Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Jaybo

1813 EK 2: authentic or a 'shaver' (fake)???

Recommended Posts

I need the opinions of the GMIC 'experten' on this question. I have the opportunity to purchase from my very dear friend of 30 years an 1813 EK 2. His trustworthiness is beyond reproach. He has been a collector for well over 50 years. He is slowly selling off some of his massive collection. He bought this 1813 EK 2 many years ago. The question is, is authentic or a fake? We all are aware that even experienced collectors can be fooled. What say you gentlemen?1813.zip1813.zip1813.zip

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone out there?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

I wouldn't be of much help, because not my field of experience!

But putting proper pic's could help, I for one are not able to open the link you gave...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have managed to "unzip" the files. The fault in the iron is a good sign but the quality of the images are not  sufficient to be absolutely certain.

Paul

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Stuka & Paul for your replies. I will try taking some better photos with my SLR in the next few days and post them. Paul, what exactly do you mean by the fault in the iron? Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a thin shadow on one of the limbs of the cross which suggests a thin split. The original crosses were made from Cumberland iron which was quite  brittle and prone to splits. Most of the fakes the iron is too regular

Paul 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gentlemen,

Here are the pictures from the zipfile.

Paul,

I don't see the shadow you are referring to.  Perhaps you could tell me which of the photos have the shadow you are referring to.

Regards,

Gordon

 

IMG_2875.jpg

IMG_2876.jpg

IMG_2877.jpg

IMG_2878.jpg

IMG_2879.jpg

IMG_2880.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Gordon for ‘unzipping ‘ my iPhone photos. If you guys need better quality photos, I can give it a go with my SLR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What appeared to be fault from my crappy phone is actually a shadow line on the reverse. Not sure what to think. 

Paul

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gentlemen,

I took some better quality photos of this medal with my SLR but can't get them to upload successfully. The max size allowed for uploading is 8 mb and the image is 6.4 mb. What gives?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jay,

This is a 1914 cross by maker KO that has been shaved and repainted by a faker.

All the best,

Trevor

PS: Apologies for my late reply, I check this site only very rarely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Streptile said:

Hi Jay,

This is a 1914 cross by maker KO that has been shaved and repainted by a faker.

All the best,

Trevor

PS: Apologies for my late reply, I check this site only very rarely.

Hi Trevor,

Thanks so much for your reply. I was fearful that might be the case. The reverse looks too much like my 1914 EKs. Could you please tell me what telltale signs lead you to your conclusion?

All the best,

Jay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's try this again with some resized SLR photos:

DSC_1619.JPG

another one:

DSC_1626.JPG

another...

DSC_1624.JPG

last one:

DSC_1620.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for weighing in. Can you be more specific so I can understand the pitfalls of the 1813?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Compare the pattern of the leaves and other details. They don't match the cores I'm familiar with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The leaves, the crown and the bottom stem are details I have been told in the past to be aware of in identifying authentic 1813 EKs from the fakes. But how so exactly? These seem to be somewhat 'trade secrets' on this site. Maybe properly in order to keep the fakers ignorant. I get that. The one detail that I have gleaned (correctly so???) is that the real 1813s have more of a straight bottom stem. Thanks for your input Vince.

 

EK 1813.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The above photo is apparently a known authentic 1813. Any other opinions out there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...