Announcement

**Johnny R** · 12-01-2007, 01:57 PM

85th

The date on the tunic and the white piped boards doesn't make sense. The 85th infantry Rgt. was changed into the 85th Gebirgs in 1940. Should be a mountain piped tunic with the date and the unit. Sorry, I think these boards have been replaced post war.

http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/...ter/Inhalt.htm

Click 85th

**Luca Ongaro** · 12-01-2007, 01:59 PM

Thanks Jacques

Here a better close up.
Luca

Attached Files

closeup.jpg (14.7 KB, 297 views)

**JuanS** · 12-01-2007, 02:13 PM

Dear Luca

Could you check the shoulder boards. What happened to the right SB?. It look like it had been replaced. The odd thing is that the left look OK. Could you check the inside?

regards

Juan

**Johnny R** · 12-01-2007, 02:18 PM

Board

The right board looks poorly applied. Sorry, I think this tunic has been tampered with. I rechecked the unit history, starting in 40 and completed in 1941 the 85th was converted to Gebirgsjager. The numbers may have been added to the boards but to me it looks like the boards were sewn into the tunic postwar.

**jacquesf** · 12-01-2007, 02:18 PM

John,

I don't think it is the straps that has been fiddled, but rather the cyphers. Look at the placement and to a lesser extent the aging in relation to the pips. Jacques

Originally posted by jhodgson View Post

The date on the tunic and the white piped boards doesn't make sense. The 85th infantry Rgt. was changed into the 85th Gebirgs in 1940. Should be a mountain piped tunic with the date and the unit. Sorry, I think these boards have been replaced post war.

http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/...ter/Inhalt.htm

Click 85th

**Johnny R** · 12-01-2007, 02:21 PM

Board

IMO The right one has come loose or is poorly sewn in post war. The other one look okay. I can see the numbers being added to "pump up the tunic". Everything else looks good, low rank for someone with WWI service in 1943 with all those awards and odd to see an "old guy" in a front line combat position as company commander that late in the War but possible.

**Glenn McInnes** · 12-01-2007, 02:27 PM

Originally posted by jhodgson View Post

The right board looks poorly applied. Sorry, I think this tunic has been tampered with. I rechecked the unit history, starting in 40 and completed in 1941 the 85th was converted to Gebirgsjager. The numbers may have been added to the boards but to me it looks like the boards were sewn into the tunic postwar.

I would agree with your observations.

Glenn

**Luca Ongaro** · 12-01-2007, 02:27 PM

Originally posted by jcsanche View Post

Dear Luca

Could you check the shoulder boards. What happened to the right SB?. It look like it had been replaced. The odd thing is that the left look OK. Could you check the inside?

regards

Juan

Hi my friend, only an hand inspection can assure you this tunic was never restored, IMO the right shoulder was broken and war time restitched.
I will send pictures of inside so you can see. The left one is original applied

Luca

**Luca Ongaro** · 12-01-2007, 02:33 PM

Originally posted by jhodgson View Post

The right board looks poorly applied. Sorry, I think this tunic has been tampered with. I rechecked the unit history, starting in 40 and completed in 1941 the 85th was converted to Gebirgsjager. The numbers may have been added to the boards but to me it looks like the boards were sewn into the tunic postwar.

Thanks fo your interest, I am not agree with you about the boards were sewn into the tunic postwar, I ask to you and Glenn, please, if you can exlain me why you consider 85 as a btg.
Luca

**Johnny R** · 12-01-2007, 02:58 PM

Observations

Originally posted by Luca Ongaro View Post

Thanks fo your interest, I am not agree with you about the boards were sewn into the tunic postwar, I ask to you and Glenn, please, if you can exlain me why you consider 85 as a btg.
Luca

All I can say is this appears to have original infantry tabs applied and most likely was an Infantry tunic. The 85th is recorded to have changed from a straight infantry unit to a Gebirgsjaeger Rgt. begining in October of 1940 and completed in early 1941. Given the tailor date date of the tunic (1943) the number on the boards does not work with the waffenfarbe. If the was an edelweiss it would be a bit more believable but in this case it seems "odd" and it is hard to believe.

I personally suspect that the boards or the numbers have been postwar replaced. That is my just my opinion. We are here to help each other. If you think it is okay that is great.

**Paul McKee** · 12-01-2007, 03:06 PM

IMO, the tarnish on the "8" cypher doesn't match the "5", unless that is the fault of the lighting in the photograph. I'm suspicious.

I would have to agree that the right shoulder strap is at least poorly repaired if not actually replaced. However, logic would say if one shows a botched job of replacement, then so should the other one. Luca, take a look at the inside and see if the sleeve lining had been opened and sewn shut at the shoulder seam. That may help answer the question of replacement.

I was a little "iffy" about the fuzziness and open weave of the material of the tunic itself, but the tailor's tag looks originally sewn and the collar looks good to me. I guess its just me being paranoid.

Paul

**Glenn McInnes** · 12-01-2007, 03:13 PM

The right shoulder board is an obvious replacement,have seen it done this way when the interior lining has not been opened but then again I have seen it done this way when the lining was opened to re-apply them,all depends on the skill of the person doing the work.

It appears that the exposed attachment thread attaching the board (s) looks to be the same type/color of thread that is used for the award loops, but it could just be the photo.

Glenn.

**Luca Ongaro** · 12-01-2007, 03:21 PM

Originally posted by Paul McKee View Post

IMO, the tarnish on the "8" cypher doesn't match the "5", unless that is the fault of the lighting in the photograph. I'm suspicious.

I would have to agree that the right shoulder strap is at least poorly repaired if not actually replaced. However, logic would say if one shows a botched job of replacement, then so should the other one. Luca, take a look at the inside and see if the sleeve lining had been opened and sewn shut at the shoulder seam. That may help answer the question of replacement.

I was a little "iffy" about the fuzziness and open weave of the material of the tunic itself, but the tailor's tag looks originally sewn and the collar looks good to me. I guess its just me being paranoid.

Paul

Hi Paul, you are correct, the tarnish on the "8" cypher doesn't match the "5", I think to have enough experience to tell you for sure this tunic is not restored and the shoulder boards are war time mounted and not repaced, the right board as you can see is poorly repaired.
Maybe by these pictures the cyphers seem were added post war but I don't think so by hand inspection, hope new pictures can help.
Thanks again for your interest

Luca

Attached Files

DSC_0667.jpg (47.3 KB, 270 views)

**Luca Ongaro** · 12-01-2007, 03:22 PM

1

Attached Files

1.jpg (60.6 KB, 271 views)

**Luca Ongaro** · 12-01-2007, 03:23 PM

Please look the signs where the board was originally stitched

Attached Files

2.jpg (80.1 KB, 271 views)

Announcement

Heer 85 Inf. Officer tunic

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread