Paul Küst from Berlin - producer of crosses EK2-1939 ?

[Douglas 5]

Just another listing that has Paul Küst still on it .

Douglas

[boch_62]

Just another listing that has Paul Küst still on it .

Douglas

... we're still closer ...

the more so because we know that the LDO numbering system was in effect valid from March 1, 1941, and the PKZ numbering was introduced only in the second half of 1942.

Jarek

[sanya13]

Hí Jarek
I found these pictures on a Russian page about Paul Küst

[sanya13]

.

[sanya13]

and the last

[gregM]

Hí Jarek
I found these pictures on a Russian page about Paul Küst

It's good to see that someone else finds my old catalog page interesting.
Two of those pictures are of my piece that I posted here back in 2006.

[sanya13]

Hí Greg
yes interesting , but than wrote ,these all pictures was on the Russian forum side

It's good to see that someone else finds my old catalog page interesting.
Two of those pictures are of my piece that I posted here back in 2006.

[boch_62]

With high likelihood, we can conclude that the P.Kust's company produced crosses EK2-1939 (perhaps also EK1-1939).
The company's name is on all official lists of the Reich Chancellery showing producers of EK crosses from 1939-1940.
In addition, we have a statement from Gordon Williamson from 2003, who saw the official list of manufacturers of EK crosses approved by the PKZ, which also includes the P.Kust's company.
We also know that the P.Kusts's company did not receive the official PKZ number, and we know that these numbers were broadcast in the second half of 1942.

It seems, therefore, that we can say with a high probability that the P.Kust's company ceased production of EK-1939 crosses (or the total activity) not later than in the first half of 1942, or even in 1941 ...

Unfortunately, we still can not recognize the EK2-1939 crosses produced by P. Kust's company.
We have too few sets of crosses and an envelopes signed with the name Kust's. We can not draw specific conclusions from this reason ...

Regards
Jarek

[sanya13]

With high likelihood, we can conclude that the P.Kust's company produced crosses EK2-1939 (perhaps also EK1-1939).
The company's name is on all official lists of the Reich Chancellery showing producers of EK crosses from 1939-1940.
In addition, we have a statement from Gordon Williamson from 2003, who saw the official list of manufacturers of EK crosses approved by the PKZ, which also includes the P.Kust's company.
We also know that the P.Kusts's company did not receive the official PKZ number, and we know that these numbers were broadcast in the second half of 1942.

It seems, therefore, that we can say with a high probability that the P.Kust's company ceased production of EK-1939 crosses (or the total activity) not later than in the first half of 1942, or even in 1941 ...

Unfortunately, we still can not recognize the EK2-1939 crosses produced by P. Kust's company.
We have too few sets of crosses and an envelopes signed with the name Kust's. We can not draw specific conclusions from this reason ...

Regards
Jarek

[streptile]

Here is my set.

[Douglas 5]

Your Küst envelope had a S&L EK2 in .

Douglas

[boch_62]

Hi Trevor

By comparing both my crosses from the beginning of the thread, with your cross from the set, we can conclude that the frames are identical = type S&L design, also the cores are identical = type S&L design.

However, we also have differences in the finish - no manual freezing of the frame, the weld is visible in the place of joining a large ring ...

The question is, could such differences may have appeared in the course of production in 1939-1941 (42?) ...?

... it would be worth to compare the size and weight of my 2 crosses and your cross from this set.

Jarek

[boch_62]

My crosses have size and weight:

1) 20,0g - 44,2x44,1mm
2) 18,8g - 44,2x44,1mm


Jarek

[Douglas 5]

Hi Jarek - to post #27 :
Some of the early manufacturers started off with - hand frosting , and changed over to dip frosting to save on cost and increase production ,
.... so we have the same frame finished differently .

The unknown with Küst is - did they get dies from S&L to stamp their own frames/cores or did they only used individual supplied components
so that they could assemble the crosses themselves ?? A different cross in a Küst envelope creates more questions . Did they have more suppliers ?? -
Or - was a foreign EK put into the Küst envelope post war to enhance value ???
And yes ... have to mention in all fairness also : in the case Küst used components only -- and was short piece count wise in fulfilling an order -
they could have sourced a few crosses (as components or already assembled) from some other maker .

Yes ... there is a remote unprovable chance the other cross may have been originally issued with that envelope ?? It is possible but still speculation !!
I myself cannot see comparing weight and size to be of help or relevance - as over the duration of the war flange width and weight was gradually reduced
to conserve on harder and harder to get materials . All this tells us is which crosses were in sequence made first ... heavier/bigger to lighter/smaller .

Douglas

[boch_62]

Hi Douglas

You are right in most aspects of our discussion.
I agree that we walk on thin ice (that is why I try to avoid far-reaching speculations), because crosses type "S&L Design" are sometimes very difficult to assign to a specific producer.
For us, the best solution would be to present, by several collectors, convergent sets of P. Kust's envelopes and unsigned crosses ... for comparison works
For now, however, we have too little comparison material.

Regards
Jarek