Knights Crossnof the Iron Coss plus Separate Oak Leaves - opinions please.

[terry.h]

Hi All,
I would appreciate any views on the two items attached.
Knights Cross of the Iron Cross
and separate Oak Leaves.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance,
Terry

[terry.h]

b)

[peter3181]

No

[Thomas E Hansen]

I do not like any of it. Sorry.

[kaiserwilhelm2]

i do not like any of it. Sorry.

+1

[Thomas E Hansen]

The oaks are og sharp enough in the details and the markings on the oaks are not sharp enough either.
The cross looks like a dipping “3”. Typical for souval.

[terry.h]

Knights Cross etc

Is it so difficult for so many when they reply to a query to say WHY something is wrong?
To just get remarks like 'no' or 'don't like it' or '+1' is about as useless as fart in a thunderstorn. I really believed the purpose of the Forum was to gain useful information from people who are supposed to know what they are talking about. I was obviously mistaken......the purpose clearly seems to be as least helpful as possible by SOME members with one or two word cryptic word play answers to genuine questions from Forum members. The answers that I repeatedly see to countless worth while questions from Forum members more often than not show a complete lack of constructive response from many 'knowledgable' members who seem to get some sort of sadistic pleasure in making their answers as obscure and vague as they possibly can. After all if we were all smart arses and knew all there is to know about militaria we wouldn't need to ask the questions in the first place. What's the point of having a Forum in which the only answers you get are invariably as vague as it is possible to get?
I hasten to add that this does not refer to ALL Frorum members who 'answer' questions, but it certainly refers to a great many.

[kaiserwilhelm2]

the oaks are og sharp enough in the details and the markings on the oaks are not sharp enough either.
The cross looks like a dipping “3”. Typical for souval.

+1

[cobra-2001]

kc

I agree the cross looks like a souval cross . Cliff

[Hank C.]

Is it so difficult for so many when they reply to a query to say WHY something is wrong?
To just get remarks like 'no' or 'don't like it' or '+1' is about as useless as fart in a thunderstorn. I really believed the purpose of the Forum was to gain useful information from people who are supposed to know what they are talking about. I was obviously mistaken......the purpose clearly seems to be as least helpful as possible by SOME members with one or two word cryptic word play answers to genuine questions from Forum members. The answers that I repeatedly see to countless worth while questions from Forum members more often than not show a complete lack of constructive response from many 'knowledgable' members who seem to get some sort of sadistic pleasure in making their answers as obscure and vague as they possibly can. After all if we were all smart arses and knew all there is to know about militaria we wouldn't need to ask the questions in the first place. What's the point of having a Forum in which the only answers you get are invariably as vague as it is possible to get?
I hasten to add that this does not refer to ALL Frorum members who 'answer' questions, but it certainly refers to a great many.

Two things spring to mind:
1. You said "Any help appreciated". But apparently the help given was not satisfactory - or apparently appreciated.
2. Knights crosses and oak leaves have been posted and discussed here on WAF since 2002? or so. You could search on your own, draw some conclusions, and say 'This is what I think, can somebody confirm/deny?' But nope, you just say "I need opinions". After 11+ years as a member here, you should realize some due diligence on your own part would be appreciated.
Unfortunately, my knowledge of Knight's Crosses is nil, so can't comment on it.

Best
H

[terry.h]

Hi Hank,
In reply to what you wrote, and thank you for replying.
I do not rely on Forum Members for advice AND I did as much research throughout the internet as I thought might help, but I needed confirmation from someone who could really know what the two items were. I deliberately did NOT write what I had discovered myself because I was hoping for a completely unbiased point of view from anyone responding, which I assume you would agree with. If you believe that 'I don't like them' and simply 'no' and then '+1' (the first three replies)....are in any way constructively helpful then we must disagree. I am always the first to personally message ANYONE who is kind enough to reply to me with helpful, constructive advice but I really don't see any point in writing a one word response that tells me absolutely nothing. You may well disagree and feel that 'no' is helpful but I genuinely think the idea of the Forum is to be more in depth with constructive responses that are designed to shed a little light on the items people ask to be discussed and commented on. It doesn't have to be a Gettysburg address but helpful advice, suggestions or guidance goes a long way. If as you possibly believe that personal research is all you need then
1) There is no need for the Forum
2) The nature of the Forum to bring people together with similar interests, queries and suggestions is also of no particular concern.
3) WAF is NOT just a Forum for knowledgeable 'experts' with little or no time for newcommers into the militaria hobby. We all have to start somewhere.
4) Just for the record, the major criticism of WAF is in the area of responses to genuine queries over items. If you are inexperienced on WAF (perhaps a newer member) or unknowledgeable when first joining and ask a question that appears obviously answerable or just too simple to the more knowledgeable members the response is frequently not just unhelpful it's frequently belittling. Check it out for yourself, you might be surprised.
Thanks for replying anyway Hank,
Terry.

[kaiserwilhelm2]

If you believe that 'I don't like them' and simply 'no' and then '+1' (the first three replies)....are in any way constructively helpful then we must disagree. I really don't see any point in writing a one word response that tells me absolutely nothing.
Terry.

Actually No, +1 tells you exactly what you want to know. You wanted to know is it original. Answer: No. Supported by me: +1. Then Thomas chimes in with why we do not like these items. No need to complain.

[Tony T-S]

The RK is a very nice postwar Souval. The dipping 3 in 1939 and the low swaz confirm that. A very nice addition to a postwar Souval collection, but not wartime. Better photos of the case may tell us if it and the Cross are a complete set.

[terry.h]

Knight's Cross etc

Hi Tony,
Thanks for the info
Now I have some idea what the KC is. Not been told much till now. I'm not a medals/awards man, and most of the replies haven't helped much. I have been trying to help a friend of mine with some sort of advice about the Oak Leaves and the KC because he is thinking of selling them but didn't really know what he had. I will attach a couple of better photos of the case tomorrow if you would be kind enough to look at them. Is the Oak Leaves anything?
Cheers and thanks,
Terry

[kaiserwilhelm2]

Hi Tony,
Not been told much till now. and most of the replies haven't helped much. Is the Oak Leaves anything?
Cheers and thanks,
Terry

Come on read reaction number 3 there the same information was already given and then confirmed by me and then by Cobra. No way to go about getting info and appreciating what you get.

The oak leaves as was already clear are not period originals - so post-war reproductions.