SS EM Schirmmütze

[willysproject]

Hi,

I wanted to share this cap with you before I might part from it. It's a perfect condition 55-56 sized SS EM visor cap lacking the insignia. When removing the fake insignia, according the small holes through the lining there once have been previous (original?) insignia on this cap. The pasteboard of the cap is black colored and none of the materials is glowing. The shape is quite nice as you can see.
The cap is a very early well made fake however, using wartime materials beyond any doubt. I' ve read topics about the earliest Älteste fake caps that where made shortly after the war by former German 3rd Reich cap makers e.g. as souvenirs for Americans. The earliest of these where totally made with wartime materials or where made from wartime 'unfinished caps'. Taken in account this point, and regarding the 99% percent SS-tunics restored with original insignia, one could state that these well made super-fake caps are partly 'original' too, instead of just simple cheap fakes.

According to a cap collector this cap isn't one of the good Älteste caps. At this point I'm not really sure yet at whose product I'm looking here.
Does anyone else has photos of very good fakes like this to share??

Kind regards,
Gerd V

[willysproject]

2

[willysproject]

3

[willysproject]

4

[RobertE]

Gerd, I think you have it about right: a cap produced from original WWII materials, assembled after the war, like the A-SS cap I posted a few threads down.

Nice looking example, though I wish they'd used the regular smooth wool for what is built like a early NCO cap in terms of materials, but nicer peak than the teller types.

regards, Robert

[willysproject]

Hi,

thanks. No one else any thoughts?

Kind regards,
Gerd V

[BenVK]

I'd love to know how anyone can identify this as an early fake rather than a late original!

[willysproject]

Hi Ben,

well some have popped that thought too already. As it would be too good to be true I went for the 'very nice early fake' option. In case it would be an original one, I'd be just a bit more happy.

Kind regards,
Gerd V

I'd love to know how anyone can identify this as an early fake rather than a late original!

[BenVK]

Well, I've only got the photos to study but I can't tell you that it's a fake.
If anyone can tell you that it's a fake based on these photos, I'd say that they're talking crap.

[SgtB]

Actually, my first impression isn't that it's old at all. It looks like a Chinese copy of the last 4-5 years.

[RobertE]

By Gerd's declaration that this is a replica - and he's the one who has it in hand and knows where it came from - an assessment of originality was not being solicited.

The materials appear to be wartime, as I said above. It's when it was assembled that appears to now be the question.

On the headgear forum, there is plenty of headgear that is bad that's declared to be good, depending on who's listing it. Conversely, there's many cases where stone-cold original pieces dismissed as fakes when they are original. I agree there are many people talking crap on this forum section.

s/f Robert

[willysproject]

Thanks Robert,

Yes, I agree with your observation on crappy talk.

I bought this cap on an online auction about 3 months ago. The auction countdown was ticking when I first saw it and had no time to ask better photos. So I took the risk. It was my assessment that the lining and pleads looked okay, the shape was nice... It had fake insignia that were undoubtedly put on the cap to replace previous as could see the previous holes. But I liked the materials and the shape so I bought it for the price of a good fake.
After payment the cap got lost in the mail and ended up in Brazil instead of Europe. I had given up and eased my mind that it would have been a bad cap anyway. I got my money back from Paypal.
Last week it arrived anyway. When unpacking the features of the cap (construction, material and shape) did give me a good feeling. Re-reading the topics on the Älteste caps I did however start to think that maybe it might also be one of these.

On the other hand, if it's a plain common obvious fake... I do expect to see 'its twin' soon when searching the internet. Until now, this hasn't happened. All input so far of knowledgeable people was:
- It's not an Älteste Berliner;
- Might this be the first original (yet: late war) cap be 'disguised' as an early post-war fake?
- Impossible to tell by only these photos if it's original. One cannot make up by only these photos that it is bad though.

Kind regards,
Gerd V

By Gerd's declaration that this is a replica - and he's the one who has it in hand and knows where it came from - an assessment of originality was not being solicited.

The materials appear to be wartime, as I said above. It's when it was assembled that appears to now be the question.

On the headgear forum, there is plenty of headgear that is bad that's declared to be good, depending on who's listing it. Conversely, there's many cases where stone-cold original pieces dismissed as fakes when they are original. I agree there are many people talking crap on this forum section.

s/f Robert

[Buckliger]

Actually, my first impression isn't that it's old at all. It looks like a Chinese copy of the last 4-5 years.

clearly not, these are period materials.The question is still when is it assembled ...imo

[jacquesf]

My first thougth when I saw it , was "nice cap". Bit surprised when it was described as a fake.J

[RobertE]

Doesn't sound like too suspect of a history, and it would be great to be positively surprised. It is devoid of size/maker/RZM stamps, embossing, or tags, and that gabardine is present on many replicas - but it's also on original headgear.

I would hang onto it and give it a good coat of looking at. Give it time, review headgear references for details, and let your gut speak to you.

Good luck!

s/f Robert