Cased Mutterkreuz on eStand?

[Herr_Flick]

Greetings

A fellow member has brought to my attention that there might be something wrong with the cross I have on the eStand:

http://www.wehrmacht-awards.net/for...ead.php?t=99151

- wich I of course welcome as I would hate to sell a fake if it's listed as orginal

I have posted the cross in the respective forum but since I didn't get any attention I were kindly sugested to try here instead.

In the meanwhile I have read various threads and I'm quiet surpriced if a cross like this can be faulted based on a dot over the "i" in AH's signature alone, when everything else IMHO seems to be in order. Having in mind that there were more than 40 different companies wich mass produced these during 1938-45 I don't think it's legit not allowing minor differences - or errors that might have happend during certin production runs...again my oppinion. I also wonder if there is any facts that proves this "error cross" as fake?

When this being said, I will be the first to admit that I'm far from being an expert, as I've only collected serious for about 2 years. However somewhere between 10 and 15 of these crosses has passed through my hands during that time - and none of them were matching eachother - all slightly different...I think that's also worth having in mind.

I've made some additional shots today wich are posted below. Please also se the sales add as the pattern below the blue enamel is better shown on one of these photos. Making good photos isn't among my best skills

Either way I welcome facts, thoughts and oppinions so I either can remove the sales thread or continue the sale...and move on.


Cheers,
Carsten

[Herr_Flick]

Close-up of the applied disk...

[Herr_Flick]

A side view...

[Herr_Flick]

And the reverse...

[skip]

Looks fine to me. Never heard of that dot or swas not touching the edges thing.
Considering the large amount of manufactureres making these there are a lot of small differences between them.

I have only ever seen very crude fakes of Mother Crosses and none managed to obtain that lovely opaque blue colour of the originals.

Skip

[bigd]

Looks fine to me. Never heard of that dot or swas not touching the edges thing.
Considering the large amount of manufactureres making these there are a lot of small differences between them.

I have only ever seen very crude fakes of Mother Crosses and none managed to obtain that lovely opaque blue colour of the originals.

Skip

hi, i brought up the point about the dot above the signature simply because when i posted a similar cross a few weeks ago i was informed it was suspicious because of this reason. i think it was Dion who mentioned it and because of his far superior knowledge i did not buy the cross. The thread is still there on page 2 if anyone cares to have a look.If i am wrong ,i apologise for any inconvenience i have caused but i was only tring to help.

[Greg Kubasek]

The cross looks just fine to me. I've heard of the "dot" issue here before (if you search I'm sure you will find some threads) but I don't think that is a sign of a "fake"

The fake MK's I have seen have crude castings, or the writing is placed improperly and you don't have the opaque enamel effect.

Correct me if I am wrong but this looks 100% fine to me.

Greg

[Matt Starr]

I dont think I would ever hear the words 'Dion' and 'superior knowledge' in the same sentence ever. The Mk looks ok, I have never heard about the dots before.
Matt

[Darrell]

Mr. Flick (Carsten)

Could you maybe post a picture of reverse without the flash? It may dull some of the features. Things tend to look alot better that way. The writing looks like a lighting reflection .....

[Herr_Flick]

Greetings everyone

Thank You all for chipping in on this issue - much appreciated

bigd: No sweat or any hard feelings what so ever...You did absolutely the right thing - so need for feeling sorry It would have been terrible if it indeed was a fake, and then it got sold and the new owner perhaps never found out...or if found out when recived, as that would mean unnesessary expenses for both parts as well as the trouble and disapointment. Not to forget I could get the reputation as a 3rd Reich pusher I don't have yet ruined

It's also good to bring such things to attention...in case some of our "eyes gets lazy" - as mine did (didn't notice the dot to begin with ). If only I had noticed this rare variant, then the price would have been $197 and not $97

Darrell: Please have a look a the sales thread (link on top of this thread) as there is a scan of it at the bottom of the thread. As for making photos without flash...these were without flash - outside in dull overcasted weather!
I have a super 8 Megapixel digicam that cost me half a farm - but the idiot behind the digicam can't figure out how to use it propperly Ughh...trouble with high-tech stuff is the first sign of becomming an ol' fart ...crap...not to forget the use of the term "high-tech stuff" is as well I guess I better give in and watch the bundled DVD on "how to" I've had for about a year as well

Once again thanks for comming to the rescue - have a good weeked guys.


Cheers,
Carsten

[Frank Heukemes]

Dear Carsten,

Looks absolutely fine to me.

[mrg]

Hi Herr Flick im sorry to disagree but the dot above Hilters signature is an accepted fake. Hitler did not sign his signiture this way, also the criss cross enamelling effect is suspect.Not too keen on the reverse lettering. This is my opinion,but i feel it is not one for my collection.

[Mark S.]

Looks fine to me. Never heard of that dot or swas not touching the edges thing.
Considering the large amount of manufactureres making these there are a lot of small differences between them.

I have only ever seen very crude fakes of Mother Crosses and none managed to obtain that lovely opaque blue colour of the originals.

Skip

The blue isnt opaque, it is translucent. If it was opaque, you wouldnt be able to see through it.

This cross is fine. What I look for is a stipple pattern under the enamel, and I can see it quite clearly in these pictures. I have problems with ones that have underlays of random bumps and lumps, and of course murky enamel.

Be aware though, that some of these crosses use an entirely different style of underlay, and it may not even be stippling, but it will be uniform in design. For example, I have one that has crosshatching.

[mrg]

Hi Carsten is there any chance of seeing the whole of the cross with a bit more distance on the shot front and back. May i also say that a year or so ago on this forum there was a posting of an MK fake with its enamelling process half finished and at the time every body agreed what a good fake it was. Have done a search but that file no longer exists. Maybe its just me but i feel as if we should move on from the murky poor enamelling theory.Not trying to be awkward but given the right style of die time and patience that a lone bandit would have these could easily be copied and copied well. I once talked to a dealer who said he could make copies of most awards to a standard that not many could detect. The first would be Time consuming '' but when you ve got nothing better to do all the pennies count and its worth it in the long run''. All the best.

[münster]

Wasnt me who said stay away from the dotted "i" But I dont go out of my way looking for them