Who could the manufacturer of this EK2 have been? Many thanks for your expertise!
-
-
IMO, it's a '333' fake.
Compare with these photos. Notice the 'chip' on the top of the second '1' in 1813 date, and the extreme slant on the tops of the 3's.
Robert -
Interesting, but are you still sure after seeing the following close up.
Any other opinions?Comment
-
On the other hand, I’m no expert (yet) and the (very) subjective current owner, but I’m also not convinced (yet) by the resemblance between this EK2 and your example.
If a fake EK2, then the whole medal bar is a postwar compilation/copy/fake.
Could other EK experts have a look? Many thanks!Comment
-
Hi Dirk
Oh!! I am sorry, I am not a EK2 specialist. I don´t know EK2 "333" characteristics.
Don´t worry, If this cross is a fake, I return your money, without any problem.
Please can someone explain to me the characteristics of these crosses and why they are believed to be fakes?
Regards
JoseComment
-
One question... Do these crosses always carry the "333" in the ring?Comment
-
The core of my EK2 is magnetic while, if I read the 333 fake threads correctly, the fake 333 EK1 and EK2s have non-magnetic cores.
Also, my EK2 does not have the pictured flaw on any of the 4 sides (picture by Streptile in several of 333 fake threads):Last edited by wrongplanet67; 11-27-2019, 11:09 AM.Comment
-
Hello! I believe that the medal bar is original. There is no sign of fake. Therefore, all the awards on it are also original, because the medal bar is a single-piece item and not a composite one. A compound bar medal is when you can hang anything on hooks. On this medal bar all awards are sewn. The cross also looks original. If this is all fake, then it surpassed the original in quality. But this cannot be! Because the copy is always inferior to the original.Comment
-
Thanks Edward!
And here are close ups from both 6 o'clock beadings of my EK2:Comment
-
Not an expert on EKs but I just wanted to support Jose as a good guy and collector. If the EK is post war, following the rest of the medal bar I might feel it is really a postwar assembly but with medal bars you never know unless you dont see them on ww2 pictures. However, if wrong - Jose is a good guy and there must not be any intention in offering it.
I was myself interested in this medal bar as I wanted to examine this medal bar to prove the folding (how solid it is) and see its inner construction to make a verdict of this one.Comment
-
Ofcourse Jose is not to blame! I simply asked who might have manufactured the EK2 as I always like to know, not to question his integrity.
Until now there’s no confirmation by people who have the knowledge that this actually is a 333 fake. I hope they will give us their opinion.Comment
-
Hmm, that's a most revealing photo in post #7, and clearly shows that were dealing with something other than a '333' fake, though some of the features are close to being the same. I posted the word(s) 'IMO' (in my opinion) because I wasn't totally 'solid' in my assessment. This sheds new light on things. The only question now is, what known original period cross shares the features that this cross on the 4-place bar bares? Could it indeed be original?
RobertComment
-
May I invite everybody to give suggestions
Comment
-
Difficult subject....
"Fake 333" crosses did not always have a frame flaw.
Below are photos of my copy (cross signed 333).Comment
-
Can I have accurate (clear, no shadows) photos of this part of the frame? I'm interested in reverse and obverse.
Thanks in advance
greetings
MaciejComment
Comment