Pix of Visors in the Rain!

[stonemint]

We've had a little bit of controversy (and it is a good thing) as to whether or not untreated cardboard was used instead of pasteboard for the frame of the band of visors during the TR.

I agree with Nick, logic would dictate that they be treated--however, I differ with him that it was due to sweat, I believe the rain was the primary concern.
Unlike most countries currently (which have waterproof covers/exteriors for their visors),most Extramutze German visors had no built-in rain protection--and they must have leaked like a sieve when it downpoured, whether it be near the Sea of Azov, the French Riviera, Normandy, or Berlin itself.

Untreated cardboard would greatly reduce the lifespan of a cap from years to a matter of months, if that. Regs also provided for it (as they did for stainless-steel cap springs.)

That most recent Erel artillery just defies logic for me--this is due to the high-quality of Erels, and I just cant see Erel (at any time during the war) wanting to have its poducts look like limp rags.

Anyway, if you have shots of visors being worn in the rain, please post them!

Here is an Sa Kepi being worn in the rain:

[stonemint]

Here are members of the LSSAH in the rain on Nov 1st, 1942:

[stonemint]

Here is Peiper on that same day--pay attention to his hat!:

[stonemint]

Now, here is Peiper wearing THE SAME hat in April, 1945--this is a hat you can see him almost always wearing thruout the war, in all weather conditions--there is no way in h**l that this hat had cardboard for a frame--furthermore, it is a testament to German craftsmanship, and demonstrates (as Dave Kane noted) that the wear-out period for visors certainly was not a year or 2--even in the field:

[stonemint]

As I said before, I do believe that the odd "mom and pop" cottage maker may have screwed up and added an untreated cardboard frame--but this is also why I doubt the Artillery Erel.

[SgtB]

--there is no way in h**l that this hat had cardboard for a frame--

You're absolutely correct, Stone!

[Jerry45]

-

[Dave Kane]

Many times these hats had "buckram" band backings verses treated cardboard. Also these caps tend to be very lightweight & have no padding etc. inside them. Just the wool body, a thin stiffner in front to shape the peak, & the buckram frame (like a collar tab backing) & the visor often leather . Wether is the same exact cap, or he preferred them & had a couple as most combat SS officers did, remains to be seen or proved.In heavy combat conditions these caps didn't last for years, & took a beating just like any cap you may have today. Take a construction workers cap, concrete man, full of sweat-dirt-cement etc. Lasts one season. Combat was worse. Could it be the same cap maybe, we will never know for sure.
And a sweatband. These caps were made to be comfortable, lightweight field caps, preferred in combat use verses the normal visor. Much close to the weight of a ball cap.

Jerry, I disagree completely! Look at the many GD pictures...easy to follow a (guy) cap through YEARS of combat....
It's not a good idea to compare modern 'throw away crap' to items made to last some 70- years ago!

[Dave Kane]

1

[Dave Kane]

Years and years...

[Jerry45]

-

[Dave Kane]

Sorry!!! Unfold the nickers and relax a moment....I didn't realize that you had the answers!

Please, Jerry take the helm and guide the members!

I'm happy to bow out of an arena of such knowledge!

[Jerry45]

-

[Jerry45]

-

[Jerry45]

-