EK 1914 EK 1

[Tom63]

Real?Fake?

[Motorhead]

That's a good one-no doubts!

Micha

[Tom63]

As you think,what manufacturer has made EK?

[Motorhead]

From the pin my first thought was "Square",but the core is totally different.So unfortunately the answer to your question will stay in the dark...but may be one of the others will know more!

Micha

[DavidM]

Hello

I have no idea who the manufacturer is, but it looks like a good, original WW1 EK to me.

[Chris Boonzaier]

I have to check, but I think I have the same somewhere with a simple "800" stamp...

[Mike K]

Hi Tom,

I have no problems with authenticity but I have no idea on the maker. Both of my examples (pinback & screwback) have non-steel cores. My pinback is stamped 800 on the reverse center of the pinback version.

I'd load pics but my browser does not work with the new forum format here.

Regards

Mike

[naoki matsumoto]

Real?Fake?

Hi,Tom! Nice to meet you. I am Naoki Matsumoto 39years old. Beautiful WW1 !! I have some 1914 WW1 of 800 or 950 hallmarked & written name.I like silber made.I have Spanienkreuz,deutscheskreuz,Eiserneskreuz..

Thanks.

[Steve Russell]

Definitely looks good. Crown, core and skinny pin hinge look like the 'KMST' to me. Steve

[buellmeister]

Tom,

A very nice Cross I may add!

Regards,

Joel

[Mike K]

Definitely looks good. Crown, core and skinny pin hinge look like the 'KMST' to me. Steve

I just wanted to state that the core of this type is absolutely definitely not KMST.

I've loaded the dreaded MS IE, so here are the pics of my examples of Tom's type, which I couldn't load before.

Regards

Mike

Edited April 8, 2007 by Mike K

[Mike K]

Reverse...

[Chris Boonzaier]

Looks to be a core match....

[Steve Russell]

I just wanted to state that the core of this type is absolutely definitely not KMST.

Regards

Mike

Thanks for posting the pics Mike. They help. But 'absolutely, definitely not?' What makes you state this? Compare Tom's with your non-screwback. I stand with my original possibility and agree with Chris...looks like a core match to a KMST. Even the dimensions and frames are similar. The only difference I can see is the tapered pin on your example, but too many other similarities front and back. See the pics below. Steve

[Steve Russell]

Back and last pic. Steve

[Mike K]

Hi Steve,

I agree that the two I posted are a match with the one Tom posted - that's why I posted them.

Marked KMST examples have only been seen with one core type, and that core type is radically different to the core on Tom's example. The pin on "standard" pinback KMST examples is also different to the example posted by Tom - they are always "V-notched" over the hinge and the pin sits over the hinge (and has a separately applied "leg" support at the hinge end). Frame size and beading details are also different.

I'll stand by my statement that Tom's example is absolutely definitely not a KMST.

To make things easier, here's a comparison between a marked KMST with "standard" type pin and the type in question.

Regards

Mike

Obverse...

[Mike K]

Reverse...

[Steve Russell]

OK Mike. I think I follow you. So you are saying that these unmarked examples are KMST manufacture and unmarked? or that they come from a different manufacturer altogether? I think you are saying that they are a different manufacturer. And if so, who do you think? Your marked one is clearly different but that was not clear on the earlier thread, which seemed to say those two were unmarked KMST examples. Please help me unconfuse myself. Thanks, Steve

[Mike K]

Hi Steve,

OK, I saw where I inadvertently created confusion - sorry. I've re-written the second line of that post.

To clarify, the first two examples I loaded (posts 11 & 12) are examples I have that match Tom's example. Neither are maker marked. The pinback has an 800 stamp on the back of the cross (hidden by the pin). The maker is unknown to me, but imo definitely not KMST.

Posts 16 & 17 show a comparison between one of my examples (unknown maker) and a KMST, to show the big differences between the two types and prove that Tom's type is not a KMST.

Again, sorry for any confusion - I only wanted to show that Tom's type is not by KMST.

Regards

Mike

Edited April 8, 2007 by Mike K

[Steve Russell]

OK now it is clear! The good news is that Tom has a nice cross. Thanks, Steve