EK1 1939 without MM - Opinion???

[Douglas 5]

A picture I borrowed -- smooth W&L back and the regular rough Juncker back plate .
Bottom : A W&L made/finished Juncker 3 flaw frame EK2 . .. so why not EK1s ?

Douglas

[boch_62]

Solder colour doesn't depend on time. The Juncker solder is a lot softer than the much harder W&L solder.

Where I would date the cross? Early.
Motive?
Juncker bought up AWS, and used the AWS frames in the so called "Juncker Schinkel". During World War 2, Juncker also made 1914 crosses with the AWS core inside it. Well, I've owned a few specimen of World War 2 made 1914 crosses by Juncker, both factory vaulted, both with AWS core, Juncker pin, Juncker catch, dark solder, a rough reverse surface... but with a W&L frame.
Due to regulations, factory vaulting on crosses was forbidden around march 1940, which makes any factory vaulted piece pre-April 1940.

As you should know Jarek, Juncker's later L/12 marked 1914 crosses with an LDO frame do as well have the AWS core in it. I haven't seen so far any marked 1914 for W&L or any 1914 made during World War 2 made by Wächtler & Lange.

None of the W&L framed crosses with AWS 1914 core had a W&L pin, W&L catch or smooth W&L finish. They had a Juncker pin, a rough Juncker finish, a Juncker catch and a core owned by Juncker.


There's no evidence W&L used Juncker setups or Juncker finishes on their own parts (never seen a Juncker framed cross with a W&L setup), but there is evidence which I have presented that Juncker used W&L cores and frames and are distinguished by the reverse hardware, finnish and setup.



I'm convinced this cross is made by Juncker.

Daniel, I'm not saying that you're wrong, I just want to understand that it's definitely the Juncker's cross, not the W&L cross, where the Juncker's needle was used
A little (IMO probably unnecessarily) You complicated the matter, to mix in all this AWS crosses, it is probably unnecessary in this particular example.

An example of the use of the W&L crosses in Juncker's production is also in the case of the EK2-1939 crosses, but this was most likely after the bombing of the Juncker's Factory and on time of Juncker's production problems.

This cross here raises my doubts, and because of the time of its production (early or late) and because of the only element that does not fit to the W&L crosses, is the needle.
If You were in this W&L cross, had a typical needle for W&L, then You would say it's a W&L cross. Or so?
Because here is the crux of everything. Of course IMO and with full understanding
I do not insist.

Regards
Jarek

[Dansson]

An example of the use of the W&L crosses in Juncker's production is also in the case of the EK2-1939 crosses, but this was most likely after the bombing of the Juncker's Factory and on time of Juncker's production problems.

Well Juncker was bombed in December 1944 (if I recall correctly) and Juncker didn't ever make EK's for the PKZ.

But anyways, I lay my case and base my opinion on this that W&L did not use those materials as seen on the cross here, but Juncker did, see it for yourself. W&L did have a different Finnish on their crosses, and the setup is Juncker on that cross. Not only the pin. Out of my memory I can't remember seeing a W&L with a round catch wire, could you show me one?


Mixing AWS cores to the disussion is necessary, you know Juncker owned all the AWS dies, and that W&L made no 1914 crosses.

Here is a picture of a cross I used to have. Juncker reverse setup, AWS core but W&L frame. Look at the rough surface and the overall material used on this one and compare it to the thread starter.

Question, if this 1914 had a W&L core... would it still be a Juncker or would it become W&L for you?

[Douglas 5]

Here is one - W&L with round catch . A picture I got a long time ago ... sorry did not mark the owner back then .
I think Robert Pierce had one also - if I am not mistaken .
Looking for more .

Douglas

[Dansson]

If I am not mistaken the pin seems to be a Juncker pin, same pin as on my AWS cored EK1 which is also vaulted. So questions raised and answers silent.

[Douglas 5]

One more : W&L pin with the oblong Juncker C-catch .

Douglas

[Douglas 5]

Not a Juncker pin on the previous one ... the a-symmetric top indicates W&L pin .

Douglas

[Dansson]

That one has the W&L pin and Juncker catch. Interesting.

Now we must return to the original question, is the thread starter cross a Juncker or a W&L. We have evidence and good points on both sides pointed out.

I vote Juncker built cross that has both W&L frame and W&L core.

What do others say, please let your voices be heard!

[boch_62]

Well Juncker was bombed in December 1944 (if I recall correctly) and Juncker didn't ever make EK's for the PKZ.
....
Mixing AWS cores to the disussion is necessary, you know Juncker owned all the AWS dies, and that W&L made no 1914 crosses.
....

Daniel, it's all the facts, but I do not support them and it does not change anything in our discussion ... I do not understand why you cite them?

W&L with round catch You have on page 774-775 of F.Thater's "Das Eiserne Kreuz 1. Klasse von 1939".

I understand your arguments, but today they do not convince me.
Let's stay at our own opinions (I am in doubt), because I see that further discussion may end with unnecessary conflict

Regards
Jarek

[Dansson]

W&L with round catch You have on page 774-775 of F.Thater's "Das Eiserne Kreuz 1. Klasse von 1939".
(...)
I see that further discussion may end with unnecessary conflict

Regards
Jarek

I agree, I as well wish to avoid conflicts You're a wise man Jarek to know that it's best if we stop here.

Best is perhaps to leave the cross as W&L/Juncker cross, without making any strong statements which it is as there doesn't seem to be a clear answer to this, I did realise this while this thread was going on. The cross certanly raises more question than it answers.


It has for sure been activating to have a propper debate after a long time.

Douglas, you sure do know to dig up good reference pictures. Thanks for contributing as always.

PS. I've never owned that book you refer to so I can't check it up. All observations I have ever made are based on what my own eyes tell me.

[boch_62]

I agree, I as well wish to avoid conflicts You're a wise man Jarek to know that it's best if we stop here.

Best is perhaps to leave the cross as W&L/Juncker cross, without making any strong statements which it is as there doesn't seem to be a clear answer to this, I did realise this while this thread was going on. The cross certanly raises more question than it answers.


It has for sure been activating to have a propper debate after a long time.

Douglas, you sure do know to dig up good reference pictures. Thanks for contributing as always.

PS. I've never owned that book you refer to so I can't check it up. All observations I have ever made are based on what my own eyes tell me.