Eisernes Kreuz 2. Klasse 113 or 117 Reproduction

[Chrish124]

I have this Iron Cross that I believe may be a reproduction. I am only showing it here to make sure I am not missing something, as there are a few authentic Iron Cross variants that appear as if they are reproductions if one is not familiar with them. Iron Crosses by Assmann, Paulman & Crone and Petz & Lorenz come to mind.

As for this Iron Cross, the first thing that jumps out is the finish, it reminds of 1957ers more than an original. The dates are very poorly stamped, the beading is also poorly defined. What stands out is the makers mark. Unfortunately (or conveniently) the makers mark is only partially stamped into the ring. If it is an incused number it likely says 117 or 113, or it could be an LDO number in which case it is difficult to determine what it says.

I do believe this is a reproduction, but as mentioned above I would prefer some confirmation from the experts before I dispose of it.

Thank you,

Weight: 16.5g
Height: 44.75mm
Width: 44.94mm
Core: Magnetic
Maker's Mark: 117, 113 or possibly an LDO number of some sort
Jump Ring: 1.55mm diameter
Suspension Ring: 1.63mm diameter
Ribbon: Ribbon is original

[Nick Hessens]

Correct, it's the well known "113 Aurich fake". Sadly this cross is appraised as an authentic Type 1 frame with Type 1 core in Dietrich Maerz' new EK2 book (page 392 to 394). Be warned!

Regards,
Nick

[Chrish124]

It is very disapointing that it made it into the book. Such things create so much confusion for people. Thank you for your input Nick.

[raz]

Nick I looked in the book and The OP's cross date blocks looks nothing like the cross in the book IMO . The tails on the 3's & 9's are totally different . Please check again to make sure I am seeing this correctly. The cross that started this thread is indeed not good IMO.
Dennis

[Nick Hessens]

Nick I looked in the book and The OP's cross date blocks looks nothing like the cross in the book IMO . The tails on the 3's & 9's are totally different . Please check again to make sure I am seeing this correctly.

Yes Dennis. While the dates show some differences, the frames are a match. Both the cross in the OP and the one in the book are fake.....

Regards,
Nick