Maybe an original transitional piece in very good condition? The lettering difference a bit of the later rzm pieces but Descher was a large firm so I assume they used more then one die in there production period. I have ssen this reverse somewhere before in the data base I believe.
It looks to me like an early (first few months of 1935) RZM transitional piece by Deschler. The lack of an "M1" RZM license prefix dates it to that time. Very high quality silver or nickel-silver content and probably has been polished sometime in the last 50 years.
When the M1 prefixes came in mid-1935 Deschler would have made a new reverse die.
Thank you for the picture of post 7. I'm sure Stephen would like this one also.
It's that seldom seen M1/49. Your picture of the front is not visible?
This is the second example I saw by this maker. I already had serial number 107.164 in my list. Your's marked 15.180.
@ Stephen: I don't know your number?
I try to keep a record of the serial numbers, but until now I still get not much wiser. Only the M1/70 seems to be holding steady into the 8000 -9000 range???
Thank you for the picture of post 7. I'm sure Stephen would like this one also.
It's that seldom seen M1/49. Your picture of the front is not visible?
This is the second example I saw by this maker. I already had serial number 107.164 in my list. Your's marked 15.180.
@ Stephen: I don't know your number?
I try to keep a record of the serial numbers, but until now I still get not much wiser. Only the M1/70 seems to be holding steady into the 8000 -9000 range???
Regards, Theo (Wim Vangossum)
Hi Theo,
I think your fingers were moving too fast - the number above is 105.180 - perhaps the M1/49 HJs are above 100,000. My M1/70 is #9574
I think your fingers were moving too fast - the number above is 105.180 - perhaps the M1/49 HJs are above 100,000. My M1/70 is #9574
__________________
Cheers,
Stephen
Oops, I thought you also had a M1/49 in your collection. However, I keep digging after more information. Did you noticed Detlev Niemann sold a M1/52 two weeks ago?
Comment