Rounder RK

[Dietrich Maerz]

What wears first, the ring or the loop? Or both equally? Or one more than the other? And how much is 'contemporary'? I agree however that everything that moves will wear. Will it (fully visible) wear in one year, two or five? I have agold chain with a hanger since 35 years on me day and night - not (visible) worn yet. 585 gold.

Dietrich

[Brian S]

I see nothing other than what could have been caused by absolutely perfect finishing or the kind of wear silver on silver produces after swinging on a tunic proudly for a couple of years.

What would you expect on a minty example with frosting and showing little wear? Let's see one in this degree of clarity at the ring.

[Dietrich Maerz]

Dave,

the "800" is - from the pieces I know - always very nice and with a very sharp stamp. Contrary to other markings. Just look at the definition of the '8'.

Dietrich

[Marc Garlasco]

Gents,
Can I ask how the cases compare to other cases? Another angle to investigate. May have been covered already, but could someone give me an idea?

Thanks,
Marc

[Brian S]

That '800' is interesting and at an odd 'skew'.....is it the same stamp used on the other examples?

Yes but the same stamp is not important. But that later. The stamp was applied slightly off onto the rounded edge causing the blunt force looking at the cross at an upper and to the left effect.

Same stamp? I hope to see some that are NOT the same stamp. That gives it greater provenance to a company that owned more than one stamp and had more than one worker making these. So, for me, yes, show me more than one stamp.

[Brian S]

Dave,

the "800" is - from the pieces I know - always very nice and with a very sharp stamp. Contrary to other markings. Just look at the definition of the '8'.

Dietrich

Someone's enjoying his tool. Very nice! I'm still hoping for a different stamp...

[Dave Kane]

Here is an example of wear....Lazy2

[George Stimson]

It's been a very good -- and very civil -- discussion so far, gentlemen. I appreciate it.

[Dave Kane]

Is this a Law book...?

[tom hansen]

Here is an example of wear....Lazy2

I guess that 800 silver on the ring of the juncker lazy 2 that Dave posted wears just about the same as any other 800 silver worn cross, maybe even a little less, given that the lazy 2s are considered more late war. I would bet that piece dangled for at least a year, maybe more.

[George Stimson]

Lazy 2s might be considered late war, but are they necessarily? I mean, the use of "P" numbers was mandated in mid-1944, but they very likely could have been in use before that (such as we see in heavy Zimmermann "20" DKs, which are considered early).

[Brian S]

I don't think we have any evidential support for how long a cross was or was not worn. Holding a cross a couple of extra seconds on whatever finishing wheel they used could produce a few micrometers here and there to create the illusion of wear. Crosses with excess material never having been cleaned out and showing no wear is one thing, trying to conclude months/years of wear is quite another. I see a dead end on this analysis.

[tom hansen]

Lazy 2s might be considered late war, but are they necessarily? I mean, the use of "P" numbers was mandated in mid-1944, but they very likely could have been in use before that (such as we see in heavy Zimmermann "20" DKs, which are considered early).

That is true George. Given that the mfg number was mandated, one might expect to see the less worn, mint crosses then, predominantly mfg code marked. Isn't that right? Would one expect early, non mfg code marked crosses to show no wear? I have five early juncker Rk crosses. The rings are worn as hell on each. None of them are "2" marked.

[George Stimson]

Well, you've probably examined more RKs than I have. Is that true in your experience, i.e., that there are a lot of mint RKs with "P" numbers? And what about unmarked, but unquestionably good, RKs by other makers? How many of them show little wear?

[tom hansen]

Well, you've probably examined more RKs than I have. Is that true in your experience, i.e., that there are a lot of mint RKs with "P" numbers?

You have probably actually examined alot more RKs than I have George. How many 800 only marked juncker RKs are mint? How many L/12s? Just taking a look at those posted here on the forum, very few realitive to the "2" marked junckers. The 800s and L/12 would be considered, nearly by PK mandate, to be "early" relative to the "2" marked crosses.

There are not that many "4' marked S&Ls that have been posted around here to make a decent comparison.

Just a few things to think about regarding wear. When I see something without wear, I think "new". When something has wear, I think "old".