Unmarked cross, S&L(?)

[Dansson]

Hello,

pretty sure it is a S&L cross, someone just confim it for me. Thank you!
Pm me if interested also, I have a few other cross to offer.

Daniel


https://scontent-ams2-1.xx.fbcdn.net...8a&oe=55F40B0E



https://scontent-ams2-1.xx.fbcdn.net...52&oe=55F5AA2E

[Douglas 5]

Yes ... looks like an S&L .

Douglas

[boch_62]

I agree, this might be S&L.

Regards
Jarek

[Dansson]

I got a opinion from a other very experienced and well known collector that it could be a Gottlieb & Wagner.

What do you think?

[Douglas 5]

After pulling up a 52 to compare ... very well could be .

Douglas

[Dansson]

Thank you!
He also said that the cross could be intermixed that it is not a full "52" because the back is a Gottlieb but from the front he was not sure. But he was of the opinion that it was not a S&L.
Has he got any point?

Daniel.

[Douglas 5]

Now you got me going .
The more I compare it - the more I have to stick with S&L .
Have a look at the core reverse .

Douglas

[Douglas 5]

Even with a comparison of the back is a still a match with a S&L core .

Douglas

[Dansson]

Douglas, a big thanks to you!

I am very glad that you put time on the cross and you even told me the frame and core types. 1st frame type and second core type from S&L, right. The comparison pictures were a great add!

Daniel.

[Douglas 5]

Well Daniel ... S&L crosses have their challenges ... especially with unmarked pieces as S&L supplied so many companies with cross components and tooling . Some used S&L frames but their own cores . When another company uses S&L frames and core and the ring is not marked ---- due to lack of any other evidence/documentation - it is for now an unmarked S&L EK2 .

Douglas