German Cross in Gold

[tom hansen]

Great question! This has come up several times before and there have been variable responses. There are consistent differences in the zimmerman and Klein wreaths. This is at many points around the wreath. For starters, the flaw in the "9" of the 1941 on the klein is more at the top of the loop, while it is more right sided on the zimmermans. There is a gap or flaw in the hypotenuse of the "4" in the kleins, but not zimmerman. Another quick place to look adjacent to the date is the first segment to the immediate left. The middle horizontal strokes are widely separated in the zimmerman, appearing a clothes pin, while on the klein, it is separated at the right side, appearing more like an alligator with an open mouth. There are many very subtle differences around the wreath that are fun to compare.

[Erich B.]

Thanks Patrice and Tom. Hmm, here's a picture. It does seem to have the Klein '4' flaw. What do you think?
Erich

[tom hansen]

Thanks Patrice and Tom. Hmm, here's a picture. It does seem to have the Klein '4' flaw. What do you think?
Erich

Yes it does. Again, there are many subtle differences between the wreaths, but this has two on the date visible from this photo. The "alligator" vs "clothespin" horizontal impression immediately left of the banner is an easy quick check as well. Take a look at the forum gallery of Kleins and Zimmermans and this is clearly visible.

One important issue that I had suggested early on was a clear shot of the "134", as this is where many of the fakes tend to fail. The photo of the 134 on patrice's cross is not clear to make an easy comparison. Perhaps if there is a detailed shot, that would help. Also, the fakes tend to be under 63 mm in diameter.

[Erich B.]

Thanks Tom--so, since this wreath is on a '20' marked piece, it's not a good sign I assume!
Erich

[tom hansen]

Thanks Tom--so, since this wreath is on a '20' marked piece, it's not a good sign I assume!
Erich

That would be more consistent with a Klein. However, zimmermans have other particular features and I think one would need to see the whole cross. The zimmermans have a distinct flaw at about 10 oclock on the sunburst as well. Do you have some detailed photos of the date, wreath just to the left of the date and othher random points around the wreath? How about the 20 stamp? A detailed close-up of the date? Thanks!

[Chris Taylor]

I was the one who originally purchased this "20" from Detlev, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.

I was proud to have it in my collection & if it wasn't for a heavy tax assessment against me it would still be there! (Damn IRS! )

[Jim Baker]

Hello,

Well, I thought I was out of here, but apparently not.

I bought this cross from Chris, and sold it to Erich. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this cross. I have faith in Detlev's assessment. Per the rules, I will take the cross back and refund the money.

Should anyone else be interested in purchasing it, please let me know as it will be reposted on the e-stand as soon as it arrives.

Thanks,
Jim

[Erich B.]

Here are a few more closeups. The maker's mark looks fine.
Erich

[Erich B.]

With flash. I can't get a super closeup with this camera.
Erich

[Erich B.]

Maker's mark.
Thanks,
Erich

[Erich B.]

Closer shot--slightly fuzzy.
Erich

[robert60446]

Guys,

For your convenience, all 3 dates are presented on one picture now. Erich, date from your cross is first from the right side.

[Darrell]

Both DKiGs are FINE ... absolutely nothing wrong with them

[Erich B.]

Robert--thanks! Is the center one a 20 or a 134?
Erich

[Airborne Nut]

I have said it before and I will say it again, the dates look the same to me.


And.... Although I am not an expert on DKIG's I have absolutely no problems with the one originally posted by Eric...

-Shane

Robert--thanks! Is the center one a 20 or a 134?
Erich