taucher Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Tomorrow i will have a look at this cross.Any help is welcomeLooking forward to your opinion and thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taucher Posted January 14, 2008 Author Share Posted January 14, 2008 back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taucher Posted January 14, 2008 Author Share Posted January 14, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taucher Posted January 14, 2008 Author Share Posted January 14, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taucher Posted January 14, 2008 Author Share Posted January 14, 2008 Thanks for al the helptaucher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe campbell Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 this is a cross which has been vaulted by someonewho likes metallurgy or a jeweler. nothing wrongwith it, but certainly not standard issue in present form.looks like '39 production based on the retaining screwplate.hope it's a good price for you!joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregM Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 I also notice that the anti-spin pin has been removed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe campbell Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 I also notice that the anti-spin pin has been removedwith all the added vaulting, who needs "anti-spin"??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motorhead Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 I'm a bit sceptical.........unfortunately I'm not at home at the moment and I don't have access to my database! But bigger pics would be very helpful!Micha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taucher Posted January 15, 2008 Author Share Posted January 15, 2008 (edited) The cross felt and lookt nice so i bought it.Once home to my surprise i found this marking L/52 on the top of the cross.Its hard to spot with the naked eyeI think it stands for the maker C.F. Zimmermann a well known maker of WWII crosses.Maybe they made replacement WWI crosses? Edited January 15, 2008 by taucher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taucher Posted January 15, 2008 Author Share Posted January 15, 2008 Micha this is the best i can do considering the smal amount of upload here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taucher Posted January 15, 2008 Author Share Posted January 15, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taucher Posted January 15, 2008 Author Share Posted January 15, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taucher Posted January 15, 2008 Author Share Posted January 15, 2008 (edited) The back and the screw are silver (tested)Lets see how whe look when this age Edited January 15, 2008 by taucher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe campbell Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 now i'm a bit nervous....L/52 stamped OVER the filed downstability pin????i await micha's input...joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taucher Posted January 15, 2008 Author Share Posted January 15, 2008 looks like they put a WWI core in a other frameBut why stamp L/52 over the stability pinIts bearly visible with the naked eye and L/52 seems to have been boxed.I think a lot of efford to make a fake but clearly thinks don't end up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taucher Posted January 15, 2008 Author Share Posted January 15, 2008 (edited) This stinks!!!!!!! This is flying back and i think the end of the EK adventure!! Edited January 15, 2008 by taucher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taucher Posted January 15, 2008 Author Share Posted January 15, 2008 Hey Joe,A came across this one alsoA L/52 also??????Listed as very rareLooks the sameWonder what Micha has to say. http://www.rheinland-orden.com/shop/index....html&page=2 The 3 one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taucher Posted January 15, 2008 Author Share Posted January 15, 2008 (edited) I lookt at this cross over and over again.My eyes even look cross now Everything seems correct and in detail Only the L/52 mark is a riddleI have a gut feeling this is a genuine crossMaybe i am just fooling myself Edited January 15, 2008 by taucher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve campbell Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 There are genuine L/52 TR era 1914 EK1s out there, along with other LDO numbers such as L/11 etc. I have an L/52 on the way but it has a proper mark in the box and in the proper position. If you can return this do so because it has too many question marks. Don't give up on EKs though, give up on sketchy sources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe campbell Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 i think this is an original cross.i am concerned that it has been played with to "add" to its value.i think you might consider returningit, but would tell you that there areMANY fine crosses available just on thissite alone.yours will come with patience and some study.gordon williamson's books and steve previtara'sIron Time are worth having if you are thinkingof more than a token cross or two.i like the other cross you displayed, but would need to seemore detailed photos. i ALWAYS like to hold a cross inmy hands before reaching into my pockets.... you maynot have that option, but it is clearly the best way toget a feel for this wonderful decoration.joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taucher Posted January 16, 2008 Author Share Posted January 16, 2008 Seller did not know of stamp.The seller is no problem he is a trusted guy and will take it back.Only i dont know if i will give it back Will see after some more digging Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike K Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Hi,After having a good look at that pic with the removed anti-spin pin and the MM, I think it can be argued that the MM was applied after the anti-spin pin had been affized, but that the MM was applied right at the base of the anti-spin pin. The mark is well formed in the MIDDLE but weak on the right and almost absent on the left. I think the removeal of the anti-spin pin was probably neatly done well AFTER the MM had been applied and that some of the grinding has probably also removed some of the MM on the right hand side - eg the top of the 2 looks indisctint and not as deep as the middle or base of the 2. I think we are seeing an imaging effect. Hand examination will probably show everything is 100% OK.RegardsMike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taucher Posted January 16, 2008 Author Share Posted January 16, 2008 Hey Mike,Joethanks for the help.I have the same idee about it and thats why i waver.My idee is that this is a good cross.Lets see what's Micha's idee about it.greetsVince Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve campbell Posted January 16, 2008 Share Posted January 16, 2008 Hey Mike,Joethanks for the help.I have the same idee about it and thats why i waver.My idee is that this is a good cross.Lets see what's Micha's idee about it.greetsVinceYes get Micha's opinion, but there's not much Mike K doesn't know about these things. If he says it I'm halfway to the bank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now