Announcement

**Luftm40** · 03-24-2005, 08:00 PM

With the exception of some of the more controversial styles (like the rounder) and the controversial subsets of known makers (die flawed SLs) RKs are actually among the easiest TR artifacts to authenticate. I'm more comfortable buying an RK than I am an IAB to be honest. There just aren't that many possible variations. It either "is" or it "isn't", and if you have handled even a few original examples, the good ones are instantly identifiable right down to the maker. Each original maker has very distinct characteristics that are unmistakable. You don't have to weigh it, measure it, examine the solder under a loupe etc etc. As someone mentioned, weights are nothing to go on...a wide variance here.

**Brian S** · 03-24-2005, 08:05 PM

Well said Andy, why based on what you just said, ANYONE could call himself an expert if he had a real one in one hand and one to examine in the other... And, of course, you are indeed right. So, being an expert on what you have in hand versus what you don't have in hand is also not that tough given the degree of photos we've all shared. I don't take my oaks to purchase another, I take blown up photos and compare. It's that simple.

**Greg Domian** · 03-24-2005, 08:24 PM

OK, I guess that does make sense in respect to known makers..you do have particular things to go on. But now when we are debating things like metal, paint, etc. Wouldn't weight also be something to consider as a specific aspect of "rounders"? Since we don't know what maker is responsible for them and construction and finish is considered very high, should we not also consider a tolerance range for weights, etc? If you had a rounder in hand as you say and you don't know what the inner corners(the rounds) look like, would you be comfortable with originality without seeing this? basing it only on the other known qualities you look for in a KC? Just trying to understand this weight thing that my friend was so adament about. When I bought my rounder I never even considered weight in the equation as to originality, just the quailty of the piece, and of course other things I was told to look for..and round inner corners were not one of them to be concerned about.

Greg

**Brian S** · 03-24-2005, 08:27 PM

I think if the silver sheet metal is of the same thickness and the core the same thickness and metal not zinc, then absolutely. But some slight variation of supplier metals and weight can drastically fluctuate when we're talking such minute tolerance zones.

...so if a faker had the same thickness metals, stamped it according to regs, would it be real because it weighed in properly?

**Marc Garlasco** · 03-24-2005, 10:03 PM

Some photos of rounder wear. Thanks to the member who supplied the pics:

**Blitz** · 03-25-2005, 02:45 AM

Thanks to vonStubben and Dietrich.

I no longer have questions regarding this issue.

**Luftm40** · 03-25-2005, 07:07 AM

Regarding weight, Juncker RKs are a good example. Some are quite heavy as has been noted. But other equally original examples (early ones w/ alloy cores) are significantly lighter. If you just went by weight, where would that leave you? Most would think the light ones are fakes, but the aren't. You can tell this because of the other characteristics.."fingerprints" so to speak. Likewise, a fake cross may weigh exactly the same as a heavier Juncker original...but that doesn't make it a Juncker.

**tom hansen** · 03-25-2005, 08:08 AM

Originally posted by Dietrich

Antti,

I did not feel this question being directed as me as for me it counts as evidence, and for Gordon Williamson, and for a lot of others.

So you have to wait for an answer fom "the other side". And by the way, I'm also waiting for the answer on the worn ring of the cross posted under #1.

And I will come back to the dies issues and everything will be clear.

Dietrich

Oh, the "worn" ring? Look at the "wear" thread on this cross. This looks like an emory cloth job on the swaz. I do not have a single RK that has had the swaz and date rubbed with emory cloth to make it look like wear. Again, remove yourself from the whole rounde issue and just take a look at the swaz and tell me that is genuine wear. If so, the guy's uniform must have been made of assymetrical sandpaper! It spared the beading, but was able to rub some of the iron core down on the swaz!

Regarding the photos, I have a juncker RK that has over finishing of the inner corners that would look like a rounder on a studio photo. I can post that as well. It is a cross with provenance. I can post the photos later, but would it really make any difference to anyone?

Regarding weight, Dietrich pointed out that there is a wide range of weights with original juncker crosses. I would bet that the rounder weights are all within .5 gram of each other. Could you guys post the weights?

Regarding the Nimmergut authentification- are you kidding!? So are we to embrace the other fakes that he says are real as well? Now what was he calling the rounder, as I have forgotten. A meybauer? Deumer? Juncker? The lack of mfg stamping on these should be a screaming sign to everyone, yet it, like all the other problems, are ignored, as there is too much emotion tied up in these pieces such that sense has departed. IF THEY ARE NOT MFG MARKED, THEY MUST BE EARLY, PRE-1942. WHERE ARE THE WORN CROSSES AND THE CROSSES WITH PROVENANCE? NOT EMORY CLOTH WEAR OR NIMMERGUT PROVENANCE, BUT THE REAL DEAL. Answer- It is not there. There was no award ceremony in the 1970s or 80s, no awardees, as the war was long over. No need for a non-existant recipient to wear the cross, therefore no wear. These sit in cases (but where the heck are their "period" cases)? The main award winners with regard to the rounder have been the dealers who have been pawning these off on collectors and profitting.

**Blitz** · 03-25-2005, 08:26 AM

I naturally can't say weither it will change something or not, because I haven't seen this photo. So by all means share it.

It's even more essential if your explanation regarding those two pictures is based entirely on over finishing.

Ps. I guess I'll have to back what I said earlier. My interest is peaked once again..

**tom hansen** · 03-25-2005, 08:32 AM

<TABLE class=tborder cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" align=center border=0><TBODY><TR vAlign=top><TD class=alt1 width=175>tom hansen<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_649898", true); </SCRIPT>
Association Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,588
Location: Iowa

</TD><TD class=alt2>

<HR color=#cfb992 SIZE=1>another from the thread..........................look familiar?
<FIELDSET class=fieldset><LEGEND>Attached Images</LEGEND><TABLE cellSpacing=3 cellPadding=0 border=0>

</TD><TD class=alt2 align=right>

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=4 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=thead>tom hansen</TD></TR><TR><TD class=vbmenu_option style="CURSOR: default">View Public Profile</TD></TR><TR><TD class=vbmenu_option style="CURSOR: default">Send a private message to tom hansen</TD></TR><TR><TD class=vbmenu_option style="CURSOR: default">Find More Posts by tom hansen</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

11-17-2004, 06:14 PM </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

**tom hansen** · 03-25-2005, 08:40 AM

11-15-2004, 08:12 PM </TD><TD class=thead style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal" align=right> #10 </TD></TR><TR vAlign=top><TD class=alt1 width=175>tom hansen<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_647646", true); </SCRIPT>
Association Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,588
Location: Iowa

</TD><TD class=alt2>

<HR color=#cfb992 SIZE=1>Here is a photo of the blown up photo. There is another photo that the guy said is quite clearly real, that shows how the effect of the light should look in the image.
<FIELDSET class=fieldset><LEGEND>Attached Images</LEGEND><TABLE cellSpacing=3 cellPadding=0 border=0>

</TD><TD class=alt2 align=right>

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

<TABLE cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=4 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=thead>tom hansen</TD></TR><TR><TD class=vbmenu_option style="CURSOR: default">View Public Profile</TD></TR><TR><TD class=vbmenu_option style="CURSOR: default">Send a private message to tom hansen</TD></TR><TR><TD class=vbmenu_option style="CURSOR: default">Find More Posts by tom hansen</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

11-15-2004, 08:13 PM </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

**tom hansen** · 03-25-2005, 08:41 AM

My computer at home is down. When that is up, I will photograph my "rounder".

**Blitz** · 03-25-2005, 08:44 AM

I take it that by over finishing, you mean the two lower corners? Are those both from the pic in post #96?

**Greg Domian** · 03-25-2005, 09:19 AM

I agree that the weight should not be an issue and don't know why my friend was so adament about stating that fact..I would look at it as just being another bit of info to add to the equation, not an absolute. I will try and sneek over to officeMax today and see if I can test one of their gram scales and get my crosses weight.

Greg

**Jim Baker** · 03-25-2005, 02:50 PM

.

Announcement

Rounder RK

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread