Here's a new RK on ebay. What do you guys think about this one????
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...524510803&rd=1
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...524510803&rd=1
-
-
Clue #1 is it is from the early 30s. They were first made in 1939...
Marc -
This one was just posted earlier today.Originally posted by Flak88Clue #1 is it is from the early 30s. They were first made in 1939...
MarcComment
-
15 bids ..btw marc,,I had a real RK when I was 9 and lost it in grade school keeping it in my desk..I still have reoccuring nightmares from this
Iam Uncle Sam
That’s who Iam
Been hiding out
In a rock and roll bandComment
-
But this cross has wear; 10% to the rim and 2% to the paint, even to the loop shows signs of wear. A sure sign of genuity!
DietrichComment
-
No Dietrich .. you have to get the 1000x loop out and look for those microsopic flawsOriginally posted by Dietrich
Comment
-
Duffer...sometimes a visual is best!!! No ambiguous words etc. as it IS or it ISN'T
Have a gander at the ring, ribs and font....Regards,
DaveComment
-
Originally posted by h009291No Dietrich .. you have to get the 1000x loop out and look for those microsopic flaws
Sometimes you do not need a loop to identify fakes. And sometimes wear is real, sometimes it is not, but that can be seen under a microscope for those who have such equipment and the material to examine .
Sometimes analysis with a "1000X loop" saves money for people who have bought fakes and have been able to return those fakes to recover their funds. Usually those people are grateful for the help .
Last edited by tom hansen; 04-10-2005, 08:49 AM.Comment
-
I've wondered if one of the indicators besides the others mentioned is the
"hump" on the top part of the frame below the ring?Last edited by coastie; 07-22-2007, 11:29 PM.Comment
-
Teach me something here on these boys...what is the giveaway!?Iam Uncle Sam
That’s who Iam
Been hiding out
In a rock and roll bandComment
-
The shape of the "800" and "L/12" is wrong. There are examples of the 800 and L/12 marks posted on the forum for comparison.Originally posted by münster
The shape of the ring is wrong. This ring sits on top of the frame, unlike a juncker. The inferior part of the juncker loops seems to "melt" into the frame without indenting the frame. This ring sits squarely on top.
The date is the wrong shape for a juncker. There are examples of the dates on the forum. This difference is best seen by copying the dates and comparing side by side via a photoshop program. All the different RK makers have slightly different dates in shape.
The thickness of the ring in the side view is too thick
The loop is not correct for a juncker. Juncker has a characteristic "800" appearance with a slight gap between the "8" and the "0"s.
I cannot see the beading clearly enough to make a statement for the beading, which is going to be the best determinant. It would probably take a 1000X loop
. However, the beading in the high detail shot of the 800 and L/12 area is incorrect for a juncker,despite not having a high detail shot of the swaz to see the cross hatching of the beading, which has a characteristic appearance for a juncker. Everything else is wrong for a L/12 juncker. This will free up funds from potential buyers to purchase dotted DKiGs. But I think those have all been sent back by the buyers after 1000X loop analysis saved their bacon.
Last edited by tom hansen; 04-09-2005, 11:23 PM.Comment
-
Thanks for the replies. I've only been collecting for about a year now and I know to be sceptical of junker RK's since these crosses were made post 1945. When I compared this cross with other junkers on the internet, it looked rather interesting, hence, why I posted this thread. Hell even "Deitrich" thought it was the real thing. Thanks for the info guys and keep it up, this forum is the best.Comment
-
Comment
-
I wonder if anyone saw this that was on German eBay last week for a matter of hours before being pulled. It was listed simply as "Iron Cross" and was being sold by a vendor with no history of selling any type of militaria.
I know the pics are crap - I should have asked for better pics and details but I was in a hurry...Comment
Comment