The Two S&L Dies for RK's

[Dietrich Maerz]

For all those people who might not have the patience to read thru the whole article (I know, I tend to write too much ...) here are my findings in a nut shell:

1. S&L had two dies during the war A-Type and B-Type
2. The A-Type is the early one for mainly 3 o'clock flawless and flawed "800"
3. The B-Type was introduced with the 935-4 cross (very) late in the war
4. The B-Type die was used for the 57 crosses also
5. S&L produced "swastika" crosses on the B-Type well after 1957

I'm open to any critic and -more important - any discussion.

Dietrich

[coastie]

I'm still learning about these, did the type B die get sold to some guy in England, and continued to make RK's?

[Marc Garlasco]

Dietrich,

Were the post 1957 swastika RKs to feed the German market of veterans who wanted to replace their wartime RKs that were taken/lost?

Great article! It does take multiple reads, but the Stereo-zoom microscope pays off. Awesome tool - maybe you can post a picture of it?
Thanks,
Marc

[Bob Hritz]

Well done Dietrich. With science and a passion, much can be accomplished. The compelling evidence and photographic illustrations are a great step in the path of truth.

Bob Hritz

[Dietrich Maerz]

Marc,

I could think of several scenarios, souveniers being the most likely. It comes back to one of the fundamental questions of the hobby: Is it real if it's from the same company and the same tool BUT after 8th May 1945? One thing is sure however, after the 1957 issue, it was illegal to produce and sell (maybe even after 1948 with the foundation of the Federal Republic of Germany)

And yes, if the story about England is true, it was the B-Type (look at the heavily flawed, unmarked and unmagnetic cross!) that was sold and used.

Dietrich

[Bob Hritz]

Now I know where I left my eyeglasses!


Bob Hritz

[Gerd Becker]

Dietrich,

isn´t it possible, that the B-Type crosses with swastika were made between 1945 and 1957 or what is the argument, that these crosses are from after 1957? Maybe due to the evolution of the die-flaws?

Gerd

[Dietrich Maerz]

Gerd,

if you look at the heavily flawed unmarked un-magnetic cross and compare the flwa pattern with a flawed 1st Type 1957 ( i.e. B-Type) then you will see tha the 'swastika' cross must have been made after the 1957. And since the 1957 was not instituted before 1957 (obviously) this cross was made well after 1957.Was it the only one? I doubt that.

Now, how many 935-4 were made after the war from left over stock? Or how many were already finished and not shipped, but sold/distributed after 1945?

Dietrich

[Peter Wiking]

"(look at the heavily flawed, unmarked and unmagnetic cross!)"
Are we talking about a casted core, or a die strucked core ? If die struck, was that the pre 45 die or a die made post 45 (i´m talking about the core here) ?

Thanks.
Peter

[Dietrich Maerz]

Peter,

I did not look at the cores at all, I have to admitt in shame...

Dietrich

[Luftm40]

Dietrich, as I said in private, a very very well done article. To further paraphrase what you are saying (for my own clarification):

- A type "A" cross of any kind, whether it be perfect or flawed, is by definition pre 45 because those dies were not used after the war, having been replaced for some reason late in the war by the "B" dies.

- A "B" cross, then, MAY be pre-war, or not since these dies were used continuously after the war to make both 39 and 57 strikes/restrikes until the dies were sold off and replaced w/ the "dipping ring" dies. The "B" dies also became flawed with use. Also then, since 'B" type '57 crosses exist with NO 3 o'clock flaws, any arm flawed "B" types should be looked on w/ great suspicion.

Is all of that correct? If so, I guess the "hole" I might see in this looking at it critically, is that there is nothing to say definitively that the dies were used sequentially and not at the same time...perhaps to boost production later in the war. Without documentation, the timeline for the 'B' types is very hazy. In fact, with the existence of two dies, we now IMO have to explore the possibility of different makers, at least for the type "A" crosses since the "B" types exist w/ maker marks. As I mentioned to you in the email, Luftwaffe badge collectors will recognize this issue vis a vis Juncker and JMME pilot badges...different makers w/ identical die characteristics. Perhaps unlikely, but it is possible.

Here is a question: Are the 3 o'clock flawed crosses described as vet bring backs/Castle Klessheim finds etc etc type "A" flawed crosses or type "B"?

[Dietrich Maerz]

[/QUOTE]
- A type "A" cross of any kind, whether it be perfect or flawed, is by definition pre 45 because those dies were not used after the war, presumably having been replaced for some reason late in the war by the "B" dies.

- A "B" cross, then, MAY be pre-war, or not since these dies were used continuously after the war to make both 39 and 57 strikes/restrikes until the dies were sold off and replaced w/ the "dipping ring" dies. The "B" dies also became flawed with use. [/QUOTE]

That is how I see it!


[/QUOTE] Is all of that correct? If so, I guess the "hole" I might see in this looking at it critically, is that there is nothing to say definitively that the dies were used sequentially and not at the same time...perhaps to boost production later in the war. Without documentation, the timeline for the 'B' types is very hazy. [/QUOTE]

I'm under the working thesis that the dies were not parallel. This rests on the so far unproven assumption that NO 935-4 with provenance exists (to 'our' knowledge here) and that 935-4 were (alledgedly) found in Klessheim. From that I conclude that this was the last production run. Certainly I don't think that 935-4 were awarded in - let's say - 42 or 43.
I can't comment on different makers using the A-Type. Might be tough to proove and is maybe even purely academical - it's still an S&L die.


[/QUOTE]Here is a question: Are the 3 o'clock flawed crosses described as vet bring backs/Castle Klessheim finds etc etc type "A" flawed crosses or type "B"?[/QUOTE]

The flawed crosses we have discussed so far could have been A-Type or very late B-Type since we didn't know about the two dies.
The flawed Vet-crosses I know, such as Gordon's, Skip's and others were all A-Type, 800 and IMHO pre-45. I do not know of any Klessheim 'flawed' crosses.

Dietrich

[Luftm40]

I have always thought the 935/4s were contemporaries of the lazy 2 and 65 RKs, although made in much smaller numbers. Without production statistics it is hard to say for sure WHEN they were made...I believe there were lazy 2s found at Klessheim as well. Also, without documentation, it is difficult to say for sure that the flawed type "A" dies weren't also used after the war to make restrikes...

[Dave Kane]

Dietrich, although I encouraged, supported, contributed and understand your great effort in time and study...I believe the assertion of more than one die is a bit premature!


To plagiarize your own words "the die don't lie" I have noted at least 25 'fingerprints' that are IDENTICAL on crosses ranging small 800, large 800 and the 935/4

These are almost microscopic but undeniabley 'die flaws'! They are random in position on the crosses ie; top of ribs, valleys and walls BUT the 'faults' are in the same position and shape on each cross looked at.

Start with this and I encourage all owners of S&L crosses to locate and look at the flaws in the areas highlighted!

[Harry]

I think a major crux lies in the fact that the 935-4 crosses are pressed with the so called 'type-b' die as are the early 1957 issue crosses, and both have identical minor flaws. However, along comes crosses with swazes with major flaws, yet these are supposed to pre-date the early '57ers.