My new M40 DD SS

[mandy333]

History???

Greetings:To me the history a mint article presents is as you said.... where it was stored and who found it. It is a perfect example, no more . It has no evidence or marking associated with the turmoil of that era... only aging ...It has no significant indication that it was even used or did partake in the world strife .IMO as far as history ... condition determines that.
Regards
Zeke

[Killerbee]

Hello:

For everyone's consideration:

Not to say that Kelly Hicks SS Steel book is the end all (I have many issues with it), but on Pg. 132 he writes:

" For all "Q" helmets, the maker and size markings were moved to the inside rear skirt of the helmet in late 1943, as were those of the other helmet producers. The "no-decal" "Q" M40 rear marked shell is a commonly found pattern of German WWII helmets. Many of these "no-decal" M40s have become "double decal" SS helmets in the postwar period. Collectors should note that the movement of the size marking to the rear skirt of helmets happened months before the order to cease issuing decals. Therefore, original helmets can display a single decal and have a rear marking."

So if Hicks is correct, this helmet was produced sometime between mid-1943 to 1945.

Question: Does anyone know if or when an order was provided not to put party shields on SS helmets? I'm sure there were exceptions, especially in the field which is the case for this helmet.

Per "Ludwig Baer" book, and requoted by Hick's in his book, "Very few SS M40 helmets were factory-produced with two decals, as the order to switch to a single decal took place in mid-1940."

I know we are talking about reissue treatment of a helmet vs a factory produced one, but does the last part of that quote above mean that a general order was issued mid-1940 to "not" put a party shields on factory produced helmets, and more importantly for field reissue ones? If so, 3 years later we have a helmet that was issued with them. Interesting... hmmmm, makes one wonder.

Counterpoint: To take the side of the helmet, I would counter that this helmet was issued to a prison camp guard, as it is known that prison camp guards continued to put both decals on their helmet even after the order. But better yet, maybe this helmet belonged to a SS medical doctor stationed in the prison camp, thus would explain the condition....

Well all this is obviously speculation but may spur more conversation or thought.

I don't mean to continue to comment about this helmet, but I think it is a good learning tool. We all know that the correct materials are present, but what is the real story about this helmet.... as it is not textbook. As everyone has noted, no one will ever know... and maybe there lies the conversational value of this helmet? I know that I wouldn't mind having this helmet in my collection just for the conversational value and it's nice display. And maybe in the future a better explanation will be forthcoming.

Regards,

Jim

[pvluger]

Very nice! I would be shakey about authenticity buying one in such great condition.

[nopoop]

You can talk of an unissued helmet not having a history but in that I would disagree. I collect both.

A photo does not convey the beauty of a helmet in superior shape. It just doesn't come across. Where a photo of a killer salty helmet goes along way in showing the way it looks in person, with an unissued helmet it doesn't even come close.

I have three probable unissued helmets in my collection. It wasn't until I acquired my first one that I saw what isn't seen in a photograph. That something.

...so I guess I'm hooked

As far as the example in this thread. Too many questions that can go either way for the amount of money involved. That's just my opinion and I am conservative to a fault when it comes to SS.

[Schwerpunkt]

The difference is huge , to even contemplate posing this question means you obviously don't care much about the history of these helmets.

Being content with an "altered" helmet would play right into the cards of all the people currently trying to rip serious collectors off.

Why would we need to study it if your satisfied with an 'it looks like an SS' helmet.

Just to be clear my statement has nothing to do with the helmet in question.
Personally I would like to see more evidence via lotnrs that proves it either was an ND lid or that it could be a DD SS lid.

You guys are going to hate me for this, but has anyone ever had this thought?...

Is there really any difference between a dead-nuts mint (never worn) helmet that had SS decals applied during the war, and a dead-nuts mint (never worn) helmet with SS decals applied after the war.

Another way to ask the question is if an SS soldier never wore it, is it an SS helmet at all, period applied decals or not?

Nice eye candy though.

[roby66]

This is a neverending question when we see an helmet like this one; undoubtedly helmets Q m40 ND and m42 ND of any maker fit perfecly for the purpose.
The helmet and the decals are without doubt original but in my opinion they have been postwar applied; the flaking is suspect but my concerns are most of all for the lot nr, not compatible for a DD and very weird for a depot sticking as well. Anyway, who knows for sure? My 2 cents.
Mauro

Roberto

[Chad1]

The difference is huge , to even contemplate posing this question means you obviously don't care much about the history of these helmets.

Being content with an "altered" helmet would play right into the cards of all the people currently trying to rip serious collectors off.

Why would we need to study it if your satisfied with an 'it looks like an SS' helmet.

Just to be clear my statement has nothing to do with the helmet in question.
Personally I would like to see more evidence via lotnrs that proves it either was an ND lid or that it could be a DD SS lid.

My point is that I care more about actual WWII history, such as the battles, not souvinir hunting in the warehouse. Sure, a truly mint example is both rare and interesting, but philosophically, there isn't much that sets it apart from a parts helmet, provided all the parts are original (at least to me). Of course, the market value of such helmets says otherwise.

Just curious if anybody else ever takes a moment to look back and remember what being interested in WWII is?

And for those who consider going from a warehouse shelf to a duffle bag real WWII history, have you heard of the SA daggers, made after the war for the souvinir hungry GI's, using the original equipment?

I'm not sure if it's true as I am not into daggers, but it should make you wonder.

[M35]

M40 Dd Ss

[QUOTE=Killerbee;2114046]Hello:

Question: Does anyone know if or when an order was provided not to put party shields on SS helmets? I'm sure there were exceptions, especially in the field which is the case for this helmet.

Per "Ludwig Baer" book, and requoted by Hick's in his book, "Very few SS M40 helmets were factory-produced with two decals, as the order to switch to a single decal took place in mid-1940."




Per Ludwig Baer, the order was issued 21 March 1940 to discontinue use of the red/white/black shields, and it applied to Heer and SS. On 12 June 1940 the order went out to Luftwaffe and FJ. The helmet paint was changed to rough texture matte finish at the same time.

Regards,
Terry

[Perry Floyd]

The date/directive above was for the German army with the black/white/red shield refering to the National color decal.
Black, white, red being the order of placement of the National colors.
I do believe the SS discountinued the Party decal under a directive but different to that of the Wehrmacht.
This is not any reference or to make comment to the decals on the subject helmet but only refering to the Heer bulletin #428 that was referenced.

[M35]

Party shields

Perry

You could be right, but unfortunately Baer does not cite a separate directive for the SS. He does state however (p190) "During the war the Waffen-SS received the same helmets as the Army. As of March 1940, the swastika shield was removed from the helmets."

The party shield was black, white, and red as well.......

Regards,
Terry

[Perry Floyd]

Correct but he is citing the actual Heer directive but not so in the case of the SS. I think it's rather clear since its a Heer directive and in the order it's stated, they are refering to the National colors. It's possible he may have assumed as the party shield disappears around the same time the tricolor is removed/withdrawn. I think anyone that has collected any length of time would agree. But you rarely see the party shield removed or overpainted, just stoped being issued, unlike the Wehrmacht branches after this directive. With the rarity of party shield removal/overpainted on polizei/SS helmets it is my opinion these examples were done in error(or following the Wehrmacht directive) at the time.
With what's avaliable to us today it looks like it was just discontinued and removal of prior applications discouraged.
Pride? State flag not to be defaced? that will just have to be debated but it's rather clear the SS/Polizei were on a different page on this issue.

[Killerbee]

[QUOTE=M35;2114526]

Hello:

Question: Does anyone know if or when an order was provided not to put party shields on SS helmets? I'm sure there were exceptions, especially in the field which is the case for this helmet.

Per "Ludwig Baer" book, and requoted by Hick's in his book, "Very few SS M40 helmets were factory-produced with two decals, as the order to switch to a single decal took place in mid-1940."




Per Ludwig Baer, the order was issued 21 March 1940 to discontinue use of the red/white/black shields, and it applied to Heer and SS. On 12 June 1940 the order went out to Luftwaffe and FJ. The helmet paint was changed to rough texture matte finish at the same time.

Regards,
Terry

The date/directive above was for the German army with the black/white/red shield refering to the National color decal.
Black, white, red being the order of placement of the National colors.
I do believe the SS discountinued the Party decal under a directive but different to that of the Wehrmacht.
This is not any reference or to make comment to the decals on the subject helmet but only refering to the Heer bulletin #428 that was referenced.

Perry

You could be right, but unfortunately Baer does not cite a separate directive for the SS. He does state however (p190) "During the war the Waffen-SS received the same helmets as the Army. As of March 1940, the swastika shield was removed from the helmets."

The party shield was black, white, and red as well.......

Regards,
Terry

Correct but he is citing the actual Heer directive but not so in the case of the SS. I think it's rather clear since its a Heer directive and in the order it's stated, they are refering to the National colors. It's possible he may have assumed as the party shield disappears around the same time the tricolor is removed/withdrawn. I think anyone that has collected any length of time would agree. But you rarely see the party shield removed or overpainted, just stoped being issued, unlike the Wehrmacht branches after this directive. With the rarity of party shield removal/overpainted on polizei/SS helmets it is my opinion these examples were done in error(or following the Wehrmacht directive) at the time.
With what's avaliable to us today it looks like it was just discontinued and removal of prior applications discouraged.
Pride? State flag not to be defaced? that will just have to be debated but it's rather clear the SS/Polizei were on a different page on this issue.

Thanks guys for the excellent comments and analysis. I appreciate the good thought processes provided.

Regards,

Jim

[Killerbee]

But you rarely see the party shield removed or overpainted, just stoped being issued, unlike the Wehrmacht branches after this directive. With the rarity of party shield removal/overpainted on polizei/SS helmets it is my opinion these examples were done in error(or following the Wehrmacht directive) at the time.
With what's avaliable to us today it looks like it was just discontinued and removal of prior applications discouraged.
Pride? State flag not to be defaced? that will just have to be debated but it's rather clear the SS/Polizei were on a different page on this issue.

Perry & M35:

Maybe you can help me with this thought. "Since the SS were using camo helmet covers, then the removal of existing shield(s) became unnecessary... and due to pride, would like to know it was still there (decals)."

Also,

Question: Did the SS start painting camo on their helmets due to the lack of supply of helmet covers? I assume the helmet covers did not have a real good life span.

I know this is off tangent with the thread, but I appreciate any of your thoughts.

Thanks,

Jim

[DougB]

Camo covers were issued to assault troops and were always in short supply. Considering a full strength WSS division had 18,000 men in mid 42 (although was almost never at full strength) the troops using camo covers was a fraction of that. Still a lot of helmets that would have been uncovered, how many were camouflaged, hard to say.