Eisernes Kreuz 1.Klasse 1939 - Klein u. Quenzer

[Grunwald]

Hello, gang,


I've been a so-called silent watcher on this forum for a while, but now I really could use Your, folks, help.

For some time I've been looking for a decent EK1 by maker Klein u. Quenzer. And so it happens some time ago I stumbled upon this unmarked EK1 by Klein u. Quenzer on the dealer’s site. Asked for additional photos of the item. After doing some research and side-to-side photo compare, the obverse of the cross looks OK to me, typical to this maker, although it is the reverse that gives me some thoughts. While the c-catch (despite being off-centered) and the attachment pin looks typical to other examples I've seen before, the hinge block doesn't exactly matches to them, well at least to my eye.

By the way, the hinge block I'm calling the squarish part on the reverse, where attachment pin is connected to the cross by means of a small pin-axis. I'm sorry if it turns out that I'm using not a familiar terminology to You.

I made side by side photo reference table to help me to compare with other Klein u. Quenzer examples. The EK1 from the dealer is on the left side, while the other EK1 by KuQ is on the right side. Looking from the side view to the hinge block, it seems that the one from the dealer has very little to none groove which is very apparent to other examples in the table. It very well could be a variant, but I haven't seen hinge block exactly like this one. Maybe it was filled with some soldering paste during the repair? What do You think?

Secondly, judging from the photos the corners of the hinge block also shows some splinters (?) on the edges, maybe it is also some marks from the possible repair? Is it possible that the attachment pin fell off some time and was repaired? Or maybe I'm just being paranoid...

The last thing, on the upper arm of the cross directly in the beading there are visible (in my opinion) die flaw marks. Do early EK1s had such marks, or is it an indication of a later production time?

Anyways, I'd like to ask Your opinion, folks. Do You think it is an original cross? Do You agree that this an early wartime is Klein u. Quenzer cross? Was it repaired?
It would be really helpful if anyone can share an opinion on this EK1, so looking forward for Your reply.



Kind regards,
Andrew

[Adrian]

I have no problem with it being an original K&Q cross. There are no signs of repair or replacement parts.
I think the splinters as you call them are burrs of metal when the hinge block was cut and they're disguising the depth of the groove.
Sometimes you will find anomalies in various parts and on awards, maybe the groove wasn't milled as deep on that production run.
I like the cross and see nothing to prevent a purchase if you want it.
Obviously wait for other opinions too but mine is that it's a genuine piece from Klein & Quenzer with original reverse hardware.

[manclino]

I don't see anything disturbing about the cross either. Just as Adrian wrote, all these minor flaws were caused by the imperfection of the craftsmen's work. I assure you that the crosses did not have to have the precision and elegance of a Rolex
Robert

[Grunwald]

Thank You for Your opinion, Adrian, I think I was too picky about the cross wanting every detail to be perfect...
Since I've been looking for the EK1 by this maker, I've decided to go for it.

[Grunwald]

Thank You, Robert, I think I've started looking for the similar quality of details since I've got my hands on one WW1 EK1, that distinguished in very high quality craftsmanship.