Interesting Overseas Cap

[Mike P.]

front again

[Sammler]

Nothing on this is "M35", IMO, I would give this item a wide berth, Its made to deceive and I appreciate it even more when the supposed date of the item is what gives it away.

[Albert]

HI!
Would not be for my collection. Biggest turnoff is the insignia / date mismatch, followed by the artificial soiling of the inner forehead area. There are other things that would make me worry but those are best examined in hand. Still not one to take home.
Albert

[Glenn McInnes]

I would personally pass on it as well.





Glenn

[Soldat de Fer]

HI!
Would not be for my collection. Biggest turnoff is the insignia / date mismatch, followed by the artificial soiling of the inner forehead area. There are other things that would make me worry but those are best examined in hand. Still not one to take home.
Albert

Hello
I agree , Nothing fits with this hat. The markings are wrong and too "fresh" with a modern ink.
scary fake
Regards
Pierre-Yves

[starshy]

The markings made me cringe a bit, I would pass on it.

[Howard Kelley]

Hello
I agree , Nothing fits with this hat. The markings are wrong and too "fresh" with a modern ink.
scary fake
Regards
Pierre-Yves

Hi Pierre-Yves,

Just curious, but what makes this hat fake?

Is the entire hat fake? Insignia, etc.?

Or just the inkstamps?

IMO the hat is authentic, but I do have concerns with the ink stamps.

Regards,
Howard

[Bob Coleman]

I have seen quite a few schiffen over the years and never recall seeing a unit marked example. The hat is well executed but flawed, to me, in the fact that there appears to be wear in certain areas but the stamping, if genuine, should show wear and natural fading. The material seems to be old beging the question if this hat is not the product of another garment.