Klein & Quenzer A.G.

[Sebastian Bianchi]

Come on now girls....stay on topic and let's really have a good look at this!!!!


My K&Q IC1st is really just worn out...so I could accept a change in the core and frame but for a Knight's Cross....that's a bit harder to swallow IMHO!

Come on boys...!

Brian, it doesn't disqualify you, but it's interesting. I'm generally interested in what people collect. What do you collect? Your profile says "WWI Prussia ". Nah, never mind, we'll get into that another time or via PM. In fact I might start a separate thread on it.

Getting back to the topic at hand, generally we can establish a baseline of accepted characteristics, and there will always be variations. I must say that's not a core I'm used to seen (the one with what looks like thinner numbers).

[Brian S]

I hope as I get all the RK's from these Luftwaffe RK winners photos sorted out I will find at least one KQ where the cross is clear enough to see the numbers in such a way that we can distinguish these. But that's really wishful thinking to get that kind of clarity on the cross itself. But you never know if I don't have one someone else might.

[Sebastian Bianchi]

I hope as I get all the RK's from these Luftwaffe RK winners photos sorted out I will find at least one KQ where the cross is clear enough to see the numbers in such a way that we can distinguish these. But that's really wishful thinking to get that kind of clarity on the cross itself. But you never know if I don't have one someone else might.

Try different contrasts.

[tom hansen]

Here is another font from an early cross that appears "thin" relative to its cousins.

[Brian S]

Tom, that's a Juncker.

[Harry]

I wonder if we could get Frank S to post a pic of the 1813 date on his provenanced K&Q??

[tom hansen]

Tom, that's a Juncker.

Brian, I know it is a juncker. Look at the "thin" appearance of the digits here as well compared to the early K&Q and other later juncker pieces. This is an early piece as well. Perhaps the "thin" appearing digits is a feature that is seen on some early crosses, regardless of maker. This piece was awarded 6/40, which makes it a contemporary of Frank's piece. Also, this is a zinc cored cross. Is Frank's piece magnetic or a non-magnetic core?

[Brian S]

Tom, I get it. And you're right at least in principle. Several crosses began 1914 as very thin stylistic numerals. And several crosses began 1939 with 1914 type numerals. I think whatever it is we are probably seeing a 1939 with thinner rounded numbers and then a more blocked lettering with high relief.

I know what you're saying. Here's my grandfather's EK1 received as an Oberst and replaced. Won in 1914 and very crude in appearance (look how thin it is!). I didn't think the KQ RK differences were this severe.

[Erich B.]

Here's a thought--would it be conceivable that a maker would have initially designed the thinner, elegant numbers and later made them thicker (by working the die) to make them look bolder?
Erich

[FrankS]

The numbers are actually not that thin. Here a shot from a different angle.
Both photos show the Ravenstein cross.

[FrankS]

The details of the core are very crisp. It is finished in a very dull/matt black.

[FrankS]

Here is the 1813 of the Ravenstein cross

[Luftstalag1]

K&Q marking?

So has anyone ever experienced one of the K&Q's marked with anything other then 800? I have come across one with no ribbon loop and I can not find any other photos to compare it with. Or would the list of flaws be the only way to truly ID it?Thx!

[Ludwig]

So has anyone ever experienced one of the K&Q's marked with anything other then 800? I have come across one with no ribbon loop and I can not find any other photos to compare it with. Or would the list of flaws be the only way to truly ID it?Thx!

Post good quality photos and let´s have a look!

[Luftstalag1]

Post good quality photos and let´s have a look!

I am trying to get it in hand now. With luck next week I can get some scans/photos to post.