EK 1914 What do you think about it ?

[pinpon590]

Hello !

Someone purpose me this one, but I don't know... I don't like the needle...

Thank you for your opinion !

[pinpon590]

next

[pinpon590]

Needle articulation

[pinpon590]

last picts

Thank you !

[pinpon590]

Nobody can help me ??

:beer:

[Mike K]

Hi,

I have not seen one like this before but nothing I see makes me like this one at all - especially the hardware and patina. My guess is that is a new fake we'll be seeing more of in the near future.

Regards

Mike

[pinpon590]

Thank you Mike !

:cheers:

[Kriztofer]

I've seen this type of pin before and I finally found the comparison pics. I think it's just another design variation although I don't remember seeing this exact type before. I would say this cross is a ok, but you might want to see what Motorhead or Mr Garvy think first.

[gregM]

I am leaning in Mike's direction on this one. I don't like the patina on the back

of the cross. It looks like it was a chemical was of some kind. I also have not

this style of hinge block and catch before.

[Eric Stahlhut]

crapola.

[Kriztofer]

crapola.

Hi Gents

For the sake of furthering our knowledge of these awards I would like to hear more reasons why you think this cross is bad. Funny patina and personal preference do not make a bad piece.

I see nothing wrong with the core, it appears to be 3 piece construction. The catch does seem like TR period but this pin is acceptable as seen on the example I posted. The block that's above the hinge is another thing maybe a repair??

[ekhunter]

Chris, the above talked about cross doesn't give me that warm and fuzzy feeling.. It's a lot different then the one you posted, which is a good one. If you note, the block above the hinge is actually part of the hinge. The pin is perfectly round, not flat backed, and the clasp is square wire, not round. The beading on the frame is thick like a fake I've seen somewhere before. True, it's a three piece, but their are a lot of three piece fakes out there. I can't say without a doubt, 100% that it's bad, but I'll just say it's one I wouldn't feel comfortable having in my collection. I love unigue pieces, and their are a lot of really good and unique ones out there that are totally legit. If you or anyone else is looking for a nice/unique pinback to have, an unmarked KMST was 'For Sale' here, don't know if it is still available. Sorry, just checked, cross is gone now!

Edited April 29, 2009 by ekhunter

[Eric Stahlhut]

sorry for any confusion regarding my remark, chris.

i was referring to the first cross that is the subject of this thread. your cross is fine. :cheers:

[Mike K]

Hi Kriztofer,

The example you posted shares NONE of the same hardware with the example under discussion - the hinge is obviously very different, the main pin on the example you show has a square/rectangular profile (no, it's not round, it just has rounded edges) and the catch is obviously different.

I can only think of one wartime / 20s maker who used a "flatwire" catch - CD800 (and their related "square punch" cousins) - and the catch on those is very different. Flatwire catches are known on 1914 EK1s, but those crosses are of imo 30s/40s (and post-war, including 57er) construction. NON of those 30s or later crosses used the type of hinge as the cross in question.

I have no problems with needle/round pin EK1s, but none of them share the core or the hinge with the cross in question.

The core on the cross in question is not known to me. I also personally think the crown is very unusual and not in proportion with the W or the date.

Wouldn't surprise me if the beading on this frame could be typed to one of the "Latvian" fakes in common circulation.

In this case the patina - which to me looks artificial - IS important when taken into consideration with the other bad points this cross exhibits.

Regards

Mike

[Kriztofer]

Gentleman, thank you for pointing out what you see as the bad characteristics of the posted (pinpons) cross, this does make it clearer. The one I posted isn't mine but an example from another thread, the comparison I was making with the example was with the L shape of the pin which some collectors see as a fake attribute or a replacement. I must admit it isn't the nicest of pin designs, pretty basic.

Regards,

Chris

[Valgor]

I am leaning in Mike's direction on this one. I don't like the patina on the back

of the cross. It looks like it was a chemical was of some kind. I also have not

this style of hinge block and catch before.

I had not noticed at first, but indeed, the patina is made by a liquid.

I have seen this cross somewhere before, but i cant remember where.

[gregM]

something else that looks "off" to me------

Check out the picture of the hinge in post #3. Look at the gray discoloration of the back of the

cross where the hinge is attached to the back of the cross.

In my opinion that hinge block was welded on to the cross and not soldered. The gray discoloration

is caused by the super hot gas used in the welding process.

I work in a aluminum fabrication shop and it is very common to see these dark areas in the welds

done using "MIG" wire feed welders.

Edited April 30, 2009 by gregM

[Valgor]

something else that looks "off" to me------

Check out the picture of the hinge in post #3. Look at the gray discoloration of the back of the

cross where the hinge is attached to the back of the cross.

In my opinion that hinge block was welded on to the cross and not soldered. The gray discoloration

is caused by the super hot gas used in the welding process.

I work in a aluminum fabrication shop and it is very common to see these dark areas in the welds

done using "MIG" wire feed welders.

Do they need to be soldered, always, to be good ones?

This is turning into a very interesting thread by the way.

[Motorhead]

Sorry for beeing late here. The first cross is a modern fake. It showed up not so long ago-and that kind of pin you can find at various copies of imperial awards.It's the core that gives the thumb down. Sorry,but just one one fake more on the list. The 2nd cross is a "Deumer".Well known from the clamshell examples,here with a pin.Can befound magnetic and with non magnetic core(Mike,have you ever seen a flat one from this variation?)

Micha

[Valgor]

Sorry for beeing late here. The first cross is a modern fake. It showed up not so long ago-and that kind of pin you can find at various copies of imperial awards.It's the core that gives the thumb down. Sorry,but just one one fake more on the list. The 2nd cross is a "Deumer".Well known from the clamshell examples,here with a pin.Can befound magnetic and with non magnetic core(Mike,have you ever seen a flat one from this variation?)

Micha

Micha,

This Deumer, is that a private purchase? Wartime? Interwar?

[Motorhead]

That Deumer pinback I would put into the 20/30ies.My oppinion.For sure a private purchase.

Micha

[Mike K]

....The 2nd cross is a "Deumer". Well known from the clamshell examples,here with a pin. Can be found magnetic and with non magnetic core (Mike, have you ever seen a flat one from this variation?) Micha....

Hi Micha,

Not with this type of hardware - only with the standard TR period "coke-bottle" pin and L/11 marking.

Regards

Mike

[Motorhead]

So-the only confirmed " flat Deumer" EKs next to the both variations you've named are the magnetic and non magnetic clamshells?

Micha

[Eric Stahlhut]

flat magnetic deumer. lightweight cross. frames are delicate

[Eric Stahlhut]

unmarked, wire catch