New to Bundeswehr Collecting, First Display Attempt

[Gene T]

One must be VERY careful about FJ type helmets these days. There are many, many, many fakes out there that have been artificially aged and damaged. They are getting to be very tough to filter out unless you have extensive knowledge of what to look for. Personally, I don't think that was a BW FJ helmet, but I lack the knowledge to say that for certain.

I'm with Steve on this one. The heavy wear on the exterior just doesn't match up with the wear - or lack thereof - on the liner and chin strap assembly (note especially the clean forehead area, which doesn't even show a hint of sweat stain or grime). In fact, I am quite certain that this liner came out of a recent vintage repro (you can see an example of it here: http://www.fallschirmjager.biz/info_helmets_001.htm). However, the shell seems stubbier and shallower than the repro one normally associated with this liner. So who knows, it may well be of BW origin. However, the fact that the "aging" process seems to have happened after the installation of the liner suggests that the person who put it together wanted it to look like something that it wasn't before.

Compare that example with the ones we've discussed previously in this thread (http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=362510), and you can probably see why you didn't lose much by letting this one "get away".


Gene T

[Klaus1989]

Found this FJ-related link to a veterans site, that could be of interest here. Many excellent reference photos from Fallschirm-Pionier-Kompanie 260 of transitional period from Splittertarn to Filzlaus.

http://www.norbert-meiners.de/0008_l...hronik_06.html

[Gordon Craig]

One must be VERY careful about FJ type helmets these days. There are many, many, many fakes out there that have been artificially aged and damaged. They are getting to be very tough to filter out unless you have extensive knowledge of what to look for. Personally, I don't think that was a BW FJ helmet, but I lack the knowledge to say that for certain.

My rule for BW FJ helmets is that unless there's markings shown that it is BW and not 3rd Reich, I'm not going to touch it. As far as I know nobody tries to fake BW helmets, so the risk is fairly low if there are BW markings shown in the auction.

The EXCELLENT condition BW Splittertarn jacket sold for a little less than I expected. I thought it could go as high as EUR 400 as people go crazy for the ones with very little signs of use. They are extremely rare to find on eBay or anywhere else.

Steve

Steve,

Sorry but I can not agree with most of your comments here re the helmet.
First of all, these trial helmets were not marked as far as I know so looking for BW markings won't get you anywhere.
Agreed that there are lots of fake WWII FJ helmets and since the post war trial helmets were of the same design it can be hard to tell from pictures. Having one in hand, as I have, and referring to Lugwig Baer's book I stand by what I have said earlier.
One problem people have with these helmets is that they were made by several different firms and each firm used a distinctive liner and often more than one type of liner. The liner in the helmet under discussion seems to be of the type used by Römer but since I cannot see all of the interior I will have to say this is only an educated guess by me.

Gene T,

The helmet shell and the liner often deteriorate at a different rate so I do not think that you can judge this helmet because the shell and the liner may appear not to be of the same age. As I said above, there are lots of the interior parts of the liner that are not visible in the photos provided in the auction. Again, I must qualify my remarks since interior photos are not clear enough to see all of the support material on the other side of the visible leather section which sits on the head.

All that being said, we are all taking guesses on a picture, which I rarely do, since speculation may be fun but in the end that is all it is.

Now on to post some comparative pictures of one of my helmets.

Regards,

Gordon

[Gordon Craig]

#2

[Gordon Craig]

#3

[Gordon Craig]

#4

[Gordon Craig]

Now for a picture of my helmet on a splittertarn uniform. I didn't put it with my infantry uniform previously but from the comments on the thread it would appear that some FJ units did wear infantry smocks and pants. I didn't notice auntttil after I had taken the picture that one of the gloves had fallen off the mannequin.

Regards,

Gordon

[Cassidy]

Awesome

Great, Display, this is what I want to do, An FJ NCO with the MP2 and a GJR with the G3,

Pat

Hey, I just got this 1961 Reibert in the mail today,

So, I have 1937 and 1961 Reiberts, The 1914 Soldiers Handbooks is not a Reibert.

[Collectinsteve]

Steve,

Sorry but I can not agree with most of your comments here re the helmet.
First of all, these trial helmets were not marked as far as I know so looking for BW markings won't get you anywhere.

That is good to know! I thought there were stamps in the shells.

On that point, I have heard (and it's logical) that earlier fakers of 3rd Reich era helmets put WW2 type markings on BW helmets and sold them as 3rd Reich. It's at least a possibility which complicates things.

One of the reasons I like collecting post war stuff is that there is little forgery (Vietnam stuff is a general exception) compared to WW2 where forgery is rife even for silly little things.

Agreed that there are lots of fake WWII FJ helmets and since the post war trial helmets were of the same design it can be hard to tell from pictures. Having one in hand, as I have, and referring to Lugwig Baer's book I stand by what I have said earlier.

You are indeed lucky to have one in hand to compare against. Books and photos of other helmets helps, but there's no substitute for having one in hand.

The helmet shell and the liner often deteriorate at a different rate so I do not think that you can judge this helmet because the shell and the liner may appear not to be of the same age.

I agree in general, however one thing I have noticed is that the guys who artificially age metal parts often go overboard. Such significant rusting, as seen in the eBay pics, raises a red flag for me. That's not to say the item is definitely not legit, it's just that it reduces my confidence that it is.

All that being said, we are all taking guesses on a picture, which I rarely do, since speculation may be fun but in the end that is all it is.

True, but as a bidder that's generally all one has to go by. Comments from the seller are often unreliable or outright unhelpful. Which sucks when the item is difficult to distinguish from undesirable items.

Steve

[Collectinsteve]

With that said, I'm curious Gordon. What do you think about the eBay listing's pictures? Do you see any red flags based on your example in hand? I think we can agree that the seller's description of it being GSG/SEK is incorrect.

Steve

[Gene T]

Gene T,

The helmet shell and the liner often deteriorate at a different rate so I do not think that you can judge this helmet because the shell and the liner may appear not to be of the same age.

Hi Gordon,

Your example is a nice "one-looker" for sure. However, the one that sold on eBay was not, IMO.

What gave me pause was not so much that the liner and the shell did not appear to have aged at the same rate, but that the liner had almost no wear to it (i.e., no sweat and grease stains in the forehead region, which should have been obvious on this type of leather), whereas the shell seems to have led a less than peaceful life since it came into existence. Unless this helmet was never worn, but was instead used as a hammer, then left to float in a bath tub for a day or two, it would be very difficult to explain how it came to look the way it does now (as seen in the seller's photos):



More worryingly, the liner exhibits that zig-zag seam that is characteristic of a well known repro of the M38 (for instance the one listed here: http://www.ebay.com/itm/GERMAN-WW2-P...em3a99927ee0); it's a feature that has never been observed (as far as I am aware of) on any of the documented Versuchshelm variants.

Of course, this may still be a rare and legitimate variant, which had escaped documentation until now. In that case, it is rather unfortunate that it should share such a strong resemblance with a known repro.

Nowadays, TR helmet collectors must have an associate degree in metallurgy, leather craft, and paint chemistry to stay one step ahead of the fakers; at least we are in no danger of being preyed upon by scammers with that level of sophistication and expertise in our little corner of the playground, yet. Let's hope it stays that way!


Gene T

[Gordon Craig]

Steve and Gene T,

Thanks for your comments. Great to have this forum where we can make comments without anyone doing any more than accepting for what it is.

Gene T,

Interesting comment on the zig zag sewing being well known as a sign of a fake in WWII FJ helmets. I never noticed that and I haven't studied WWII FJ helmets so was unaware of that fact. I didn't want to take my FJ helmet off the mannequin so I had a look at my GSG9 helmet and I can see the difference right away. My helmet is sewn as a straight line across the centre of the liner. Not in a zig zag line. Thanks very much for pointing that out. My BW FJ helmet that I posted pictures of doesn't appear to have been worn very much even though the liner has begun to disintegrate on the edges. The liner in my GSG9 helmet has seen a lot of sweaty heads but the leather is still intact. You never know which helmet leather is going to survive and which is not.

Regards,

Gordon

[Collectinsteve]

Gene,

The zig-zag stitching is a fantastic tip-off, or at least a red flag, to keep an eye open for. It's critical that we have one or two obvious signs to look out for because the subtle details are often too difficult to see in eBay pics or are simply overlooked. The stitching is very obvious.

Gordon,

When one considers how leather is made and behaves over time you can see an explanation for how your liner got to its current state. The lower edge, bent around the stiffening strap, is under the most amount of stress. The outside layer, which you can see, is under the most stress. The rest of the leather should not undergo stress unless it's been stored very badly. All things being equal, the leather should deteriorate first and worst exactly where yours is and not nearly as much and badly as the rest. I think yours is a pretty typical example of what age does (I have other helmets with similar damage).

I think, but am no expert, that it is harder to fake the sort of natural age damage your helmet shows and that's why we tend to see (in my experience) the overall uniform condition of liners in the fake helmets. I had a repro, aged FJ helmet in my hands last year and the leather was very dry and hard. There were some random nicks around the rim, but otherwise the leather was in uniform condition.

Steve

[Cassidy]

Schrankordnung 1937 und 1961

Some things never change, below are photos of wall locker sample from the 1937 edition of Reibert Dienst-Unterricht and the 1961 Reibert version.

I noticed in the 1961 Reibert photos that there were no flags on the wool uniform? Today I got a wool Jacket dated 1963 with no flag on the arm. Is this correct? When did they start putting flags on the shirts and jackets?

Pat

[Klaus1989]

I noticed in the 1961 Reibert photos that there were no flags on the wool uniform? Today I got a wool Jacket dated 1963 with no flag on the arm. Is this correct? When did they start putting flags on the shirts and jackets?

Pat

Introduction date of the flags for the Filzlaus is conflicting. Some sources say 1961, other 1963. But there are apparently jackets after this date without flags for unknown reasons. Early moleskin uniforms will not have the flags, as only applied at first to the Kampfanzug.

The photo from your 1961 Reibert could be older. Sometimes not all pictures are so current in these (I have 2000s edition with old moleskin uniforms in photo of the Spind). It appear, that there is US-style belt with holes on door?

Regards
Klaus