EK 1914 1914 EK 2 Maker Marks

[joe campbell]

is this maker mark lVl?

or is it M?

joe

[joe campbell]

this one is very similar, yet the

top of the first upright DOES NOT touch

the first down arm of the "V".

so are there two different MM's here?

the second picture kind of stinks...

[joe campbell]

the guilty parties...

thanks for any thoughts!

joe

[joe campbell]

they certainly seem like twins except for

the method of eye attachment to upper flange.

so do i have M and l V l, or

are they the same maker mark?

(i KNOW this is nit-picky,

but it would be nice to clear up.

yes, i WILL get some sleep tonight...)

joe

[Tom Y]

You got me to looking at my M and IVI, and now I won't sleep tonight.

Maybe because I have a night job? Anyhow, the gist of it is, the cores are identical. the only difference being about 1 gm. in weight.... and what I've called an M for years is really an IVI So, next question, does the M actually exist? Any good scans of a real M out there?

[Daniel Murphy]

I think all of the above are IVI's, I just wish I had one. And a few of the other rare ones . I have always wanted one of each, but I only have about 25.

Dan Murphy

[Bill Garvy]

Here's another for consideration from, of all people, Joe Campbell. Is it an "M" or an "IVI"? What do you gentlemen think? Either way, it's a beautiful cross, and with a non combatant ribbon!

[attachmentid=16341]

Edited November 19, 2005 by Bill Garvy

[Bill Garvy]

An extreme close-up of the maker mark. . .

[Tom Y]

An extreme close-up of the maker mark. . .

Definitely an M

[joe campbell]

herr bill-

great shots!

the way your MM is open on the right peak is the way my left peak is open.

BTW, bill and i occasionally trade, and i am ALWAYS pleased with what

he sends me.

herr tom-

i wish i could decide with such enthusiasm...

i'm just not sure. i hope maybe gordon or

micha might have some thoughts.

c'mon guys...

admit it...

minutiae is FUN!!!

joe

[Motorhead]

Nice shots!But it's a hard case....after lkooking a while at your pics I'm voting for "IVI"-why?I've got a "MM" in my collection-please have a look.The arms of the "M's" are tighter together,exactely in the way I would expect it!Here is the ring with the maker mark:

[joe campbell]

micha-

your photo clears it for me!

the closed tops at the M's is what decides it.

many thanks!

joe

[Bill Garvy]

So your best thinking, gentlemen, is that my example is an "IVI" and not an "M"? Edited November 22, 2005 by Bill Garvy

[joe campbell]

william-

i think you have an l V l, not "M".

heh-heh... it's nice when mistakes fall in your favor.

i trust you can live with it.

joe

[Tom Y]

On the IVI the uprights and diagonals are squared off at the tops and there's a distinct, though slight, separation. On Bill's the left upright and diagonal are joined and the right are tapered. This can be accounted fr by the slight angle of the mark and the curvature of the ring, causing an incomplete stamping. I still say definitely an M.