the 5 looks a tad off, ill post images of the front here in a couple hours
-
-
the front
heres the frontLast edited by Anthony Evans; 02-14-2005, 11:26 AM. -
Anthony,
The reverse looks exactly like the one pictured in Gordon Williamson's book on page 142. I can't really tell about the front because of the angle of the picture. I do not own a 65 Ek 1 But I have an EK 2 and I am wondering if the front "3" in the date is different between classes.
BrianComment
-
That is a nice 65. I dont mind the loss off the 5 top, maybe they did have a bad day wen they stampt this one and did hold the tool a bit wrong. Any way the back side is ok, i can even see what many off them have a pin not at center on the hinge.
MikaelComment
-
Is there something written on the back of the cross??Comment
-
It's a "Short 3" K&Q EK 1 -- yes?GeorgeComment
-
yes i think the recipient of it let the name is Henrich SchuldtComment
-
Appears to be, and looks slightly vaulted.Originally posted by George StimsonComment
-
9.17.41 and runes over the name??Originally posted by Anthony Evans
Is that the motto "my honor is true"???
Do you mind if I ask where it came from??Comment
-
yes that is there moto, its on a selling blockComment
-
Is it just me ... or does the reverse appear a little too dirty and messy compared to the Obverse condition?
Trying to hide something? Then again maybe just my paranoid self.
Comment
-
I don't know Darrell, you might be right on this one. The damage (wear) on the back almost looks to be chemically induced.
Maybe someone messing with a good cross to jack up the selling price. Anything SS is doubled in price???
Anthony, what is the asking price if you don't mind my asking??Comment
-
right now 110 now the question is good cross bad signitureComment
-
110 (dollars) ??
Is this an auction?
I don't know without holding it. Darrell has a good point about the back though. The wear isn't consistent.Comment
-
ya its an auction. so bad cross?
Comment
Comment