Knights Cross, that I wish was...

[eindecker2]

Here is the deal, what do you think? Souval or other....

[eindecker2]

the back

[Peter Wiking]

That is a reproduction from Souval.

Cheers.
Peter

[ben bijker]

That is a reproduction from Souval.

Cheers.
Peter

Yupp.

Ben

[eindecker2]

thanks - that what I wanted to make sure of - it was eitehr an underpriced S&L or an overpriced Souval...

[colonel1]

Why a fake?

Hi,
For the benifit of us new guys, what characteristics of this piece make it a fake?
Thanks
Colonel1

[Stravers]

That is a reproduction from Souval.

Cheers.
Peter

Why do you think it's a repro? The low Swastika?

[Peter Wiking]

This is a known reproduction made by Souval in the 60´s and 70´s.
It has a flat/low swastika and the ring dips in the frame. Those are negative factors if you look for original Knight Crosses. Look at the 1939. The "3" sits lower than the other numbers. That low 3 is known to have been used by Souval on their Iron Crosses, during the war. Souval is not known for any Knight Crosses during the war.

Cheers.
Peter

[colonel1]

Thanks

Hi Peter,
Thanks much for your explanation of why the cross is a fake. That is really helpful for us new guys out there.
Thanks again,
Colonel1

[John Pic]

The dates are also inferior and low.When you see one side by side with the real deal you can tell right away.

[eindecker2]

I must say that I thoght it was a Souval - someone convinced the seller that is was an S&L, he raised the price, I took a picture to make sure. I must admit though of the several reproductions that I have seen / held - it is of very good quality in construction. I can see how these would fool people back then. If it were not for the subtle facts that make it a Souval - I would be hard pressed to convince myslef that it was not of wartime manufacture with high standards. Anyhow - its now still over priced for me copy or not.