Crusher

[Paris Gun]

I can clearly see that the eagle was sewn through the lining, but I want to know if the lining is enlisted type cheesecloth? Certainly looks like an EM cap based upon its silhouette that was perhaps relined, as the lining in the crown would cause me some concern. I also don't like the visor attachment, as all my crushers had handsewn visors and not machine-stitched. With that said, how one was able to so craftfully attach cellon piping is a mystery. If it is a mere EM upgrade to resemble an early WH General's crusher, kudos to the con artist that made this hat. However, given the quality of the cellon's apparent intergral construction, coupled with what I would deem a late period crusher type visor, maybe there's a chance; but if a late war style crusher, why not gold bullion insignia? C'mon 'Ole Guru of WH Crushers', grace us with your brilliance! If silence must be maintained, then, Donald where art thou?

Whomever the owner of this piece is, contact me should you decide to sell it. It will find an honest home for all to learn from. Thanks, Paris Gun

[Norman Keller]

!

Ambulance chaser

[Glenn McInnes]

Celleon doesn't fade that much. it is more then likely a calvery crusher.
Cheers;
Norman

Sorry but I disagree. I remember seeing a one look original used Generals visor in which the cellon piping was faded this much. I got the named tunic and breeches from the lot (ran out of $ for the visor) which was purchased direct from the family.


Glenn

[sturmbannfuhrer]

Sorry but I disagree. I remember seeing a one look original used Generals visor in which the cellon piping was faded this much. I got the named tunic and breeches from the lot (ran out of $ for the visor) which was purchased direct from the family.


Glenn

Feldwebl is right, Gold celleon often ends up as a near transparent colour. Something to do with its organic wood pulp material construction. (cellophane rayon).

My admin General's visor has very light coloured celleon piping.

Back to the SS visor, I am not an admirer of this piece.

[25thlight]

Hello Sturmbannfuhrer,
please elaborate.
your not a fan of the cap posted or a unrelated SS cap.
Thanks
Eddie

[Dave Kane]

Eddie, here's how I 'see' you cap and thus the cautionary message!

*The devices obviously haven't been part of the cap for 60+ years

* The wear patterns of the interior belie the exterior

* The oil that is evident on the sweat leather doesn't appear on the attaching (grey) material

*The dimentions of the cap are a bit queer and force a crowded look to the eagle

* The piping doesn't give the impression of being 'part' of the cap

* The frame material (bottom) shows no wear at all

* The bottom of the frame is very thick

* The diamond placement suggests a 'reupholstering' as it's far back

* The visor is placed poorly with the upper edge (guide line) far too low

* The stitching for the visor is visible (not hidden by the lower piping)

* Then the 'intangible'....what self respecting General Officer would be seen in a cap constructed like this?


These are observations made from your pics only BUT I suspect there may be many other questions raised if it were in hand!

[sturmbannfuhrer]

Hello Sturmbannfuhrer,
please elaborate.
your not a fan of the cap posted or a unrelated SS cap.
Thanks
Eddie

Hi Eddie, I was on night shift last night as tonight. I must have had SS on the brain. It has no relevance in this thread I just must have been on a different plain when I was writing my input.

I do not like the cap posted.

[Dave Kane]

I'm a bit suprised by the lack of discussion....

[Gene]

I dunno Dave. . . I still like it

[Dave Kane]

Thanks Gene...now we're off!

Why do you like it? This sometime can validate a piece, that is, if the good points outweigh the bad!

[nonameno]

Hello Guys,
I think that Dave has outline the questions very well indeed. If I were to add such a cap to my collection, these types of questions would need to be answered convincingly. I do NOT see how that can happen here.
I would pass.
Thank you,
Curtiss

[Glenn McInnes]

Eddie, here's how I 'see' you cap and thus the cautionary message!

*The devices obviously haven't been part of the cap for 60+ years

* The wear patterns of the interior belie the exterior

* The oil that is evident on the sweat leather doesn't appear on the attaching (grey) material

*The dimentions of the cap are a bit queer and force a crowded look to the eagle

* The piping doesn't give the impression of being 'part' of the cap

* The frame material (bottom) shows no wear at all

* The bottom of the frame is very thick

* The diamond placement suggests a 'reupholstering' as it's far back

* The visor is placed poorly with the upper edge (guide line) far too low

* The stitching for the visor is visible (not hidden by the lower piping)

* Then the 'intangible'....what self respecting General Officer would be seen in a cap constructed like this?


These are observations made from your pics only BUT I suspect there may be many other questions raised if it were in hand!

All very good points Dave. Reproduction cap constructed with some original parts perhaps? Didn't realize they were faking celleon piping..but nothing surprises me anymore.

They never faked rayon piping up until recently from what I understand,they just couldn't seem to get it right..But of course that has all changed now.

Glenn

[B. N. Singer]

I believe that I have seen nylon "cello" reproduction hats for years.

Anyone have an original Generals crusher that they care to let us have a look at?

B. N. Singer

[25thlight]

Hello All,
I will provide any pictures desired, just let me know what you want to see.
If this cap is post war made, they went to a lot of trouble.
Eddie

[Dave Kane]

Eddie, take a 'dog' visor as long as it's period OR even one from a handful of years after the war....you have a good base. The cost might be a couple of hundred bucks.

Labor, add another couple of hundred.

A period Heer General's visor is minimum..$5,000.00, yes?

Historically, a 'crush' cap is 3x the value of a normal visor, yes?

The incentive is there and the product quite handy!

I have seen only 2 (real) Heer General crushers in better than 40 years and their assembly, quality etc. was fabulous