Heer EM Tunic

[Mark Cheffins]

EM Tunic

Gentleman

Thank you all for your observations and comments. It was a great learning experience. I can now read a RB # correctly.

Best
Mark

[djpool]

Gentleman

Thank you all for your observations and comments. It was a great learning experience. I can now read a RB # correctly.

Best
Mark

Very nice tunic with a unique history. Jim

[TCT]

The eagle is most likely a post war application to raise the value on a GI souvenir item.

Steve

My guess is that the eagel was reapplied by the group of boys who 'found' these items just before your relative (unless he was the one to have removed it from its original locker?)
Thank you,
Curtiss

It seems to me that the pockets and eagle were all removed when the tunic was resized and then resewn through the lining. When a tunic is reduced in size from 128cm (50") to 96cm (38"), the pockets and eagle would have to be removed and repositioned closer in toward the center of the tunic. If you look at the photo in post #15, it appears that the same exact thread was used to re-apply both the eagle and pocket flap. So I think the eagle is 'original' to the tunic and not replaced/re-applied post war.

Will

[John Huff]

I would agree.

[km-spain]

I agre with you also, probably an unused tunic because of its size, one of the biggest I have ever seen, that has been retailored latter with some war modifications. I have seen the RBNr. code (RBNr. 0/0250/2286) in other Berlin depot tunics from 1943. Very interesting piece .

[airborne_steve]

Yup!

[Abzeichen]

Some issues

The eagle was definitely added later. I do have a question concerning the internal belt suspenders. It looks as though the slots for the interal belt suspender straps have been closed and straps have been sewn to the inside in a M-43 fashion.

If this jacket had not been issued in the early war period, why would these variations be present? Could this jacket be a re-issue and the tag is for the second issue?

Has anyone seen evidence of this varitation to the suspender straps on a tunic known to be issued in '39/'40? All of my early tunics have the standard lining and straps. Only my M-43 has the sew in straps.

Bruce

[Glenn McInnes]

The eagle was definitely added later. I do have a question concerning the internal belt suspenders. It looks as though the slots for the interal belt suspender straps have been closed and straps have been sewn to the inside in a M-43 fashion.

If this jacket had not been issued in the early war period, why would these variations be present? Could this jacket be a re-issue and the tag is for the second issue?

Has anyone seen evidence of this varitation to the suspender straps on a tunic known to be issued in '39/'40? All of my early tunics have the standard lining and straps. Only my M-43 has the sew in straps.

Bruce

The paper tag would have been for the first issue and the same numbers were stamped in this tunic above the bandage pocket. The chest size in these numbers was then inked out when re-tailored and re-stamped accordingly with new size stamps,RB# etc.


The re-tailoring probably rendered the internal belt hook support straps useless and the new belt hook support straps were then added.



Glenn

[John Huff]

Right-on!

[Abzeichen]

I get by with a little help from my friends

The paper tag would have been for the first issue and the same numbers were stamped in this tunic above the bandage pocket. The chest size in these numbers was then inked out when re-tailored and re-stamped accordingly with new size stamps,RB# etc.


The re-tailoring probably rendered the internal belt hook support straps useless and the new belt hook support straps were then added.



Glenn

Thanks Glenn for the Info.