"M45" helmets

[Brian Ice]

M40 SD Field Modified

M40 with brushed-on textured dark green paint. Underside of helmet not painted.

[Brian Ice]

M42 SD Army Depot reissued

M42 with sprayed-on very rough texture dark green paint over the first finish of standard rough texture green/gray. Decal appears to be on top of the overpaint. Underside of helmet not painted.

[Brian Ice]

M45-A Factory Issued

M45-A with what appears to be factory applied rough texture dark green paint. Standard M31 liner with 1945 date on steel band. CKL66 marked.

[Brian Ice]

M45-B Factory Issued

M45-B with what appears to be factory applied very rough texture dark green paint, smooth dark green inside. It has the M44 economy liner (used in the prototype models) with standard chinstrap. ckl 64 marked

[Michael N]

Very nice line-up Brain , Would it be possible to get a shot of the M45-B liner?

Thanks,
PAO

[Brian Ice]

From previous posting:

However, there is now evidence to suggest that there is at least one more combat color/texture that appears to have been used very late in the war:

the rough/very rough texture dark green. (collector designation--mine)
I do not believe this color to be simply a variation of the standard rough texure green/gray, but a different color/texture entirely.

This color/texture appears on the ventless M45-A and M45-B helmets.

There are some/many in the collecting community that have doubt about the authenticity of the M45 ventless helmets with their very rough texture dark green paint.

If indeed this dark green paint was one of the last changes to the paint color requirements near the war's end, one would think that the M35/M40/M42 helmets sent back to the factory for refurbishing would receive this dark green finish. If this is true, then surviving examples of these helmets should exist.[/QUOTE]


Since this posting I have learned that helmets receiving only a sprayed on overpaint are depot refinished hemets, and those receiving a brushed-on overpaint are field modified helmets (probably by the individual soldier using tins of paste mixed with various liquids, the paste made by an outside contractor, in colors apparently similar to those used by the helmet factory).

[Brian Ice]

M44 economy liner

Notice:

1. poor fit
2. poor quality leather
3. unusual type liner string
4. single band construction, 3 square shaped brackets seen above split rivets
5. all steel hardware (no aluminum) with apparently no corosion proofing.

My opinion:

A nice design, but these were made too cheaply. The band seems about the same thickness as the inner band of the M31 liner. This thin band can allow the head to more or less contact the sides of the helmet shell, which I would imagine could be fatal if the shell was struck by a heavy blow. This liner does not seem to have the same insulating effects against blunt force trauma that the M31 has, with it's double band construction.

Since there is lacking the extra metal of the M31 liner, this M44 can accomodate a slightly larger head size than the size 57cm M31 liner.

[Michael N]

Hello Brian,
Your information is very usefull, thank you for taking the time to post up photos and very well written descriptions. I now will be keeping an eye open for one of these truly rare helmets,

Thanks,
Michael

[Brian Ice]

Fake M45

PAO: please do not get into too big of a hurry to find an M45, or you may very well take home a total fake, as pictured here. Total fake at home.

[Brian Ice]

Fake M45

This helmet is actually an M42 with the vent holes drilled out and filled in. If you look closely, you can see something strange going on in the vent hole area. These holes were welded shut, and the metal in this area is not completely smooth. Something to look out for!

Please read this entire thread before doing any hunting. There are several types of fakes to look out for.

[Brian Ice]

Fake M45 liner

Original liner band with reproduction parts. Apparently original paint on underside of visor and neckguard.

[Brian Ice]

All of M45 components produced wartime?

I may now have enough information to attempt to demonstrate that the individual components of M45 were all wartime produced, such as:

Liners: M31, M44

Paint color/texture: dark green

Steel shell: non-beaded rough edge ventless


-LINERS


The M31 liner is well accepted in the collecting community so I won't waste time discussing it.

Concerning the M44 liner system:

According to Ludwig Baer in The History of the German Steel Helmet (p.388 1985 ed.), "The new Model 44 liner which was being developed for the Model 35 helmet performed very well in the field tests. This liner will also fit inside the Model B, B/II and Thale helmets." The M44 liner was designed for the prototype helmets. In autumn of 1944 the results of prototype helmet testing were presented to the chancellor for approval, which he turned down. So in late 1944 all testing was complete and the selected prototypes and the M44 liner were ready for mass production. Page 388 has a bundesarchiv photo of the M44 liner system.

conclusion: wartime produced


PAINT COLOR/TEXTURE

In recent posts on this thread (#209-216) it has been demonstrated that the color dark green in it's various shades and textures was applied to german helmets during the war, most likely very late war. Wartime examples of helmet models M35, M40, and M42 were shown to have both brushed on and sprayed-on finishes in this color. Texturing ranged from fine to very rough. We have therefore seen that the paint color/textures that are found on apparent factory produced M45 helmets are also found on proven wartime examples.

conclusion: wartime produced

[Brian Ice]

VENTLESS SHELL


I had been thinking what would be the best way to know if the ventless shell was WWII produced. I thought that it would be nice to have a bare, unpainted ventless shell, and even a bare, unpainted rough edge blank on hand to show that the ventless shell was not altered in the vent area. These would certainly show that the ventless shell was produced wartime, but it would not prove that M45 was issued in this configuration. The most logical conclusion would be that these were simply unfinished shells that were never issued by the factory.

I realize now that one way to know for sure if the M45 ventless was issued wartime would be to find a period wartime photo of the M45 in use. Just any photo of any unit in any campaign would not suffice. For one thing, these are believed to have been issued near the war's end, (Battle of Berlin era) so I would expect to see a very late war dated photo.

Since this would be an important photo used to demonstate the use of a rare helmet model, it should be catalogued by a reputable agency to insure that the photo had not been altered. The more information about the photo, the better, such as exact day taken, location, unit.

The photo should be of a non-beaded ventless rough edge combat helmet, as this is the model in question, not an M35, M40, M18 or any other model helmet.

The photo should have been taken from a close proximity with sufficient clarity.


I would encourge all discussion from anyone on this matter, but before we discuss the photo in question, I would like to say that the posted photo (post #203 of this thread) is only a poor reproduction created by my camera. I do not intend that discussion should be based on this image. The reason for the posting is to inform everyone as to which photo is in question. I am asking that all comments be directed at the published example in the following book:

IN A RAGING INFERNO Combat Units of the Hitler Youth 1944-1945 by Hans Holtztrager ISBN 1-874622-60-4
Helion and Company publishers p.59

(a lighted magnifying glass works quite well when viewing this photo)

Or, if you have access to the Bundesarchiv photo: 183/728/885.
I believe this photo to be even clearer than the published example.


There are two reasons why I do not want to base this discussion on the posted image:

1. When an image is copied like this it looses clarity, sharpness, etc.. I do not expect anything conclusive to be reached based on this posted image. So, why discuss it?

2. This posted image has passed through my hands. How do you know that I have not altered this image to suit my own ends? To know for sure that I have not altered the photo in question, the entire collecting community should have independent access to it from independent sources.

[Brian Ice]

Photo Information

Some interesting facts about this photo:

Authenticity: This photo has been cataloged by the Bundesarchiv. I would think that the chances of this photo being altered postwar to be nil.

Location: Berlin

Date: 30 March 1945

Unit: Flak (HJ flak helpers)

Other observations:

Position: Photo appears to have been taken at about waist height, looking upward.

Distance: I estimate at no more than 10 feet.



Some interesting observations about the helmet:

It appears to be a non-beaded rough edge model (note flare at rear of
helmet).
It appears to be matte finished. Wire is attached to this helmet.

The finish appears to be in remarkably good condition suggesting a recent issue.




When I first saw the wire on this helmet, I thought, "Oh no, another obstacle in the way of the vent hole area." However, after some thought, I now realize that the wire could be a blessing in disguise. Here's how:

Another forum member mentioned the possibility of the vent hole being "washed-out" in this picture by too much light from a glare. If there had been no wire on this helmet, then it would have been difficult to say if a wash-out had ocurred or not--therefore it would have been difficult to say whether there had been a vent hole, or not.

If there had been a wash-out effect in the vent hole area, the wire, which is in this same area, would have been washed-out as well, or at least demonstrated a washing-out effect.

Since the wire appears completely clear with no washing-out seen, if there had been a vent hole on this helmet, it would have appeared clearly as well.


If most stahlhelm 35 model helmets have their vent holes situated at roughly a 25-30 degree angle from the front split rivet, I would put a potential vent hole on this helmet at just above the wire. The wire on this helmet does not appear to be anywhere near thick enough to completely cover a vent hole so that no trace of it could be seen.

Even if the wire did go right over the top of the vent hole, the wire's shape would have been distorted by the vent hole's raised ring, causing the wire to be pulled away from the surface of the shell. In this photo, the wire appears to consistently hug the surface of the shell in this area, and shows no evidence of being pulled away by something underneath it.

[Brian Ice]

Scrutinize The Photo

Concerning the photo of which a reproduction was previously posted (#203), the forum has had about 3 weeks to view the published example. I will assume that all who had an interest were able to view the photo. I would appreciate comments from all who have viewed the photo in the book "IN A RAGING INFERNO".

This published photo appears to show a ventless M42 (aka M45) in use wartime. This photo may very well be the proof that has been requested as "photographic evidence proving the wartime issuance and use of the M45 during WWII".

The reason for the our attention on this matter is to see if this photo can
stand up to the forum's scrutiny, which seems to be commonplace for articles that are "new and unusual".

I will attempt to prove that this photo is in fact the photographic evidence
sought after beyond a reasonable doubt. Notice that I said "reasonable doubt", not ridiculous doubt. An example of a ridiculous doubt might be that there is a great conspiracy afoot to convince the collecting community (and especially Brian) of M45's authenticity by altering photographs, and altering M42 helmets to appear as original M45s, in order to market fake M45 helmets to gullible collectors. While there are certainly fake M45s available, the altering of photos and grand conspiracy part is, I believe, ridiculous.

Since I am asserting something (authentic M45) contrary to commonly held belief, I am required to prove my position before it will be accepted as fact. This rule applies not only to me, but to all who attempt the same thing. Keep this in mind when commenting.

If you desire to engage me in conversation about this topic, I will expect you to have viewed the published photograph in the book "IN A RAGING INFERNO".

My purpose is not to convince anybody of anything. My purpose is simply to bring to light a fact that I think has been lost to collectors for 60 years. I think that the proof now exists to do just that. If you choose to remain unconvinced (predudiced?) of something, that is your business. I am not appealing to the collecting community's beliefs and feelings, but rather, to their ability to judge hard evidence without predudice, and to make a logical decision.