New fake 1918 be aware

[chris clark]

Another fake 1918 for your attention guys

[chris clark]

Last pic

[Brian L.]

Thanks for posting.

Although, I think it would be pretty easy to spot, but, maybe not for a newby.

[chris clark]

Hi yes I agree but still worth getting it out there. So many basic mistakes on this one
Be interesting where this one may pop up eBay

[Gary B]

I am not sure that I see the mistakes in this...can you explain?

Gary B

[Brian L.]

I am not sure that I see the mistakes in this...can you explain?

Gary B

The biggest issue is that the enamel is obviously acrylic, not glass enamel.

[Gary B]

The biggest issue is that the enamel is obviously acrylic, not glass enamel.

Thanks for the reply. What would be the other "basic" errors that Chris points out? The letters on the reverse look "thicker" than the 1918 sold last year. The one that sold last year was also not marked for silver content.

Gary B

[Brian L.]

The lettering does look thicker. I think also that it's die-cast. If you look closely at the edges and at the date and oak leaves you see pitting and the date is slightly concave indicating a loss of form in the casting process. I also don't think it has any silver in it, but is some type of white metal. It's very well done. It's possible the helmet is real.

[wilhelm Saris]

About the thick or thinner lettering I would advise to read my article in the "'Military Advisor" volume 23, number 2 from spring 2012. The text gives the details.