[Swordmaker]

Your original doesn't show that clearly at all. That original was on a very long thread yesterday with multiple discussion of the 47,044 # and the "E.F." I don't think there's any difference between the two you're showing here. The top one is just lower resolution.

I posted the original image on post #52 on the first thread on the Kenyan BC taken from the link on the thread. There does not seem to me to be any differences.

The claim of E.F. Lavender being K.F. Lavender is not the case. Both are E.F. As for the claim the font is Schmutz is someone's claim that has been pretty much debunked as the 4s on Schmutz are open but these are closed. As for the use of "O" for "0" (zero) many typewriters of the period did not have the numeral "1" or "0" and typists were trained to use the letter "l" and "O" for those numerals.

[Robert DeLong]

e claim of E.F. Lavender being K.F. Lavender is not the case.

Yes one does have a K and the other has an E. Try looking at it with a magnifying glass.

[Robert DeLong]

I should say, the ones he has listed in this post, the first one is a K and the second one is an E, however, the one on Orly’s site is also an E, not a K.

[Dajjal]

As for the use of "O" for "0" (zero) many typewriters of the period did not have the numeral "1" or "0" and typists were trained to use the letter "l" and "O" for those numerals.

One of the typewriters at my family's house in Detroit in the 1950s-60s was like that.

I found this on auction at eBay. I cannot say for certain that this is the brand of typewriter we had, but the number keys were just like this.