EK 1914 EK1 "26"

[Guest Darrell]

Unusual ... I dont believe I have seen a "26" maker marked EK1 from the TR era before ..

Edited November 28, 2005 by Darrell

[Guest Darrell]

back

[Guest Darrell]

front

[Mike]

That bright silver finish on the back looks "57"ish to me

[Guest Darrell]

That bright silver finish on the back looks "57"ish to me

Not really .... original "26" WW2 (Swastika) mint 26's had that same frosted back

[Mike]

I don't own that many "Low Mileage" crosses ...mine have a few miles on them so I guess I'm not use to that 2 tone pin to back effect. You know ...it's been 2 years since I've played with my EK1's ..time to check them out again huh?

[Gordon Williamson]

Unusual ... I dont believe I have seen a "26" maker marked EK1 from the TR era before ..

Now that's a real honey Darrell, as nice a TR 1914 EK1 as I've ever seen.

[Bill Garvy]

And from the other end of the spectrum, an unmarked example from the same manufacturer. . .

obverse:

reverse:

clasp & vaulting:

[Stogieman]

Hi Guys, I do not remember seeing a "26" '14 EK1 but there's no mistaking the finish/quality/features as a "26" for sure! Neat!

[joe campbell]

i agree.

the finish on this one gives me

the very strong impression of

same manufacture techniques

as the '39 BH Mayer.

it's a beauty!

joe

[Mike]

Not really .... original "26" WW2 (Swastika) mint 26's had that same frosted back

Hi Darrell ...Mayer did pay attention to details ..and the frosted finish on any of their PAB or IAB has that 2 tone effect . I was just never lucky enough to own a mint cond one like yours ..I'm use to seeing examples like the one Bill posted where the mirror finish on the pin has faded to match the back. Could they have made the TR WW1's as a custom or made to order item ? Maybe the didn't keep a large stock on hand as replacements. They were a quality outfit that's for sure

[Mike]

One thing I've always wondered about ..why PKZ numbers were marked on TR produced WW1 replacements. Could Bill's EK be a later production where they stopped PKZ marking them

[Guest Darrell]

One thing I've always wondered about ..why PKZ numbers were marked on TR produced WW1 replacements. Could Bill's EK be a later production where they stopped PKZ marking them

Could be Mike .... the other interesting thing ... the first one I posted is vaulted as well .... the "26" stamp and vaulting (which appears machined?) must have been very early? Comments?

[Guest Rick Research]

Assuming that these are in the 1939+ sized frames, the reason for the WW2 maker markings on the "1914" pins is because ALL the +1939 frames were made for interchangeable use. So the 1939 size frame parts were stamped out en masse, and if a specific assembly ended up on a 1939 or a replacement 1914, it didn't matter to them--BOTH fit. Why bother deliberately making TWO simultaneous runs of frame parts, marked and unmarked? So without me knowing about the 1939 version, I'd still venture to guess there are unmarked 1939s as well-- simply howver that parts batch came out.

[joe campbell]

logic...

wisdom...

a dash of intuitive reasoning...

and a hearty HIYO, Silver!!!

you nailed it as far as i'm concerned.

joe

[Mike]

Assuming that these are in the 1939+ sized frames, the reason for the WW2 maker markings on the "1914" pins is because ALL the +1939 frames were made for interchangeable use. So the 1939 size frame parts were stamped out en masse, and if a specific assembly ended up on a 1939 or a replacement 1914, it didn't matter to them--BOTH fit. Why bother deliberately making TWO simultaneous runs of frame parts, marked and unmarked? So without me knowing about the 1939 version, I'd still venture to guess there are unmarked 1939s as well-- simply howver that parts batch came out.

That makes sense to me as well Rick , the more I think about it ..I can't see them making them custom ordered ...I still can't understand why the Praesidialkanzlei allowed them to be marked since the PK #'s were reserved for Official Awarded Medals and the LDO # was for the replacement or "retail" sales awards. I know a few collectors who prefer PK marked over LDO marked for this reason. I thought the PK maintained tight control over regulations. Maybe since it was a WW1 award , it was a grey area to them and overlooked ?

[Jim Baker]

Rick is right. Darrell, hold your two crosses side by side. The frames should match. I've seen a few of these and if you notice the "W" always looks wide compared to WWI issues. I always thought it was to fill up the extra space of the core.

I sold an L/54 TR made '14 cross to George Stimson that would bring tears to your eyes. Maybe he will post it.

[Mike]

Rick is right. Darrell, hold your two crosses side by side. The frames should match. I've seen a few of these and if you notice the "W" always looks wide compared to WWI issues. I always thought it was to fill up the extra space of the core.

I sold an L/54 TR made '14 cross to George Stimson that would bring tears to your eyes. Maybe he will post it.

Hi Jim ...I think Darrell only has one EK pictured here ...the other was posted by Bill. Interesting how the one you sold had the LDO # on it ...not the PK#.

[Gordon Williamson]

The answer to the numbers issue is quite simple. Serving soldiers who lost /damaged their EKs ( and other awards) "in the line of duty" were entitled to a free replacement through official sources. Unlike awards such as the PLM and other individual State awards of the Imperial period which were now defunct, the Iron Cross, albeit in a new guise was still a valid award, still being issued and being worn by thousands of still serving soldiers.

It is perfectly logical that any such lost/damaged awards would be replaced by pieces supplied on official contract and thus show the PK mark whilst, just like the 1939 version, those sourced privately as "extras" would show the LDO mark.

[Mike]

The answer to the numbers issue is quite simple. Serving soldiers who lost /damaged their EKs ( and other awards) "in the line of duty" were entitled to a free replacement through official sources. Unlike awards such as the PLM and other individual State awards of the Imperial period which were now defunct, the Iron Cross, albeit in a new guise was still a valid award, still being issued and being worn by thousands of still serving soldiers.

It is perfectly logical that any such lost/damaged awards would be replaced by pieces supplied on official contract and thus show the PK mark whilst, just like the 1939 version, those sourced privately as "extras" would show the LDO mark.

Thanks Gordon ...I understand now , so the same exact rules applied. That would mean that somewhere out there should be another 1914 "L/18" marked sister Cross to this "26" right ?

Edited November 29, 2005 by Mike

[Gordon Williamson]

Thanks Gordon ...I understand now , so the same exact rules applied. That would mean that somewhere out there should be another 1914 "L/18" marked sister Cross to this "26" right ?

Absolutely !

[joe campbell]

yes, mike.

when my scanner gets goin' agin',

i'll post some TR 1914's with TR MM.

great thread!

joe

[Mike]

Thanks for explaining that Gordon. Just what I need ...another reason to buy more EK's

My Wife will understand

" But Honey ..see how one has a PK # and the other is the LDO?"

*********************

And thanks Joe ..I'd like to see some of those Crosses

[Jim Baker]

Mike,

Sorry, I thought Darrell had both. Any picture wiz guys that can show them (the 26's) side by side?

Darrell,

Bet you would like to have that one to go with yours....

[Guest Darrell]

Mike,

Sorry, I thought Darrell had both. Any picture wiz guys that can show them (the 26's) side by side?

Darrell,

Bet you would like to have that one to go with yours....

Yep ... so many choices ... so little money