I know it is good but someone stated it was altered ? opinions ?
-
-
More photos 2
x -
More photos 3
xxComment
-
Im the one that said I felt it was altered. In my opinion, the soutache is re-applied and quite possibly the cockade. The eagle looks to be original to the cap but the leather just seem so far gone, perhaps in water at some point or something. It just doesn't sit quite right with me. That said, opinions are like butt holes and everyone has one. I like the outside wear to the cap and seems to have maybe been eaten on by some critters in the years since the war. Matt
Comment
-
disagree
first I think the ( water stains ) are sweat & rain stains oh the leather and liner this cap is well worn has NO moth holes does have small wear holes on the bottom edge under the insignia from wear.
the cap shows fading on the exposed areas also under the bulls eye and pink chevron. the thread attaching both are hand applied as for the eagle it was also hand sewn also with different color thread the lining is very dirty and worn no corrosion on the eyelets I am of course no expert but have owned and handled about 28 caps over 30 years and this cap is low quality but I think is original pre 45. for me I have no interest in unused items from a uniform shop / tailor shop looted post war I like battle worn items with wear and tear field applied insignia ect. and lastly this cap has been in a museum since 1955 documented including the vets name whom donated it then.
every collector has to judge what he likes and we all have been burned by fakes ect.
disagreements are normal.Comment
-
I like this cap, the soutache might be a problem for many, but I think it was applied after issue or purchase.Comment
Comment