"Dotted" date Zimmermann DKiG's

[Gerd Becker]

I didn?t take enough time to study your cloth one so I can?t comment on that.Expert or no expert I take sides with Mr.Hansen on this issue,yeah do good shots of your dotty one and so will I with my not so dotty one and then we should be able to compare.

Why is there not even a sentence on those in any reference book?Again I?ve seen what happened to Hawkeye out here,I don?t want to leave this place through the roof,so I hope I didn?t offend anyone.Anyway I wouldn?t touch a dotty one nor take it as gift.These are not dotted ones but dotty ones to me

Regards

This happened to Mr. Hansen NOT because of his opinion to Rounders or "dotted date" DK?s, but his try to sell something, he believes to be fake, on ebay is the reason for his suspension.

In my opinion there is nothing wrong with these DK?s. I have had one in hand maybe a year ago and was able to compare it to other Originals and in my humble opinion are these pre-45 DK?s.

Just my two Euro-Cents...

Gerd

[Gerd Becker]

+++

Edited November 13, 2005 by Gerd Becker

[Guest Darrell]

This happened to Mr. Hansen NOT because of his opinion to Rounders or "dotted date" DK?s, but his try to sell something, he believes to be fake, on ebay is the reason for his suspension.

Gerd

And apparently that isnt enough to keep him suspended at WAF for more than 24 hours. He is still slinging mud at his "suspects", never taken responsibility for his actions, or made any appologies. Plus he's still blaming others for his actions.

Makes me sick to tell you the truth.

[Larry Lipps]

Gentlemen, while my knowledge level on DK's is too small to make a contribution, I can make an observation from this year's MAX show. As I walked around I started counting the stone mint DK's versus the "been there" looking ones. The score was 41 to 13. This did not include any of the large amount of obvious fakes, but really nice looking crosses being sold as original. This just seems like a skewed number to me. Whether the wreaths are dotted or not, I have concerns really good fakes may already be among us.

[Robin Lumsden]

About wreaths not being identical etc,I think Robin Lumsden has a 20 marked Zimmermann piece with a Deschler/Godet type wreath.

If you are reading this Robin,perhaps you could post a pic of your Zimmermann DKiG?

Dave

Certainly Dave. Here it is. Front.

[Robin Lumsden]

Back.

[Robin Lumsden]

And pin stamping. The thing weighs a ton, and the pin has not been replaced.

[Guest Darrell]

I have sworn twice to not comment any further on this thread, but since the one person that would get into a pissing match with me has "left", let me get my 2 cents in.

My cross was purchased off a fellow in Ontario who buys a huge amount of stuff with Detlev GOA's and COA's (he is a friend of Detlev). The difference being COA is a Certificate of Authenticity (item not owned by Detlev, but sent to him for an expertise), a GOA and Guarantee of Authenticity (an item owned by Detlev and given an expertise).

The fellow in Ontario was the first one to receive it from Detlev (c/w the GOA I attached above). It was purchased by myself a year ago. Upon posting on WAF it drew considerable criticism from several, with good cause, no one had ever seen one before OR at least noticed one before.

The battles took place, eventually getting so ridiculous with all the false assumptions and bogus theories that I finally pulled out of the debate. Several other members then came on board with similar examples that they had in their collections for years. All of a sudden WOW !!! ... obviously a recent flooding of the market with these. They forgot to read that the others were not purchased 1 week prior to my post ... but that didnt matter. Chop Chop ... fake.

At that time I decided to contact Detlev himself regarding the WAF thread and his thoughts. He stated AGAIN that he considers these 100% original pre-45 pieces.

If anyone knows Detlev, he is an honest person with a wealth of knowledge. Much more than quite a few appointed experts. Sure he's been wrong before, sure stuff has slipped through on his site ... but he has always corrected those mistakes and made amends. He would not risk his reputation over a medal if he felt it was not ok.

Besides the obvious differences to the wreath and date, the item shows absolutley NO evidence of being taken apart or tampered with. The weight and size matches those of other war time examples. The patina and feel of this one is no different than other "commonly" accepted DKiGs.

I suppose until the positive proof comes to light one way or the other, these will be considered a grey area, accepted by some, not by others.

The scarey thing is people assuming a positon of "knowledge" and looked up to by all the other members, begin throwing darts at an item before doing any type of scientific research (similar to what Dietrich has done with the S&L RK or Alan with the Rounder). Is it any wonder few are willing to post pictures of controversial medals. If it's for some sound fact finding reason I'm sure others would contribute, but if a piece is going to be trashed by unsound assumptions and theories ... the particaption will be minimal at best.

[Mike]

I've never really been that active on any of the Forums so ..I knew nothing about this dotted date issue before a month or so ago.From what I had read over there , I honestly thought that it was a dead issue and had been accepted that they were fake. I had no idea that the debate was still ongoing. We all have to keep an open mind and only through asking these questions and studying the construction, material used..die flaws ...whatever we can find which will help us get the answers. As you mentioned before ..just look at the time and research done by Dietrich on the S&L's ...that dedication paid off. But it wasn't a short road ( and I think he's now cross eyed from it )

Edited November 14, 2005 by Mike

[Mike]

I know I'll prob get some Flak over this but ..I think it's possible that Zimmermann produced these late War ..We all know that for whatever reason, the same wreath was used by Klien and Zimmerman. Now ..after seeing Robin's Hybrid Deschler/Zimmermann Cross...it looks like it was Zimmermann that was buying the components from other Companies and assembling them as their own. If the "supply" of components Zimmermann was buying dried up (maybe the sub contractor was bombed out or whatever) they'd be finally forced to either start making them in house or ..buy them or have them made elsewhere. This could explain the Starburst and wreath not matching up with earlier #20's. Maybe we should look at the numbers to find out how many Crosses were issued between mid 44 and 1945 ? If this was a late War Cross ..that (to me ) would explain why probably more were "in stock" than documented as issued.

There are many legitimate questions that throw a shadow on this Cross ..including the big one ---why isn't there at least one early ref book that mentions or shows a picture of this variation.

That's a hard one ..However I don't think we'll ever get any answers by going at it tooth and nail with each

other over it .

Has anyone ever really gone over the dotted date wreath to see if there are any flaws (even faint) that match the other style wreath ? I wish I had one to study because I'd like to know . Some Collection out there could have a documented issued example ..I'm sure the answer is out there.

[David Robertson]

Hi guys

Here are some photos of my DK, Mike has raised the same points I did a year 1/2 ago about supply,contract from another outside vender,Bombed out factory ETC: The response was they are fake because I said so and no mater what you say or show will change my mind! So I just let the self proclamed experts have there way.

David Robertson

[David Robertson]

Hi guys

Here are some photos of my DK, Mike has raised the same points I did a year 1/2 ago about supply,contract from another outside vender,Bombed out factory ETC: The response was they are fake because I said so and no mater what you say or show will change my mind! So I just let the self proclamed experts have there way.

David Robertson

Edited November 14, 2005 by David Robertson

[David Robertson]

the back ,for some reasion I can not add any more photos?

Edited November 14, 2005 by David Robertson

[Guest Darrell]

Ok ... these are the first time scans of the Obverse and Reverse of mine have ever been shown. The only pictures that were posted on WAF were some bad camcorder still shots a year ago. Also the medal that hansen showed is not mine as far as I know. Who knows where he got them from.

Obverse:

[Guest Darrell]

Reverse:

[Rosenberg]

Hi,

I made my general thoughts already public,so consider this just as posting pics for comparison....this one weighs 45.0g on a digital scale.....

Edited November 14, 2005 by Rosenberg

[Rosenberg]

....

[Rosenberg]

I always wonder why so many mint looking crosses have no rays....is that a different version?

[Rosenberg]

....BTW I like the one Robin posted,it is unique though,isn?t it?

[Rosenberg]

....

[Rosenberg]

.....

[Stogieman]

Good question Rosenberg.......... one I do not have an answer for. Perhaps some of our more learned members can comment on this?? Thanks!!

[Mike]

Hi Rosenberg , What do you mean by "no rays"? Do you mean where the grey color being worn off the long bars of the Starburst ? If that's what you are talking about ..I don't believe there's any way that that's a normal wear pattern .My "feeling" (or guess) is that the Soldiers would sand or file the color off the longest bars of the starburst to give the Cross more character ..give it that worn "been there" look. Along the lines of taking the wire out of the top of a visor to make it a crusher cap. Plus the gold/copper color showing through made a nice contrast and dressed it up a bit

[Rosenberg]

Thanks,Mike.You got me exactly.

Regards