The Two S&L Dies for RK's

[Dietrich Maerz]

I see...but can't we STOP with the A or B type and accept just ONE die and continue to search the time line?
The 'illusion' of A and B when in fact they are the same just confuses things....
History is constantly 'glossed' over with 'prove it isn't' crap coupled with ego that it gets so confounding that we overlook the obvious...

Dave,

this statement I really don't understand. There is CLERLY an A- and B-Type cross, easily identifyable (now). There is also an A- and B-Type die, also clearly indentifiable.

At the moment we are just discussing whether the B-Type die (which clearly gives a different frame imprint) is a refurbished die or a new die. Fact still is that the B-Type die is DIFFERENT to the A-Type die and must therefore have a different name, i.e. B-Type.

Not to have a different name for both would 'confuse things'.

Dietrich

[hi-revr]

Types

Dietrich,

I agree there is no reason to not call them A and B. This does not say one or two dies, only two different series of "fingerprints".

Eric

[Brian S]

Don't give me faces!!!

Love that...

Dave shows that the area where it should have been repaired is patched up looking versus an other area that is smooth and untouched.

If you don't like A Type and B Type then BR and AR (Before Repair & After Repair )

[Dietrich Maerz]

How about this Brian?

Dietrich

[Tiger 1]

Ok , I will leave you guys to it then. This seems like a discussion between 3 people and Tony (who has made sense imo) anyways. Brian, a STOIC defense of your RK!

Thanks Sal,

Hang in there. It's just getting good.

Tony

[Dietrich Maerz]

I really think it's time to focus on the possible time line of the B-Type Crosses!

Here is were we should start:

As I said in my article and already several times in this thread, the 935-4 are the first strike of the B-Type cross. and the are clearly wartime. Several reasons for this:

- why would S&L create new die after the war?
- the time line of the flawed 800 (awarded end 44 = manufactured before that time) leaves enough time for S&L to come up with the 935-4 model
- why would S&L create a new cross after the war made of 935 silver?
- the strike is much fresher then the 1957
- there was just not enough time to reach possible awardees, just as the lazy 2 and some K&Q. Nothing new or exeptional here.

So, we can start absolutely safe with the 935-4 as the (last?) wartime model of S&L. But what came next?

Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

Dietrich, would it be reasonable to say that S&L repaired the failing die and began to use the softer more 'fluid' silver to facilitate the 'life' of the (now) obviously weakened die....?


I ask because if we can get beyond the suggestion of 2 die etc. we can begin to formulate a 'timeline'. A timeline that can be rock solid without the diversion of the expected 'ALTERNATING' die arguement that we can be sure will be brought forth!

Your own question of "why would 935 silver be used...." either war time or post lends credance to repair rather than new!

[Brian S]

Dave, that is exactly what I postulated many posts ago. Fix the die. Die repairs pre-1955 prone to fail with use. So utilize a more malleable silver, 900++. When that ran out, back to the 800 silver and sure enough, the die began to fail with use of the lower grade silver.

Postwar, 1957, when they started utilizing it for the '57s and possibly, likely, re-strikes, they used a harder silver, 800, less? And it failed quickly. Also the former factory workers were probably gone and the new guys set the presses to heavier loads, maybe. Point is, it failed quickly in '57. The 1944 repairs failed very quickly.

Where's the die now? Most likely Pieter is using it as a stool in his office and he won't share...

[Dave Kane]

I know Brian and I am of the same school! We have to put this issue to bed before we can continue to the most important 'time line'....which frankly, I think is a bit earlier than thought.

Here is some more "splatter" that was eventually cleaned off or fell off as it doesn't appear in its mirror other side. Filled with frosting as is the 'row'....but surely not a suggestion of a 'new' die but only a piece of hard material on the face of the die being transfered to the planchet.

[Dave Kane]

1

[Dietrich Maerz]

The myth of 'softer' silver, i.e. 800 vs. 935 is, well, a myth. As the table shows, there is a difference in hardness, but compared to the hardness of the stel die (HV5 = 750 - 800 )this is really completely inconsequential.

So, no, it would NOT be reasonable to say that 'softer' silver would be better. And the term 'fluid' is also misleading in that respect that one might think that the difference between 290 and 370 N/sqmm is significant less stress on a hardened die. A 'sizing' of a die with a margin of this safety number between "cracks - no crack" is for me as a mechanical engineer absolutely inconceivable.

I meant higher grade silver in the sense of more exspensive and maybe even less obtainable after the war. In no way did I lend credit/discredit to the repaired or new die theories. This was strictly economical thinking.

I think we should move beyond the die question. We are not making progress and it is absolutely fruitless in the context of the B-Type discussion.

Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

Ok, and if the die 'don't heal itself' where did the flaw, dimple or otherwise that I showed go?


It is EXACTLY like the other 'dimples' in the row, however, only shows on the front of the cross!

[Dietrich Maerz]

Dave,

I don't know where they went! But do you honestly think that splatter or whatever can only happen with a repaired die and not a new one? What makes you think so? Why is this such a seemingly convincing and irrefutable argument for a repaired die? And why does it matter?

But I cannot add more to this discussion. I'm content with two cross types, A and B, and I for myself will stay with the two dies. It has no bearing whatsoever on my next step - to look at more B-Type crosses.

You tell me when you know the outcome and we go from there.

Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

Well, I have shown an obviously different/reworked area of the 3oc arm....

You have suggested that the dimples indicate a NEW die...

I have shown that the dimples CAN disappear...

And, more importantly if (we) can't agree on this basic issue any arguement put forth regarding a timeline will allow a 'counter' and then we are full circle.

We need this in stone and not opinion!

[Brian S]

A myth?

Splatter on a new die?

Dietrich, which is more logical?

That's all. Simple question. Which is more logical. Why do you dig your heels in and take the more unlikely scenario?

Splatter on a new die? FROM WHAT????????