was actually very interested in the whole issue, as he said the standard stuff he gets is pretty boring. I was suprised at how cheap it was for a SEM- this may be something, based on these results that some of you fellows may want to have done on other items. We will see.

Let us know Tom.

Cheers.
Peter

[Sebastian Bianchi]

I just talked to the analytical lab at Iowa State University and they have agreed to analyze my K&Q and a "standard". I will use a juncker cross with provenance for the known "standard" for paint. The presumption with this is that black paint used by the firms will be comparable with regard to elemental composition. The technique reccommended was scanning electron microscopy with elemental analysis. This can be performed cheaply ($85 per hour) and accurately. Very interesting. I just need to block out some time to take a jaunt up to Iowa State- exciting news for me.


I agree that this is an "art", but so is medicine. There we rely upon judgement and experience, but also heavily upon technology to deliniate anatomical and chemical derangements. I think if we look upon this as a nice, cheap, incredibly helpful test, it may be used to detect and evaluate other potential inconsistencies (fakes).

Out of curiosity, what's the provenance of the Juncker "standard"?

[tom hansen]

Out of curiosity, what's the provenance of the Juncker "standard"?

I was just considering that. Now the juncker is a "800 dot" posthumous award with a letter to the widow, but I think a better standard would be a K&Q EK1 or EK2. This would have the same paint as an RK and would be a better standard considering the possiblity that there were different paints used by diffferent makers. Now not being an EK1 or EK2 collector, I am suddenly in the need for one. The boys have EK1s and EK2s, but I checked and there are no K&Qs.


Anybody want to cough one up for a reasonable price in the name of science?

[milsurp]

Sorry Tom, I don't have one other wise I would donate it. I agree, I think you have a much better chance of success if you stay within the same company.

Good luck!

[Sebastian Bianchi]

I was just considering that. Now the juncker is a "800 dot" posthumous award with a letter to the widow, but I think a better standard would be a K&Q EK1 or EK2. This would have the same paint as an RK and would be a better standard considering the possiblity that there were different paints used by diffferent makers. Now not being an EK1 or EK2 collector, I am suddenly in the need for one. The boys have EK1s and EK2s, but I checked and there are no K&Qs.


Anybody want to cough one up for a reasonable price in the name of science?

When you're ready to go, I can let you borrow one (I'll send it to you!).

Not to disrupt your efforts, Tom, but playing devil’s advocate - who's to say 1000% that my EK II isn't a fake? Or any of them that you test for that matter? Now, I know they're not through study and comparison, but it's not a proven science.

Also, did they use different paint on the EK and RK? I get the feeling that the RK is more of a satin and the EK a flat black.

[tom hansen]

When you're ready to go, I can let you borrow one (I'll send it to you!).

Not to disrupt your efforts, Tom, but playing devil’s advocate - who's to say 1000% that my EK II isn't a fake? Or any of them that you test for that matter? Now, I know they're not through study and comparison, but it's not a proven science.

Also, did they use different paint on the EK and RK? I get the feeling that the RK is more of a satin and the EK a flat black.

You have pointed out the same problem with any study. The identification of an appropriate "control" group and an adequate sample size. It is possible that an EK1 or EK2 could be faked as well. I would assume, that if original, the paint on the cores would be the same from the same shop and may more of an apprpriate control than, say a juncker. There are alot of paint manufacturers in the US (and I assume as well in wartime germany) and it is entirely possible that juncker may have used a different brand than K&Q. It is likely that the chemical composition for a given country at a given point in time would be similar, given the lack of imports that would be occurring during wartime. Maybe a couple of "standards" would be good to reduce any individual deviations.

What do you guys think? I think the K&Q EK1 or EK2 would be better than a juncker or S&L RK. If you can send a "loaner", that would be great. Otherwise, I will buy a couple of K&Q EK2s and use them as the paint standard for anyone that has one or two. Any thoughts?

[Sebastian Bianchi]

You have pointed out the same problem with any study. The identification of an appropriate "control" group and an adequate sample size. It is possible that an EK1 or EK2 could be faked as well. I would assume, that if original, the paint on the cores would be the same from the same shop and may more of an apprpriate control than, say a juncker. There are alot of paint manufacturers in the US (and I assume as well in wartime germany) and it is entirely possible that juncker may have used a different brand than K&Q. It is likely that the chemical composition for a given country at a given point in time would be similar, given the lack of imports that would be occurring during wartime. Maybe a couple of "standards" would be good to reduce any individual deviations.

What do you guys think? I think the K&Q EK1 or EK2 would be better than a juncker or S&L RK. If you can send a "loaner", that would be great. Otherwise, I will buy a couple of K&Q EK2s and use them as the paint standard for anyone that has one or two. Any thoughts?

So again playing devil's advocate, I don't think any control group will be good enough to prove anything scientifically, because you can just turn and question the control group. At best, you are only going to establish that those two pieces were made around the same time with roughly the same paint.

While it's possible that K&Q used different paint than Juncker, it's also possible that they used two different paints in different years.

This can be an additional tool, but it certainly won't stop debate. At some point, you take all the facts and come to your own conclution, one that will let you enjoy the pieces you have.

[milsurp]

I still think this is a worthwhile exercise. It is unchartered territory and as such you never know what you might find. I do however feel you have to be 99%-100% sure as to the authenticity of the EK before you begin.

[Dave Kane]

Who's going to step up and send Tom a cross???


Afterall he's going to assume the cost of testing and I'm sure it's not going to be limited to the $85. per hour...

Don't forget we all benefit to some degree! I think that this is not a BORROWING matter as I feel a lot more paint than expected will be needed....a medal has to be sacraficed to a degree

[Sebastian Bianchi]

Who's going to step up and send Tom a cross???


Afterall he's going to assume the cost of testing and I'm sure it's not going to be limited to the $85. per hour...

Don't forget we all benefit to some degree! I think that this is not a BORROWING matter as I feel a lot more paint than expected will be needed....a medal has to be sacraficed to a degree

I don't mind buying one and sending it to die... but.... is the same to be said for Tom's RK?

(that's why I assumed just borrowing a few EK I & II would be ok).

If this pans out somehow I wouldn't mind paying a few hundred dollars to have an RK examined, we just needs to cover all the basis, like the control group issue. Otherwise, it's a waste of time and resources.

[Dave Kane]

I would hope that the basic tests could be done on the IC2nd....boil down the data and then (with luck) compare to the RK after a 'common' factor is found!


This may diminish the paint needed from the RK?

Frankly, I'd support a 'chip in' to pay for the entire experiment...

[Marc Garlasco]

Tom,
I have a super 65 EK1 you can use if it is minimally invasive...

I don't want to seem a wimp, but she is sweet, and Jim (Panzerman) would have my head. He'll understand...

Regards,
Marc