And How About This Dream.......m43 Ss Pz Cap At E-stand

[John Huff]

I know little about SS caps but two criteria used to judge originality are meaningless:
1) too minty
2) price is too low

Bill Shea recently sold a Heer tropical shirt for half what I would have given him if I had seen it first!

[billbert]

Actually a low price SOMETIMES can be a good sign of a original inasmuch as the person has NO clue to its value...Billbert

[BenVK]

Actually a low price SOMETIMES can be a good sign of a original inasmuch as the person has NO clue to its value...Billbert

Absolutely right!

case in point:
http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...=151375&page=2

[billbert]

Ben..Didnt you get rid of that ratty old thing yet??...Billbert

[Bob Coleman]

I know little about SS caps but two criteria used to judge originality are meaningless:
1) too minty
2) price is too low

Bill Shea recently sold a Heer tropical shirt for half what I would have given him if I had seen it first!

John-
I agree with the price criteria but will disagree on the "too minty" aspect.
"Unissued" items must always be looked at these days with more care. Cloth will show signs of aging even if never worn due to the exposure to the pollution found in today's enviroment. Unless the cap being discussed was kept in a sealed container for the past 60+ years, I would doubt it immediately based upon that criteria. In the mid 60's, tens of thousands of Luftwaffe and HJ Flakhelfer field caps were found. Every gun show table seemed to have one on it for $10.00. I have seen some of the same minty examples recently that have been in a collection and cared for since aquisition nearly fourty years ago. These caps demonstrate some of the aging I have described. I also see some problems with the cap being discussed and aside from my previous remarks, I still would have serious doubts as to the originality of this piece.
Bob

PS: Bill Shea undersold an item? Unbelievable!

[John Huff]

I have purchased an M43 that was still in the original box in which it was shipped home from Europe. It looked as fresh as the day it was made. Many vets got home, packed their souvenirs in cedar chests and never (or seldom) looked at them again for the rest of their lives. A faker is just as apt to artificially age an item as not. Some websites even perform this "service" for a fee. Somewhere, there is a "combat" worn helmet in someone's collection. The combat wear came from me and the boys playing "war" with it in the streets and alleys of Chicago in 1960!. Certainly view all "mint" items with suspicion. But you better view ALL items with suspicion!

[John Huff]

see the link...
http://www.soldat.com/Aging.htm

[B. N. Singer]

[QUOTE=John Huff] Certainly view all "mint" items with suspicion. But you better view ALL items with suspicion!

Yes,
If someone has to rely on the aging of an item for the determination of it's originality, then I think, they might have more "homework" to do. (But then, I think we all need to keep up with our “homework”!)

B. N. Singer

[John Pic]

I have an undisputably original "M36" tunic and it shows almost no age except slight yellowing only seen under a loop on some threads and very very slight fading undetectable unless looked at with intense scrutiny.The aging thing is a very unreliable way to judge authenticity of cloth items.

[BILL]

Natural aging as opposed to forced is the first test though! Waffenrocks, for instance, usually look brand new but there will be evidence of age. Oxidization of exposed ferrous metals, reduction of surface coatings of insignia without physical wear, oxidization of metal threads. Certainly uniforms and insignia, stored properly, will be almost pristine. No doubt that this is a fact. But it also makes these pieces all the more rare and desirable. My logic tells me that the majority of bring backs were not stored so and should show natural decay. Aging is not deffinitive but is certainly a valuable tool. We all know when we see a piece that just "looks right". Cheers!

[TonyS]

As there are now almost no construction details that have not been revealed on a forum about M43 construction, SS or otherwise, it makes me wonder about people who give an opinion and fail to back it with an explanation. Fakers can easily buy original caps (not just M43’s either) and have them reproduced, so the argument about revealing details to the fakers is just bulls h i t in my opinion.

Here is my take on this cap from the photos:

The insignia is unquestionably original and is sewn to the cap properly. The "invisible" top stitch is nicely done. I'll take a straight stitch first, then zigzag and then handsewn (which are usually postwar done) as my own preference.

The materials used. The grey/brown HBT lining is original as is the wool exterior. The fuzzy relatively untrimmed exterior is typical of enlisted quality SS M43 Panzer caps. The size stamp is exactly the same in size and font style I have seen on unquestioned originals. The pebbled metal buttons are typical of the enlisted dished style. They show the type of aging I would expect to see even if the rest of the cap shows no aging. Look at the back of the buttons to see the tarnish. The material for the "pull downs" is typically the same as the lining material (but not necessarily), stitched at both ends to the flaps and quite commonly folded over with a line of stitching running the length of the material to seal it together but not stitching it to the cap.

The construction. The back seam reinforcement panel; this is exactly the same as on original caps. The shape and stitching on the button holes, and the single bottom seam and double top seam on the flaps is also typical of an original. The only thing I cannot see is the reinforcement material to bulk up the top seam of the flap. Sometimes this shows slightly and sometimes not. I have seen it in a wide variety of materials, from scraps of the same material lining the cap, to scraps of bright green colored Gebirgsjaeger Waffenfarbe material.

If this cap is a fake I would like to see some valid reasons why.

[B. N. Singer]

Call for a Vote

The poor fellow that started this thread is probably going around and around wondering whether he should or should not buy this hat.

You will not get an analysis from me but unless there is some "Forum bylaw" prohibiting it, what say you all we take a "vote."

Seems to me that there have been some fairly sharp fellows (Yours truly not necessarily included) that have followed this thread. OK boys, let's at the Very Least give some direction to this member. I'll go first, I would NOT own it
B. N. Singer

[jimt]

m-43

Not for my collection .............

jimtoncar

[Bob Coleman]

From the images posted, not for me either.

[Glenn McInnes]

I would pass as well


Glenn