The Two S&L Dies for RK's

[Marc Garlasco]

Sorry this is off topic, but it is better than posting a whole new thread here as well as in cases! Sorry George...

I did an RK Case posting:

http://www.wehrmacht-awards.net/foru...ad.php?t=99245

[Dave Kane]

DM, I'll put the entire article in the mail!!

[Dietrich Maerz]

Dave,

thanks. Will make a full translation. I thought I could read something like "production resumed in the Ruhrgebiet" I'm sure it's interesting.

Dietrich

P.S.: Steinhauer und Lueck is mentioned...

[Dave Kane]

You did but I can't make out if it refered to all orders or specifically the TR items....it does speak of selling to various Vet organizations and the demand for ribbon. Just a tease...but S&L is mentioned!

[Dietrich Maerz]

Dave,

in the red box is mentions specifically TR items and that "something" is done contrary to the fact that the wear of TR items "still not allowed".

Dietrich

[Brian S]

A couple of points. First of all I'm not sold on most of this research but I commend Dietrich for his efforts.

1. A die developing flaws can be 'bound', strengthened in a viselike device, I don't know the right word for it to tighten it back up and 'close' cracks. This explains the seemingly impossible notion of flaws disappearing. The die don't lie. Well the die isn't producing a lie for us if it has been trussed up to close imperfections. (Frank H talked to the son of a man who owned a factory and this was his comment, fact.)

2. Die pressure differences will account for what also appear to be flaws appearing and disappearing.

3. Flaws are accidental in nature and therefore not intended to be. They are no produced to the requirement that what goes in must come out nicely to produce a picture perfect opposite of the image of the die. These accidental flaws are rough, turn in direction, are by nature smaller at the ends or the tips than at the base and trap material that is warmed by the pressure process and can become trapped in the crevices.

Given this, I find it difficult to believe the conclusions being postulated. I see too much similarity in the design and location of the flaws between these two 'types'. Rather I see similarities which draws me to the conclusion they are the same die but from a die that has been altered by a binding like fix or other device and pressure changes and crevices clinging to their material.

This whole discussion about awards being available postwar is misleading. If I'm not mistaken they make RKs in Latvia. Are they therefore Junckers? Come on... Of course S&L is mentioned, they made the '57 and many many other awards.

I'm not sold, and I'm not buying...

[Dave Kane]

One die!

The magazine article has already been called in to question....even an assertion that 'today' a similar picture could be produced so I'll try showing more die flaws....and keep in mind the 10,000 lbs of pressure assure that the 'die don't lie'!!!

[Dave Kane]

1

[Dave Kane]

2

[Dave Kane]

3

[Dietrich Maerz]

Brian,

if you close a die with a vise or something, the flaw might disappear. I don't know that. But how do you explain then that some flaws disappear and some don't, wheras others are comming? Have a look at the comparison sheet again. How can that be??? And no trace at all of this comming and going?

So, and everytime you put the vise on to make the flaws of the "800 flawed" disapear to produce a flawless "935-4" the side flaw row pops up??? And when you take the vise off the flaw row disappears again?

I don't understand your point 3 at all, I'm sorry.

But again, I am convinced that my theory holds water, is congruent with all physical evidence and mechanics involved, explains what was not explainable before and - very important for me - with every cross that comes up, such as Marc's, the theory is confirmed.

Dietrich

[Brian S]

Point 3 is that the assymetrical nature and rough ridges and edges of these 'flaws' will retain the material pressed into them on occasion.

Dave, are these three different crosses all with the same minute flaw aspects?

[Dietrich Maerz]

This whole discussion about awards being available postwar is misleading. If I'm not mistaken they make RKs in Latvia. Are they therefore Junckers? Come on... Of course S&L is mentioned, they made the '57 and many many other awards.

Brian, the article is from 1953 and Steinhauer und Lueck is mentioned and it is strictly about TR awards. The 1957 awards were introduced 4 years later ....how could they know that?

Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

Dietrich it's your research and ofcourse you are driven by it....I understand that and encourage this sort of thing but we can't wear 'blinders' and disregard the tangible....I will show you 50 times more of the SAME markings than you will be able to show of DIFFERENCES.

Do you have an 'idea' of how blobs got 'RAISED' on a die to produce pot holes?

What die could / would be made with raised areas....minute imperfections below the SURFACE of something I could undersatnd BUT blobs, slag, welded bits as part of a die I just don't......maybe for a run and then a 'clean-up' but surely not an intricate part of the die!

[Dave Kane]

Brian, they are 4! A micro 800, two large 800 and a 935/4!