The Two S&L Dies for RK's

[Dave Kane]

Dietrich I understand your frustration! But, please, consider the Juncker pictures I offered and apply your take on the S&L.....it doesn't add up to the same does it?


And, that only is my point....we will study this further BUT a "difference" does not equate to a different die when the "exacts" out number it 30 to 1!

[Dietrich Maerz]

No, Dietrich, we are looking at the same photo and seeing two different possibilities. Same press time in my mind, material left behind.

And, dies were indeed repaired although not with the modern materials I listed but with materials that failed.

Failed you say, Brian?

Yes, failed.

And failed what does that do Brian?

Why grasshopper I am glad you asked.

Thank you master.

No problem. The repair and failure of repairs might lead the grasshopper to believe in two dies.

No master, never.

Yes, grasshopper, the precious is from one die.

Forgive me master but why is their the extremely flawed icky ugly nasty looking cross with massive flaws?

Grasshopper, the repairs were crude in the forties. They failed with younger persons pressing massive quantities of '57's and fake '39's. At some point they didn't care because they were replacing the original beat to hell die with a really icky later '57.

You are amazing master, amazing. Tell me more...

Tomorrow grasshopper.

So Mr. Grasshopper, now go and find the repair tool to stuff a crack that is less then 0,2 mm long and less then 0,1 mm wide. A welding gun?

Brian,

you constantly fail to address the different flaw pattern, the two knee flaws and the dent row.
Yesterday it was avise clamp, today it's some repair material that was somehow applied to patch up the die. It is really getting complicated.

There is no material left behind! We are talking silver here, not some plastic goo that sticks! And as you said: Always the same shape and form!

And what is with the heavily flawed unmarked unmagnetic cross we all agree to be post 45. I thgought the die was repaired? And even if it was (what I strongly reject) then you are back to the same problem:

- the 935-4 and the 800-4 and the 1957 were then made on the repaired die, which clearly is aftyer the heavily flawed 800 die (configuration).

There is not difference then between a new die and a repaired die, isn't it?The impact on the time line is EXACTLY the same, or not?

Dietrich

[Dietrich Maerz]

Dietrich I understand your frustration! But, please, consider the Juncker pictures I offered and apply your take on the S&L.....it doesn't add up to the same does it?


And, that only is my point....we will study this further BUT a "difference" does not equate to a different die when the "exacts" out number it 30 to 1!

Dave,

I'm not frustrated, not even close. In the contrary! This discussion, i.e. the last two hours have made my conviction about my findings ten times stronger then before! This was the acid test and I for myself ahve passed it better then I hoped

Two Dies, my friends! New or repaired (which I do not subscribe to), doesn't matter - impact on the findings is exactly the same.

Dietrich

[Dietrich Maerz]

And with that...

Excuse me Brian, I did not see that posting till. I don't want to leave this without a comment. And I stay with regular font size and hope to get the point across also:

I guess what you are saying is that since I do not have an explanation for the minute flaws everything else I said is also wrong. If that is the case, everything you said is also wrong because you have no explanation for the knee flaws and the different flaw pattern. And your repair explanation supports the two die theory just perfectly.

I'm far from saying I know everything. I clearly stated that here and in the article. But where I thought I have an explanation, I brought it forward in a very lengthy way (i know, too long....) trying to explain everything as good as possible.

I stay with my findings: Two Dies. You can mock me, calle me names (which nobody did ), call me premature, whatever. I stay to what I said and wrote till another - even simpler - explanation comes forward. I'm always willing to correct me when I'm wrong. My record prooves that.

Dietrich

[Brian S]

you constantly fail to address the different flaw pattern,

material left behind as stated six times

the two knee flaws and the dent row.

material ADDED to the die, why I don't know, during a repair perhaps

Yesterday it was avise clamp, today it's some repair material that was somehow applied to patch up the die. It is really getting complicated.

I wasn't there, point is, there is more than one possibility, that narrows out your two die theory as the possibilities of alternatives increase


There is no material left behind! We are talking silver here, not some plastic goo that sticks! And as you said: Always the same shape and form!

Not the same shape, very fractional material left behind, it is evident and absolutely possible

And what is with the heavily flawed unmarked unmagnetic cross we all agree to be post 45. I thgought the die was repaired? And even if it was (what I strongly reject) then you are back to the same problem:

the manufacturer of repair material speaks of repairs and re repair, an endless process before the fifties

- the 935-4 and the 800-4 and the 1957 were then made on the repaired die, which clearly is aftyer the heavily flawed 800 die (configuration).

I don't know when they were made

There is not difference then between a new die and a repaired die, isn't it?The impact on the time line is EXACTLY the same, or not?

a repaired die will result in a different looking cross as some deep flaws are repaired,

but

as Dave has shown you over and over and over, the minute absolutely die unique flaws remain

Dietrich

You may remain convinced, we do not.

You cannot tell me that the minute flaws Dave pointed out are reproduced in two dies. Or you can, but I do not believe it is so.

[Dietrich Maerz]

Brian,

now we are back to the minute flaws...

You say"

" a repaired die will result in a different looking cross"

and that is EXACTLY what we have here, TWO different looking crosses.

You explain the phenomina with repair (which I do not), I explain with TWO dies. The result is the same, don't you see that?

To go with your thesis:

- the 800 flawed was repaired
- all flaws disappeared, the dent row was introduced
- the 935-4 was the first 'new' model on the repaired die
- the came all the others till the very end (80's???/)

This puts the 935-4 after the flawed 800 and I NEVER EVER SAID ANYTHING ELSE THEN THAT! I just said TWO dies instead of you saying REPAIRED die. The effect is exactly and absolutly the same!


Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

Dangerous stuff Dietrich! Suggesting a timeline and nothing to base it on is a bit careless...


I think that the 935/4 (now) are quite early and pre date the collapse of the die flanges!

Afterall the demand came out in '41....

I guess I could show a dozen more 'like' photos but as we have our opinions it probably wouldn't do any good!

[George Stimson]

Does anybody reading this thread actually know anything about the mother/daughter die making process and whether minute flaws (characteristics) would be replicated on two daughters from the same mother?

[Dietrich Maerz]

Dangerous stuff Dietrich! Suggesting a timeline and nothing to base it on is a bit careless...


I think that the 935/4 (now) are quite early and pre date the collapse of the die flanges!

Afterall the demand came out in '41....

I guess I could show a dozen more 'like' photos but as we have our opinions it probably wouldn't do any good!

Dave,

this is far from dangerous! It is completely in line with what we all know regarding the PKZ marking of the RK's. That might all be wrong on day, but as it stands today thats what it is! Whats good for K&Q and Juncker is good for S&L also.

If the 9335-4 (and the 800-4) predates the flawed 800 then the repair die theory is out of the window as fast as it was in. And no single 935-4 with provenance?

And this is not about photos of minute flaws of Juncker or even S&L. This is about a reconciliation process in regards to the big flaws and the dent row.

How do you explain a 1941 935-4 with painted frosting and your 800 with the 'real' frosting?

There is no way IMHO that the 935-4 are early.

And I'm also not carelessly suggesting a time line. In ALL previous discussions it was clear that the 935-4 are late (i,e, after mid 44). I place them exactly there, between the flawed 800 with provenance (Richard and Marc) and the 1957 as the next prooven model.

And I want to make one point perfectly clear: NOWHERE did I say that I think that the 935-4 are post war! I said late war and maybe on stock, nothing else. Iknow that nobody so far has accused me of saying so, but I want to point this out here before it might happen! They are, however, a model AFTER the flawed 800, two dies or repaired die (which I do not think). Same effect!

Dietrich

[Brian S]

I'm not sold on the timeline either. Of course you have to be.

[Dietrich Maerz]

Brian,

okay. All is open for discussion. You tell me why the 935-4 is early. Against all common knowledge and against the lazy 2's from Klessheim. And no provenance.

Not to come back to the flaws at all, since - if the 935-4 is early - why do the 1957 have the same dent row, and the unmagnetic heavily flawed unmarked cross? How did that jump from 1941 to 1957 and after?

And I don't have to be sold on the time line either. I only say what I think fits into the state of knowledge as of today.

Saying that the 935-4 is early is even more radical then two dies, IMHO. Because THAT really throws a monkey wrench into the whole flaw issue.

Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

Yes, it is dangerous!

[JR.]

Have all of the other firms that manufactured RK's slipped into this "die flaw" catageory to where their awards also exhibited a deterioration and have left a tell tale "fingerprint" of this happening to their wares as well ? With over 7000 of these awarded and perhaps K&L, Juncker, and S&L nailing down the lions share of business, you would expect that at least these other 2 firms would experience some of the same weakness' in their dies as well ?


JR

[Rich G]

I think there has to be a distinction between when the frame was stamped and when the frosting was applied.

My 'theory' is that the frames were stamped early but not assembled. Maybe the rules on private purchase, etc screwed up S&L's plans to have higher quality '935' RKs available for private purchase. So now being unable to sell privately, they were put aside until rediscovered. Then marked with the additional '4' and assembled and the frosting applied. By this stage the method of how frosting was applied had changed abd was no longer a chemical process?

[Dietrich Maerz]

Yes, it is dangerous!

Dave,

please explain why this is dangerous. In what respect? What danger is there?

Dietrich