Announcement

**Anders S** · 03-23-2008, 07:21 AM

A wonderful aluminium Deschler M1/52 skull. I also like the way the eagle seems to be inbedded in the cap.

Now I'll look and learn.

**Robin Lumsden** · 03-23-2008, 07:26 AM

Originally posted by jacquesf View Post

Robin the problem with that is that the vast majority of army crushers did not have a buckrum pasteboard. I have only ever seen one army crusher posted on the forum with that feature. The presence of the buckram pasteboard, which this one have, give totally different characteristics to the crusher and especially the way it worn.

Good point Jacques.

**Anders S** · 03-23-2008, 07:39 AM

Attached Files

zzzzq970ph7.jpg (130.5 KB, 858 views)

**Lasse Kongo** · 03-23-2008, 07:42 AM

Originally posted by jacquesf View Post

The one thing on this cap that looks strange and unnatural to me is the shape of the top, espescially if you look at the side view. The back overhang does not look anything like my crushers or other schirmutze. It looks for the lack of a better , description, very long and pointy. Jacques

___________________

I have to say it feels a bit strange to compare the crusher in question only against your crusher. Like that was the Father of all crushers and if not completely like you something would be wrong with it!?

I thinke we should keep the discussion a bit wider then just compare it with your crusher.

I am by no means a expert of crushers so I have not much to add except I belive it can not be determmined if this is original or not without a hands on inspection.

For what it is worth I can not find anything directly wrong with it.

Lasse

**Lasse Kongo** · 03-23-2008, 07:45 AM

Originally posted by Robin Lumsden View Post

Well, for what it's worth, I cannot see any glaring faults in the construction.

As regards the 'VIII' pencilled mark, I know it was common in Imperial times to mark cap sizes this way. I have an old Leibhusar cap with a pencilled in 'IX', denoting size '59'.

The one thing I wonder about is the eagle. It looks to me as if it has been removed from another (M40?) cap and resewn on to this one. OK, I know they could have done this 'at the time', but I have a little doubt there.

___________

The Roman VIII seems to be written with the same pen on the lining as well, so it should for sure indicate the size of the cap. It is usually seen that linings and sweatbands have the same marking so they could be matched at assembly.

Lasse

**jacquesf** · 03-23-2008, 07:48 AM

That is the only one that I can compare it against as I have no access to any other. I am also not making any observation or comment on its originality. It is simply comparisons between two sets of pictures. It would be very helpful if we can have more examples for comparisons. Btw we tried it before and not much came of it. Jacques

Originally posted by Lasse Kongo View Post

___________________

I have to say it feels a bit strange to compare the crusher in question only against your crusher. Like that was the Father of all crushers and if not completely like you something would be wrong with it!?

I thinke we should keep the discussion a bit wider then just compare it with your crusher.

I am by no means a expert of crushers so I have not much to add except I belive it can not be determmined if this is original or not without a hands on inspection.

For what it is worth I can not find anything directly wrong with it.

Lasse

**NTZ** · 03-23-2008, 08:00 AM

The one thing that stood out to me was the handwritten HB. The HB mark is a roll mark from the leather manufacture. They are commonly seen on many visors from many makers (usually contract caps) and usually have the numbers 38 or 39 following. Why is would be handwritten on a sweatband is beyond me. I have also seen similar marks. I am only going from memory so I may be wrong but I think I have seen HH and HP too. Also the size is already marked on the lining (as it usually is) but is also handwritten on the sweatband. Does this mean anything? I don’t know. I just found it odd.

**Peter v L** · 03-23-2008, 08:41 AM

Nick,

Having it in hand here now.

There is VIII written on the lining for the size 58, it is also written with the same pen and textstyle on the sweatband. I would presume that is for matching them together when sweatband is sewn on the cap, as was the final stage finishing the cap of.

HB is also written with the same pen. I would presume it is the initials of eather the person putting the cap together or the person which should receive the cap.

No other marks are found on the sweatband.

My perosnal guess is that the cap is not made from one of the really large cap manufactures rather a small medium one. Probably made to order from the Officer ordering it.

Only more thing I have to stress about the cap is, that we do photos under 1000 W lamps, so all our caps looks "better" on the photos then they are in reality. The light remove the colour differences as well as dirt and wear. The cap is not mint, it is worn, not heavy but worn.

Cheers
Peter

Originally posted by NTZ View Post

The one thing that stood out to me was the handwritten HB. The HB mark is a roll mark from the leather manufacture. They are commonly seen on many visors from many makers (usually contract caps) and usually have the numbers 38 or 39 following. Why is would be handwritten on a sweatband is beyond me. I have also seen similar marks. I am only going from memory so I may be wrong but I think I have seen HH and HP too. Also the size is already marked on the lining (as it usually is) but is also handwritten on the sweatband. Does this mean anything? I don’t know. I just found it odd.

**jotuntroll** · 03-23-2008, 08:42 AM

Hi all

Thanks for reopening the tread Ben VK.

When I started the first one I wanted the technacally info about its originality and form. I did not expect the spin off..

I notive the worn out spot at the senter of the top over the eagle.

Typical place along with the schirm wich some time shows sign of the fingers worn in it after placing the visor on and off.

Could the handwritten letters have anything to do if it was private purcased/tailored?

cheers Jotuntroll

**SgtB** · 03-23-2008, 10:49 AM

This is a keeper from my 2nd collection that I managed to hold on to through my divorce in '95. I believe this to be the type seen at Normandy and the Ardennes. (In the Schwimmwagon at the Malmedy sign

)

Attached Files

altpz1.jpg (65.1 KB, 796 views)

**SgtB** · 03-23-2008, 10:52 AM

Not identical, but damn close.

Attached Files

JochenCrusher1.jpg (77.2 KB, 785 views)

**SgtB** · 03-23-2008, 10:59 AM

Visor is thinner leather than the others and is warped from poor storage on this side.

Attached Files

altpz3.jpg (75.8 KB, 772 views)

**Richard P** · 03-23-2008, 04:10 PM

Brian,

Congrats on being farsighted enough to hang onto it. When can we start the bidding? ( ha ha) Nice to know that they really do exist. Thanks for having the cahones to post it and the accompanying color tinted photo.

Richard P

**NTZ** · 03-23-2008, 06:36 PM

Peter, I don’t know if I missed it or not but what is the frame of the SS made of?

**phild** · 03-23-2008, 07:15 PM

Originally posted by Brian Bonini View Post

This is a keeper from my 2nd collection that I managed to hold on to through my divorce in '95. I believe this to be the type seen at Normandy and the Ardennes. (In the Schwimmwagon at the Malmedy sign

)

Well it is a one item collection! That crusher (as too the others posted on this thread IMO) really leaves nothing else to be said or seen.

Announcement

WSS Yellow Piped Crusher

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread