Erel Heer Visor opinions; Estand

[Axel Parabellum]

All,

Just wanted to get some opinions from the WAF on the following Erel Sonderklasse Heer Visor on the Estand.

http://wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/s...d.php?t=446404

Authenticity, unreplaced parts, good seller, ect the usual topics.

Thanks in advanced gentlemen.

Regards

[Jon. H]

Seems very fine to me!

[Kreager]

There looks to be empty holes just behind the chincord buttons. Maybe an officers upgrade, but when is the million dollar question. Other then that is looks like a nice original cap.

[Axel Parabellum]

Thanks for the quick responses Jon-Olav and Kreager.

I did notice those small holes but do not know there significance. Did the non-officers visors have these and the officers do not?

I am just getting into Visor so unfortunitely my knowledge on these are limited that why am relying on the senior visor guys on the forum for authentification. I researched as much as I could on the Erel's and they're manufacturer specific things to look for and most check out, I think?

How does the sweatband look to yous guys? I know Erel's have their own way of doing theirs?

Axel

[Kreager]

The extra holes would be evidence of former button holes, more then likely this hat started out as an EM/NCO because of the location.

The sweatband is correct.

[sturmbannfuhrer]

It is also possible that the chin cord was repositioned as the original position was not right for the wearer. (To discount NCO upgrade, best thing would be to look for signs of marks on the visor top surface from a previously fitted NCO strap)

You don't see pics of cap chin cords being used very often, the only pic I remember seeing with one being actually used was the Fuhrer himself...

[Paul McKee]

You don't see pics of cap chin cords being used very often, the only pic I remember seeing with one being actually used was the Fuhrer himself...

I assume you mean actually being worn under the chin?

Paul

[Paul McKee]

There looks to be empty holes just behind the chincord buttons. Maybe an officers upgrade, but when is the million dollar question. Other then that is looks like a nice original cap.

If is is an upgrade, there SHOULD be a unit acceptance stamp on the underside of the sweatband as it would have been a private purchase cap originally. They are not always present, and it still wouldn't answer if the alleged upgrade was wartime or not.

Paul

[Kreager]

If is is an upgrade, there SHOULD be a unit acceptance stamp on the underside of the sweatband as it would have been a private purchase cap originally. They are not always present, and it still wouldn't answer if the alleged upgrade was wartime or not.

Paul

Paul, in theory this is correct. But please tell me how many PP Em/NCO visor caps you see with the acceptance stamp compared to, with out the stamp. I would say this regulation was not followed and personally is not something I would base an NCO vs an Officers visor against. But each his own, i guess.

JT could very well could be correct. Have a look at the visor and see if there are any markings from a previous Em/NCO strap.



Matt

[Paul McKee]

Matt,

I don't disagree with you. Please note the emphasis on "SHOULD" was entirely intentional.

That said, I've seen enough officer upgrades correctly bearing acceptance stamps that I would certainly look for one. I have a nice Pioneer officer upgrade exactly like this. If a stamp is present, that would prove the upgrade theory and support any evidence of a previous EM/NCO leather chinstrap. The absence of such stamps tells us nothing.

I also wouldn't base the ID simply on the presence or absence of of acceptance stamps, but IMO one should look for all clues.

Paul

[Robert Shoaf]

IMHO, $1250 is a lot for an infantry officer's cap.

Bob Shoaf