The Two S&L Dies for RK's

[George Stimson]

"And, based on your assertions of multiple dies I will also agree that the master exists, the hub exists and dies are still being created today and therefore given the price value of RKs today, Type 'A's are still being minted."

Agree? Agree with whom? Who suggested that scenario?

(Sarcasm isn't evidence, either.)

[Brian S]

=George Stimson
Agree? Agree with whom? Who suggested that scenario?

(Sarcasm isn't evidence, either.)

What? We are told here by the 'two' die people that the master/hub/daughter is easy, has been done for years, etc.

If 'two' are easy in 1943 than why not scores of dies since then? Logic is a two way street George. You put the logic forth, be prepared for what you ask for.

...and it's definitely not sarcasm, it's sacrificing truth for greed.

[George Stimson]

Brian, there's no evidence whatsoever that the hub still exists and that new dies are being created today. That contention is taking a possiblity and saying that because the possibility exists, then the deed possible is being done. That's not logic. That's pure, unsubstantiated speculation.

[Brian S]

Was S&L bombed. No. Did they create '57 RKs. Yes.

So you want it only one way George? Great, you have it your way.

But if you subscribe to the master/hub blah blah theory, you better be worried that hub is still out there. And given the price of RKs these days, why couldn't they mimic the craftsmanship of the 40's RK. Of course they could.

Speculation? No, it's questioning the evidence brought forth and conclusions of others and taking it to the next logical step.

But for you, George, the two dies only. That's entirely il-logical. Why stop at two dies George. Because it's convenient for everyone who owns an 'A' Type. Is that really what discussion boundries are? Convenience for some members and when it steps over those convience boundries it's a foul? That makes me just more than a little bit angry if those are the rules of engagement George.

You all think about very carefully what you are suggesting here if you insist on the two die theory. Because George stops speculation at TWO dies does not in the REAL world put a question mark on your Type 'A' cross if you insist on a master/hub/ blah blah blah theory.

For me the evidence is clear the single die was repaired. All the pieces are falling into place. But if you insist, be careful of what you ask for.

[George Stimson]

Brian, you're not even reading to my posts. I never said I was a "two-die" man, so don't put words into my mouth. I just said that the "one-die" proponents have not put forth any convincing, substantive evidence (that I see) so far. It's all been speculation.

If you want to argue both sides of the issue, be my guest. But don't say that I'm on one side, because I haven't taken a side yet.

[Dietrich Maerz]

27% less pounds of pressure on the repaired die IS a significant number.

Two problems with this:

- tensile strength is not the number to calculate the pressure necessary to form in a press. Tensile strength is the number when the material brakes. The number to apply to the dies and it's setting is the range above elasticity limit and the tensil strength, i.e. the area where a piece is permanenty deformed but not ripped appart.
However, the relation in general will still be in the area of 27%, whereas the spread is bigger, i.e. you have a range that applies.

- what about the flawless (i.e 3 o'clock arm..) 800 Type-B and flawless (i.e. 3 o'clock arm) 800-4 and the flawless Neusilber 1957? And Neusilber would need ( to use the above argumentation) 65% (!!!) more pounds.

It's not that easy and straight forward.

Dietrich

[Brian S]

Two problems with this:

- tensile strength is not the number to calculate the pressure necessary to form in a press. Tensile strength is the number when the material brakes. The number to apply to the dies and it's setting is the range above elasticity limit and the tensil strength, i.e. the area where a piece is permanenty deformed but not ripped appart.
However, the relation in general will still be in the area of 27%, whereas the spread is bigger, i.e. you have a range that applies.

- what about the flawless (i.e 3 o'clock arm..) 800 Type-B and flawless (i.e. 3 o'clock arm) 800-4 and the flawless Neusilber 1957? And Neusilber would need ( to use the above argumentation) 65% (!!!) more pounds.

It's not that easy and straight forward.

Dietrich

As previously stated, then the die started to fail, again.

I don't have an explanation for the Newsilver 1957 other than, that's what caused the MASSIVE '57 flaws and makes ID of restrikes so easy.

[Brian S]

If you want to argue both sides of the issue, be my guest. But don't say that I'm on one side, because I haven't taken a side yet.

Not being self-serving and selfish, I am not arguing the MULTIPLE theory. It IS not logical. If it were, where are all the dies? Where are all the perfect S&L RKs. They aren't where I'm seeing them. And the Master Hub Daughter Mother blah blah blah theory FORCES the existence of MULTIPLE DIES NOT JUST TWO. It is intellectually dishonest to argue TWO dies and tell me how easy it was to produce that second, but NO, NOT more...

[tom hansen]

Brian, you're not even reading to my posts. I never said I was a "two-die" man, so don't put words into my mouth. I just said that the "one-die" proponents have not put forth any convincing, substantive evidence (that I see) so far. It's all been speculation.

If you want to argue both sides of the issue, be my guest. But don't say that I'm on one side, because I haven't taken a side yet.

What about Dave's showing the "rough" surface of the 3 oclock arm in the area of the presumed repair? What about the identical small flaws? I have no "dog in this fight", but it seems as though the repair explanation is able to accomodate the available data with a simple explanation. Okam's razor- the most simple explanation is most likely the correct one.

[Dietrich Maerz]

As previously stated, then the die started to fail, again.
I don't have an explanation for the Newsilver 1957 other than, that's what caused the MASSIVE '57 flaws and makes ID of restrikes so easy.

Okay Brian, forget the Neusilber. For now.

But if they were so concerned about the fragility of the alledged repaired die that they went to the more expensive and maybe even harder to obtain 935, why did they dare to strike the 800-4 and the 800 B-Types? And no flaws?

Just doesn't add up - at least not the "935 and repair" connection. And it adds not up because the difference in those materials is marginal compared to the die pressure and it's forces on hardened steel.

Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

Brian, you're not even reading to my posts. I never said I was a "two-die" man, so don't put words into my mouth. I just said that the "one-die" proponents have not put forth any convincing, substantive evidence (that I see) so far. It's all been speculation.

If you want to argue both sides of the issue, be my guest. But don't say that I'm on one side, because I haven't taken a side yet.

George, I'm very disappointed!! The dozens of pictures I posted showing the exact same fingerprints and microscopic at that has been for naught?

The moving 'dimples' was a waste of time and space and the refinished and roughly filed 3oc arm hasn't meant a thing.......BUT pages of text out weigh evidence in hand??

[George Stimson]

Let me explain my real position so that there's no misunderstanding. I think that it does the hobby a real disservice when people present their theories, speculations, and opinions as facts. To say, "It seems logical that so-and-so could have done XYZ, so therefore they did" is to me the sloppiest and most irresponsible type of "evidence" that a person can offer. When it comes to RKs, we are talking about items valued up into five figures. Imagine if you were involved in a court case revolving around some $15,000 dispute. Do you really think you would be allowed to present personal conclusions as evidence? And that's all I'm asking for -- evidence. From any side. And when I do, what do I get? "How dare you ask questions? You're confusing everyone!" Well, why doesn't someone present some evidence -- which is all I've ever asked for here -- and end everyone's confusion? Because they can't? Because it's easier to get angry? Because the sarcasm gene kicks in?
The only "one way" I have ever wanted is the factual way, whichever way that way goes. Here I've seen an interesting article with some photographic evidence and some basic, but not insistent, conclusions. And I've seen some responses which seem to rely solely on conclusions, speculation, "Of course!", and now sarcasm. From here on in I encourage the individual reader come to his own conclusion (if he wants to reach one). I've asked all of the questions (mostly unaddressed) that I wanted to have answered. And I would hope that I have made my point about wanting factual input instead of speculation. But it's pointless to keep repeating myself. I think that everybody knows where I stand. I sure hope they do.
Thank you. And have a good day!

[George Stimson]

And by the way, I have to go away from the computer for six hours or so. Please try to be nice to each other while I'm gone!

[Tiger 1]

Hello Brian,

The master/hub blah, blah, blah theory as you mistakenly call it is not THEORY. It is a concrete practise that has been in use for well over a hundred years now and maybe closer to two hundred years. Don't take my word for it. Look it up.

Please tell us what is theoretical about it?


A question............Why would S&L have to produce more hubs or working dies than it's immediate need when they poscessed the master die? The master die is the key for any subsequent hubs and working dies if any. Please keep in mind that S&L also produced many other mundane items than just decorations. They also had an RZM liscense to produce other metalware items for the government. They were not about to go broke if they did not produce EKs or KCs for the time it would take to hub up some new working dies.

Do we know if there are any flawless '57 KCs that were struck postwar? How about the previously mentioned '57 KCs with the swastika? Are there flawed versions of the same?


There's still much to learn before this mystery is unravelled.

Tony

[Tiger 1]

Bob,

Thanks for the kind words. You deserve the credit for sparking the inquisative nature of my collecting approach so many years ago, both as a mentor and a friend. Those were the times. We were all bachelors and had not too many cares. Life is good!

I'm surprised that you remember that broadsword! That was almost 40 years ago. I'm sure Brother Andy is smilin' about that old reminsance where ever he may be now. Here's one for you.......Do you still have that SS crusher that I found on the South Side of Chicago for $25.00? Those were the days!

I hope the high desert is treating you and the missus well.

Take care.

Tony