EK 1939 Let's see some Deschler's!

[Bill Garvy]

Let's see your Deschler & S?hne's in 1st Class. Unmarked, "L/10", or "1", I love them all!

An "L/10" in 1st Class. . .

obverse:

reverse:

Bring 'em on!

Edited July 10, 2006 by Bill Garvy

[Bill Garvy]

An unmarked example. . .

obverse:

reverse:

[Richard Gordon]

My only example (that I know of!) marked '1'

[Motorhead]

Here's mine...

Obverse

[Motorhead]

Reverse

[GMU]

Here is mine.

[Richard Gordon]

GMU

I do not believe that the EK1 you posted is a genuine Deschler.

Rich

[GMU]

GMU

I do not believe that the EK1 you posted is a genuine Deschler.

Rich

Why do you say so?

[Richard Gordon]

Well for a start look at the numerals and position of the date... They are not the same and it sits too low, touching the frame. The swastika is too pronounced... Deschlers are very low and below the height of the frame.

Why don't you post a full, in focus, photo of the back of your cross?

[GMU]

Well for a start look at the numerals and position of the date... They are not the same and it sits too low, touching the frame. The swastika is too pronounced... Deschlers are very low and below the height of the frame.

Why don't you post a full, in focus, photo of the back of your cross?

Cross: 45 mm. x 45 mm.

Cross arm 27 mm.

[GMU]

[Richard Gordon]

Comparing yours with those above, do you still think yours is an original Deschler?

[GMU]

Comparing yours with those above, do you still think yours is an original Deschler?

Comparing mine to literature examples, yes. Comparing mine to the other cross hallmarked "1", however, makes me doubt about the authenticity of the other cross. The hallmark doesn?t look like anything seen on literature.

Edited July 12, 2006 by GMU

[Bill Garvy]

With all due respect, GMU, I also have never seen such a Deschler with that particular pin, hinge, and clasp configuration. If you would be so kind as to disclose to us what "literature" you are referencing where a Deschler such as yours is shown as genuine, as your time permits. . .

[GMU]

With all due respect, GMU, I also have never seen such a Deschler with that particular pin, hinge, and clasp configuration. If you would be so kind as to disclose to us what "literature" you are referencing where a Deschler such as yours is shown as genuine, as your time permits. . .

Hello Bill.

An example with exactly the same dimensions as the piece I show, and with the same "1" hallmark is shown on pages 152 - 153 of DAS EISERNE KREUZ, 1813 bis heute, v. H. Gei?ler, Patzwall 1995

The piece I show has the following characteristics:

a) 45mm x 45mm x 27mm

b) Three piece construction with Iron Center

c) Has a shallow swastika unlike what has been suggested

d) Date numbers are even, not uneven as has been suggested before.

e) Numbers do not touch lower rim as has been stated before. Although not as high as many EK I?s but in similar position to many other EK I?s

f) The ?1? hallmark is typical of many other Deschlers made pieces

g) The pin is similar to that shown on Gei?lers?s book.

h) HOWEVER the hinge is not!

Now, regardless of it being a Deschler or not, is this medal an authentic EK I ? I believe it is.

But, is it a Deschler? Points a) through g) makes me believe it is. However, is h) enough to discard it as a Deschler given all the other characteristics?

If it is, it is. If it is not, it isn?t. I am no seller and I am not pretending to pass a piece for what it is not. The only thing is that, as of now, I haven?t received a real argument against it being a Deschler.

Regards,

George

Edited July 12, 2006 by GMU

[Bill Garvy]

Thank you, George, for the reference; I shall have to consult this volume.

The only argument I can put forward is that the pin, hinge, and clasp configuration of your cross does not match/resemble the configuration of other known authetic Deschler's illustrated here and elsewhere.

[Richard Gordon]

The only thing is that, as of now, I haven?t received a real argument against it being a Deschler.

George

I hope you are are happy with the cross. It's your collection and if you're happy with it, then that's all that counts.

I don't believe there is anything else to show other than how a real Deschler looks.

Rich

[ekhunter]

Thank you, George, for the reference; I shall have to consult this volume.

The only argument I can put forward is that the pin, hinge, and clasp configuration of your cross does not match/resemble the configuration of other known authetic Deschler's illustrated here and elsewhere.

I agree with Bill about the pin, hinge, clasp. Definately not Deschler.

[GMU]

George

I hope you are are happy with the cross. It's your collection and if you're happy with it, then that's all that counts.

I don't believe there is anything else to show other than how a real Deschler looks.

Rich

Rich,

To me is more than that. I am new to this forum and to other forums, and for me is all about sharing, discussing, and above all, learning.

When I posted the picture of my cross I truly believed it was good one, and I wanted to share it here. When you questioned the authenticity of the cross, I asked why it was so. The replies given to me did not fully satisfy me, especially when I compared my cross to crosses described in books such as the one I mentioned before to Bill. For example, a low date. Well, there are good crosses like that?? The pin where are crosses with similar pins?? The hallmark? and so forth.

I do not collect WWII stuff and it was sufficient to me to compare this cross, which was given to me several years ago, to those shown on books like Geissler?s

It wasn?t until Bill came up into the discussion and mentioned the pin, the hinge, and the clasp, that I began to really look further, especially going over the multiple threads in this and other forums.

I am now convinced that this cross is not good. It has all the characteristics of what is called a Floch, which by the way, I haven?t heard of this before. I believe it is not mentioned in the books I have, and many books actually present Floch crosses as real (including Previtera?s Iron Time)

Lesson learnt!

I thus rectify to you guys. This cross is not genuine. Thanks for the discussion Bill and Rich, and I apologize for any trouble I may have caused.

George

[ekhunter]

Rich,

To me is more than that. I am new to this forum and to other forums, and for me is all about sharing, discussing, and above all, learning.

When I posted the picture of my cross I truly believed it was good one, and I wanted to share it here. When you questioned the authenticity of the cross, I asked why it was so. The replies given to me did not fully satisfy me, especially when I compared my cross to crosses described in books such as the one I mentioned before to Bill. For example, a low date. Well, there are good crosses like that?? The pin where are crosses with similar pins?? The hallmark? and so forth.

I do not collect WWII stuff and it was sufficient to me to compare this cross, which was given to me several years ago, to those shown on books like Geissler?s

It wasn?t until Bill came up into the discussion and mentioned the pin, the hinge, and the clasp, that I began to really look further, especially going over the multiple threads in this and other forums.

I am now convinced that this cross is not good. It has all the characteristics of what is called a Floch, which by the way, I haven?t heard of this before. I believe it is not mentioned in the books I have, and many books actually present Floch crosses as real (including Previtera?s Iron Time)

Lesson learnt!

I thus rectify to you guys. This cross is not genuine. Thanks for the discussion Bill and Rich, and I apologize for any trouble I may have caused.

George

George it's no reason to apologize for I don't think you haven't troubled anyone. We've all been there. Very few in this field have gone through time w/o getting burned somewhere along the way. I can show you a Cave Creek Special or a sunburst Flock I got burned on, that's just to name a few. It's the nature of the beast, but it's part of it, and is the beauty of this forum and others. You can have something checked out before you buy it if you are not sure. The books don't always get it right. I've got a L/63 Gold Wound badge to prove that point, and I imagine you could find a few "Rounders" out there that, once again, were in a book as legit. Keep it going, real Deschler's are out there, just keep looking and reading. Russel

[Richard Gordon]

I agree, absolutely no reason to apologise.

I've been there too and learnt the hard way. I had the flock EK1, flock EK1 spange, fake L/63 gold wound badge and the incorrect A.S. bronze tank assault. Lessons all well learnt.

Rich

[Bill Garvy]

If it's any consolation, my first two Iron Crosses in 1st Class were Floch's, and from the same dealer no less! My learning curve oftentimes resembles a straight line!

[GMU]

Never heard of them. They appear in books as genuine. Scary pieces these Flochs aren?t they?

You guys knew it was Floch but you let me discover it for myself uh? Good teachers!

Thanks again for the lesson. I hope, too, my learning curve isn?t so flat.

[ekhunter]

Never heard of them. They appear in books as genuine. Scary pieces these Flochs aren?t they?

You guys knew it was Floch but you let me discover it for myself uh? Good teachers!

Thanks again for the lesson. I hope, too, my learning curve isn?t so flat.

Scary is right, but not if you know what to avoid. You can go to MCF or WAF and look at examples of Floch's and read about their origin. In a Nutshell, Floch is a man who made or makes repro Iron Crosses. Their is more than enough reading material available about him. I believe most us us have been Floched once or twice somewhere along the line..

[David Tiffin]

Here's my number 1.

David