1914 Iron Cross 1st Class with screw back by Werner Any comments

[Graf]

[v.Perlet]

Hello Graf,

 

i do hope that you got and paid for an 'original"

Personally, unless it is an EK1 made in silver e.g. by KO, i simply don't trust these EK1's, especially those that just don't show a 100 years of aging.

It is also known that the manufacturers of EK1's 1914 did with governmental consent produce EK1. right into 1945, for replacement purposes of originally awarded pieces. How many they kept producing after 1945 I wouldn't know, but certainly on a small scale it was done.

 

An uncle of mine was a known German collector of Imperial German Militaria, the advice he gave me in the late 70, that I remember the most was: don't invest your money into Iron crosses.

 

I don't recall the name of the maker, but there was an article once mentioning that one sold his machines in the 60's and that these machines were subsequently brought back into action in the 90's due to the reunification process of Germany and someone got the chance to lay his hands on them.

 

Regards

v.Perlet

Edited January 19, 2022 by v.Perlet

[Peter Cornwell]

Interesting enough to make me look twice. I've not seen a WERNER cross with this configuration before. But they did produce some quirky fittings from time to time. Difficult to judge from the photos but on first impression I don't like the clumsy lettering nor the closed 4 so would probably let this one go but then I'm no expert. Who is these days?  

[bolewts58]

4 hours ago, v.Perlet said:

I don't recall the name of the maker, but there was an article once mentioning that one sold his machines in the 60's and that these machines were subsequently brought back into action in the 90's due to the reunification process of Germany and someone got the chance to lay his hands on them.

 

You've got your facts a little wrong. The person who got "the machines" was Dr. Kurt-Gerhard Klietmann who acquired Gebrüder Godet & Co and all it's equipment in 1964 from the widow of Eugen Godet through his directorship of the Instituts für Wissenschaftliche Ordenskunde. Eugen's widow carried on the business after WWII and is thought to have produced some orders and decorations from the still existing original dies. When the Instituts für Wissenschaftliche Ordenskunde acquired Godet, it is generally believed that Klietmann also continued to produce some orders and decoration but not anywhere near to the degree that modern mythology suggests. He was involved in other fakery in the 1970s and early 80s, however with another high-end dealer at the time, Ingo (Ernst) Blass. But, Klietmann died in 1990. So, your statement about reunification is nonsense. Most of what he produced alone and then later with Blass is easily identifiable now to knowledgeable collectors.

 

As to experts in the Iron Cross; there are quite a few people who I would consider expert. There are excellent books and databases available with which to compare most crosses you might come across on the market.

[v.Perlet]

Hello bolews58,

 

"So, your statement about reunification is nonsense"

 

Not so sure because this article also mentioned something about those machines (molding/stamping) had been transferred first into former East-Germany and then later to some Eastern-country, supposedly involving a South-German auction company.

 

Definitely this Dr. Klietmann and his associates via another company from the 60's onward (just checked the internet after you forwarded me his name) (Die Ordens-sammlung), knew how to make those machines run for the next 25 years.

 

But it doesn't matter since you already confirmed the 60's part and I am not interested in simply spreading rumors.

 

Regards

v.Perlet

 

 

 

 

 

[Peter Cornwell]

Bolewts58,

 

Thanks for the clarification of KLIETMANN’s acquisition of the GODET presses etc. That is useful information to know. As for my comment about experts, of course there are very knowledgeable people on the subject, many of whom (thankfully) contribute to this forum, so if any offence taken - none was intended. Indeed, I consider Graf to be one such. The point I was trying to make was that given the ever-growing sophistication of fakes reaching the market today even collectors with years of experience need to remain vigilant and on top of their game.      

[Graf]

Hi

It is getting interesting

The reason I had listed the screw back version is that only the one listed today with a pin is well known Original by this maker and i wanted opinion on the screw back one which is not mine

The EK1 with the pin is mine and is one of my top 1st Class EKs

Edited January 19, 2022 by Graf

[bolewts58]

6 hours ago, v.Perlet said:

Hello bolews58,

 

"So, your statement about reunification is nonsense"

 

Not so sure because this article also mentioned something about those machines (molding/stamping) had been transferred first into former East-Germany and then later to some Eastern-country, supposedly involving a South-German auction company.

 

Definitely this Dr. Klietmann and his associates via another company from the 60's onward (just checked the internet after you forwarded me his name) (Die Ordens-sammlung), knew how to make those machines run for the next 25 years.

 

But it doesn't matter since you already confirmed the 60's part and I am not interested in simply spreading rumors.

 

Regards

v.Perlet

 

 

 

 

 

I was under the impression that the Godet dies were destroyed when Klietmann died in 1990, hence my statement that they did not make anything after 1990. Also, as I indicated, Klietmann never pumped out massive amounts of post-war material from the original dies because everyone knew he had them. He made a comparatively small number of samples for study. I was acquainted with and corresponded with Klietmann for close to 20 years. So, I'm fairly familiar with what he was involved in. As I also already indicated, he was however involved in the high-end fakery with Ingo Blass of Hamburg with the center of manufacture of their nefarious wares in Hungary in the late 1970s into the 1980s.

 

They certainly never bothered with low-end stuff like the iron cross 1 class, which you could buy back then for $25. They produced very high-end Imperial German and Third Reich orders and decorations selling in the thousands and tens of thousands of dollars.

Edited January 19, 2022 by bolewts58

[v.Perlet]

Hello Graf,

 

yep that EK1. I like too.?

 

What the heck!! the second one from left -top row, amazing locking system - must be really rare.

Congrats if its yours.

 

Regards

v.Perlet

[v.Perlet]

Hello bolewts58,

 

I got a bit of a different view on this:

 

In 1976 (when my uncle told me, don't invest.....) a family relative of mine was making around 800DM/month

and a "good" EK I was traded at around 30-50DM - which would be around 5% of his income.

 

Today the same job pays around 2600 Euro and 5% would be 130Euro.

 

So if faking an EK1, nowadays is considered good business, it would have been the same good business in 1976.

And from what I know, this Dr...., wasn't the only one doing this manufacturing business.

 

Therefore all I am forwarding is: I don't trust these EK1's - that's all

 

Regards

v.Perlet

Edited January 19, 2022 by v.Perlet

[Graf]

The topic is getting interesting

 

Yes, The EKs on the Group pictures are mine, otherwise I will specify that they are not.

The Werner Cross with the screw back I started this topic is not mine I saw it on internet and listed it for opinions.

Regarding The EKs and high end fakes This is a whole new topic

 

The most faked ones are from the WW2 period since the dies and the left over materials were available

Also those fakes could have been sold on very good prices

This forum is not to discuss who has been involved in this shady trades, since I can reassure that it is happening even now as we "talk'. However not to offend anyone I will not discuss it

The Topic is whether  this Werner 1st Class Cross is good  or not

Over the years I know that a very reputable Person lodged on the marked a questionable 1914 EK! supposedly made by Hensen. The butch was introduced on the market slowly not to bring any attention..and sold in a good numbers for very good prices.

Of course 1914 EK1 are not faked as 1939 ones, however we can see them in eBay very often. Good thing is that their quality will not fool experienced collector, however the new starters are the target

My advice for the new collectors -Go first with the basic well known makers, get experience and knowledge and then slowly add more advanced items Otherwise you will depart with your hard earned money buying  fakes

[Eric Stahlhut]

for me the screwback werner is just fine-- i have a well worn unmarked example, but it has a period-replaced disc and backing plate, so i can't definitively say whether the attachments on graf's are proprietary. sure looks good, though!

[v.Perlet]

Does anyone of you "experts" - I mean that sincerely!, has a link to literature that would describe the manufacturing process of a Werner EKI cross? e.g. cold/hot formed and punched from a metal sheet , or the casting procedure. The assembly procedure and as such the applied welding-soldering process?

Also the application process of the manufacturers marking.

 

Because just looking onto and judging from a photo without knowing the manufacturing process isn't going to give a viable answer, or?

 

Thanks and regards

v.Perlet 

Edited January 20, 2022 by v.Perlet

[Graf]

Hi v.Perlet,

The manufacturing process of all EKs is the same

The way that the makers are identified  are specific features of their Crosses  ..not only the makers marks.

personally I do not buy unmarked EKs. 

 

I agree that only the pictures are not good enough Holding the Real EK and look all the specific features, sometimes under magnifying glass, gives you the best experience

 

[v.Perlet]

Hello Graf,

 

If I got you right, then you are saying that the manufacturing process of the EK1 you are showing on your first post was subjected to the same manufacturing and tooling process which which my EK1 (KO) was made and the Werner EK1 you posted with the pin clip?

 

Regards

v.Perlet

Edited January 20, 2022 by v.Perlet

[Eric Stahlhut]

the manufacturing process for the body of the cross was basically the same, and there were certain stipulations that had to be followed such as dimensions, etc. each maker generally had their own dies for the frames and core components, so each maker can posess unique design characteristics. if you are serious about learning more, the information is right under your nose. please take some time to read the old threads

 

many of the "fancier" attachment systems were patented, such as the KMSt, Meybauer, AWS types, so if you find an unmarked version with a certain type of attachment it's a pretty safe bet it's from a certain maker

sometimes cores and frames were outsourced, and that's why we find "generic" crosses that are hard to identify because they do not display any unique characteristics from any particular maker. there were manufacturers of components that sold them wholesale to smaller outfits

Edited January 20, 2022 by Eric Stahlhut

[VtwinVince]

I'm not an EK collector per se, but I do have a few kicking around. The cross in the OP I think is absolutely genuine, and in superb condition. And let's not forget the role 'Graf' Klenau played in the purveying of good fakes BITD.

[v.Perlet]

Hello Eric Stahlhut,

 

thanks for your input. To me a hot/cold-form punching process is vastly different from a die-cast process.

I will certainly try to find out more in regards to this issue. Help off course is greatly appreciated.

 

I am not referring to the core (but the frame) and due to this I am automatically skeptical in regards to the EKI posted first. - but I will see as to where my thoughts might go wrong.

 

Regards

v.Perlet

[Eric Stahlhut]

i've just realized something very obvious regarding the attachment system. the back of the cross has a circular rub mark which means it had a circular retaining disc. maybe the rub mark came from that black piece of gunk on the cruciform backing plate, hard to tell with these pics

[v.Perlet]

Ups, I thought that was obvious. that is why I never mentioned it.

 

The first thing I noticed was that the retainer disc diameter on the retainer cross does not match the rub-marks around it. Then the circular rub-marks on the cross itself, and that the mounting pin looks like a CNC tooled Edelstahl, stainless steel pin. Furthermore that the retainer-cross judging from the frame edge-marks was made via cold-punch.

 

However I can't see (at least not on the photo) the same edge-marks on the cross. So either hot punched or cast. But if it was a cast, that why was it hot-punched (embossed) with the marker names.

 

Therefore why question as to what the usual manufacturing process is supposed to be.

 

Regards

v.Perlet.

[Eric Stahlhut]

doesn't mean the cross is bad, this sort of thing happened all of the time (as vince says) bitd. sometimes the secondary attachments were done crudely and sometimes they were done very artfully. 

still like it! 

 

Edited January 21, 2022 by Eric Stahlhut

[Graf]

https://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/iron_cross/2nd_1st_class/manufacturing/manufacturing.htm#top

[v.Perlet]

Hello Graf,

 

thanks for the link, appreciated.

Unfortunately due to referring towards the manufacturing process towards X crosses and also due to incomplete manufacturing descriptions, deciding factors are not given towards the 95% identification on an original 1914 EKI.

 

The frame manufacturing part - actually quite known, is however well described. 

I am still searching for manufacturing information like the link kindly forwarded to me by Waldo in reference to 1870 iron crosses.

http://www.medalnet.net/Eisernes_Kreuz_1870.htm

 

I am as I already mentioned on other posts, a collector of Bavarian Ulan Tschapkas incl. accessories. Which also includes some medals/awards. - therefore some MVO's and MVK's - so please have patience if I start to dive into EK's of 1914.

 

The only awards I collect (or rather that I additionally bought) are strictly EKII's from 1870. All other medal/awards were (lucky me) given by an uncle to me.

 

So due to my own knowledge and e.g. literature such as provided by waldo, I can confirm by 95% that all my EKII 1870 are Typ A.

Taking the info from your link (and assuming that the described manufacturing process is the same for a 1914 EKI) then simply the screw pin (which irked me the most) shown on your posted photo would indicate that it is a fake or an EKI produced maybe some 20-40 years later.

 

But again, this maybe wrong conclusion owns its origin due to a bit of manufacturing knowledge that I have, however confirmed by the information given on the link.

 

I am actually quite surprised that despite the huge popularity of EK's from the 1914 period, there seems to be no (link towards a single profound encompassing literature/article) regarding the exact and detailed manufacturing steps and processes. Everyone just seems to know and write a bit.

 

Regards

v.Perlet

Edited January 22, 2022 by v.Perlet

[Graf]

Hi Eric,

I agree with you about the attachments Some of the were added for additional retention/security -

some are not very good

[Graf]

some are not usually found on the original Crosses

This one is 1914 EK1 by AWS It was owned by a German Captain of U -Bout