Announcement

**Leroy** · 06-25-2007, 11:43 AM

"Leroy the insignias on the wrapper they are textbook in every way nothing wrong with them if they were loose there would still be nothing wrong."

They look perfectly fine to me, too. All I was saying was that some purists hold that the runes must be totally symmetrical, of exact equal length and equidistant from the sides of the tab, that the piping should be thinner and sewn on with stitches that don't intrude into the visible obverse side of the tab, and that, even with the pip style with mounting prongs as an integral part of the metal, there should be no visible "edge" to the pip showing where the prong is. I personally don't agree with any of this, but I have seen those comments scattered in the hundreds of posts I have read concerning insignia on this forum. I am sure that were these tabs to be posted separately, some of those same comments would emerge from some "expert". Again, I have no personal problem with these insignias AT ALL.

**BlackBelt** · 06-25-2007, 11:45 AM

Originally posted by tgn View Post

BlackBelt, just curious, who are the "people in the know"???

Tom

The people that have handled the tunic in question, or people that have been part of its history from sale to sale.

**Felix** · 06-25-2007, 12:15 PM

In my book of originals the insignia is just fine! Neither do I see any problems with the application. The stitching indicates very skilled hand sewing of the collar tabs from what I can see. Machines usually dont have this narrow stitch intervals IMHO. Might be machine but then its really tight and slow done. If you look at period photos you often see that insignias are deformed because of bending and movements and water of the collar from field use. So, thats fine too. Side prong pips are often seen on originals. What worries people are that there are plenty of fakes with side prongs as well.

Im have to slap myself for just staring at the lining. Hard to see why I didnt react before. I now notice that the wear of the collar tabs dont match the wear of the tunic. Thats atleast whats comes out when you look at the photos. It might be a reused collar tab pair and period done. However it does not speak in favor of an untouched tunic IMHO.

"Felix" - N. Hansson

**John Pic** · 06-25-2007, 12:38 PM

I fear you are correct Mr. Singer, Ive always taken it on good faith that sharing with others was beneficial. But im finally learning it is not.

**B. N. Singer** · 06-25-2007, 12:53 PM

Originally posted by John Pic View Post

I fear you are correct Mr. Singer, Ive always taken it on good faith that sharing with others was beneficial. But im finally learning it is not.

Well John, go ahead and share, nothing wrong with that, on the contrary, it's admirable; just don't let other's upset you with what they might say.

With regards

Bryon (B. N.) Singer

**djpool** · 06-25-2007, 01:39 PM

Originally posted by B. N. Singer View Post

Although I do not have any records to confirm it, I believe the subject item in this thread predates this hat. And not to open "an old wound" I think the hat is a reproduction (or put perhaps a more "familiar way") I could entertain doubts.

B. N. Singer

Mr Singer,<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o></o>
<o

></o

>
First understand that I have the highest respect for you. You are a true gentleman and credit to the hobby. So please don't take this as a personal attack. That’s not my intent. But for some reason it appears to me that you are making some allowances for the wrap that you don't generally do with other items. If I'm wrong I apologize. <o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
I think the discussion of the hat is important because some of the same subject areas: Non text book, vet stories, state of reproductions 20– 30 years ago; were discussed. <o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
As to establishing the timeframe for the hat here are some comments. It seems that the hat has been in the collector market somewhere between 20-30 years. You state the wrap has been in collector hands 27 years. I think we're in the same ball park. The timeframe is important only in establishing how good repros were or thought to be at that time. <o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
"Sorry BenVK, I stand corrected. But I believe it was more than two (2) but perhaps not as many as three (3) decades ago when these hats first appeared. B. N. Singer"<o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
"I have purchased 2 of these indirectly from Veterans. 1) I purchased one from a professor who purchased it direct from the Veteran over 30 years ago. Bill Shea"
<o

> </o

>
Gents, Here is another example. I've owned it about 20-25 years (per Mike Davis)<o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
Here you imply that repros weren't that great during that timeframe.<o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
<TABLE class=MsoNormalTable style="WIDTH: 100%; mso-cellspacing: 0in; mso-padding-alt: 4.5pt 4.5pt 4.5pt 4.5pt" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 0; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #d4d0c8 1pt inset; PADDING-RIGHT: 4.5pt; BORDER-TOP: #d4d0c8 1pt inset; PADDING-LEFT: 4.5pt; BACKGROUND: #591111; PADDING-BOTTOM: 4.5pt; BORDER-LEFT: #d4d0c8 1pt inset; PADDING-TOP: 4.5pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #d4d0c8 1pt inset; mso-border-alt: inset windowtext .75pt">Originally Posted by Soldat de Fer <?xml:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" /><v:shapetype id=_x0000_t75 stroked="f" filled="f" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" o

referrelative="t" o:spt="75" coordsize="21600,21600"><v:stroke joinstyle="miter"></v:stroke><v:formulas><v:f eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @0 1 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum 0 0 @1"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @2 1 2"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @0 0 1"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @6 1 2"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @8 21600 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @10 21600 0"></v:f></v:formulas><v

ath o:connecttype="rect" gradientshapeok="t" o:extrusionok="f"></v

ath><o:lock aspectratio="t" v:ext="edit"></o:lock></v:shapetype><v:shape id=_x0000_i1025 style="WIDTH: 4.5pt; HEIGHT: 6.75pt" alt="View Post" href="http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2050927#post2050927" o:button="t" type="#_x0000_t75"><v:imagedata o:href="http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/fusion/buttons/viewpost.gif" src="file:///C:\DOCUME~1\Owner\LOCALS~1\Temp\msohtml1\01\clip_i mage001.gif"></v:imagedata></v:shape><o

></o

>
Hello...I don't believe any stories regarding this wrap , to me it could be either a well made repro or an messed with original , and don't tell me that they don't make them !!! .
.<o></o>
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Perhaps, but only if this one was made that well over 27 years ago as a deception. I think not. B. N. Singer"<o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
But on the hat which you entertain doubts(substitute repro), your comments would imply that repros were that good.
, <o

></o

>
"I have spent a good deal of time re-familiarizing myself with these examples of "officers M43 hats" and have come to conclusion that an outright condemnation of these hats is perhaps not warranted. There seems to be nothing "glaring" that I can point to specifically that indicates them to be reproductions.

Their overall construction is executed quite well, with what appears to be original wool. And I feel the lining material, although somewhat atypical, is certainly well within the boundary of acceptability. There is small wonder why many people accept these hats has " coin of therealm".

That being said, my “gut feeling” about these hats remains one of squeamishness, and in so saying, I probably stand alone with this opinion (an uncomfortable position but one where I have found myself in the past). "

In summation, once again, in all fairness to the piece, I must fall short of a total condemnation. I cannot point to a true “smoking gun” that incriminates their originality. So it might remain, that these examples will continue to be the topic of collecting debate until judgment day, some collectors accepting them as “legal tender” others not.

Personally, the “shroud of uncertainty” that I feel cloaks these hats will keep me from owning one. B. N. Singer" <o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
On Vet stories- In the past you have pretty much dismissed vet stories. The hat had several first and second hand accounts of vet finds as well as capture papers. In fact several posters stated they got the same hat direct from vets. Heres an example.<o></o>
<o

> </o

>
<TABLE class=MsoNormalTable style="WIDTH: 100%; mso-cellspacing: 0in; mso-padding-alt: 4.5pt 4.5pt 4.5pt 4.5pt" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 0; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #d4d0c8 1pt inset; PADDING-RIGHT: 4.5pt; BORDER-TOP: #d4d0c8 1pt inset; PADDING-LEFT: 4.5pt; BACKGROUND: #591111; PADDING-BOTTOM: 4.5pt; BORDER-LEFT: #d4d0c8 1pt inset; PADDING-TOP: 4.5pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #d4d0c8 1pt inset; mso-border-alt: inset windowtext .75pt">Originally Posted by Stormfighter <v:shape id=_x0000_i1026 style="WIDTH: 4.5pt; HEIGHT: 6.75pt" alt="View Post" o:button="t" type="#_x0000_t75"><v:imagedata o:href="http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/fusion/buttons/viewpost.gif" src="file:///C:\DOCUME~1\Owner\LOCALS~1\Temp\msohtml1\01\clip_i mage001.gif"></v:imagedata></v:shape><o

></o

>
...as one of the people who acquired one of these Army M-43 officer's caps directly from a vet, I think I can probably put this debate to rest. Barry<o></o>
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Sorry that doesn't do it for this skeptic! B. N. Singer"<o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
But when it comes to the wrap:<o></o>
<o

></o

>
"The truth, as far as I have known for well over thirty years, is that the details related by TGN are accurate; and I have to believe the seller of the wraparound knows this as well. I am also certain that there are other "older cadre" collectors who might know of both this jacket and the collector who originally found it as well as some of the circumstances of how it was found.

And just for a bit of "additional spice" as an aside to the piece, there was purported to have been an accompanying "black baseball hat," that was lost by the vet's son in a child's baseball game!!!!! B. N. Singer"<o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
"Well, if you do not believe what has already been posted concerning a "documented" history as to how long a piece has been known i.e when it was discovered, what difference would further details be? as it stands or with further details added, it all is nothing more than a story that is known to some of the older collectors. B. N. Singer"<o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
"Second, the story first related about the piece, i. e. that it was discovered from a "veteran source" (or at least one that would be akin to such), in the mid 1970s, somewhere in AZ is absolutely true as far as I and other "older collectors" know. I was not aware of any POW connection/association and cannot comment on this.(per B.N. Singer<o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
Again I mean no ill will in this posting. You have always been very tough in evaluating items. I can live with that. I just believe that the same standard should be applied to every item.. As one of the "guru's" in the collecting community your opinions carry a lot of weight. A simple "I could entertain some doubts" from you is enough to condemn an item.

I wonder if I had posted the wrap, with the same vet story, what the comments might have been like?
<o

></o

>
WR Jim<o></o>
<o

> </o

>
<o

> </o

>

**B. N. Singer** · 06-25-2007, 01:51 PM

Originally posted by djpool View Post

Mr Singer,<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o></o>
<o

></o

>
First understand that I have the highest respect for you. You are a true gentleman and credit to the hobby. So please don't take this as a personal attack. That’s not my intent. But for some reason it appears to me that you are making some allowances for the wrap that you don't generally do with other items. If I'm wrong I apologize. <o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
I think the discussion of the hat is important because some of the same subject areas: Non text book, vet stories, state of reproductions 20– 30 years ago; were discussed. <o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
As to establishing the timeframe for the hat here are some comments. It seems that the hat has been in the collector market somewhere between 20-30 years. You state the wrap has been in collector hands 27 years. I think we're in the same ball park. The timeframe is important only in establishing how good repros were or thought to be at that time. <o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
"Sorry BenVK, I stand corrected. But I believe it was more than two (2) but perhaps not as many as three (3) decades ago when these hats first appeared. B. N. Singer"<o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
"I have purchased 2 of these indirectly from Veterans. 1) I purchased one from a professor who purchased it direct from the Veteran over 30 years ago. Bill Shea"
<o

> </o

>
Gents, Here is another example. I've owned it about 20-25 years (per Mike Davis)<o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
Here you imply that repros weren't that great during that timeframe.<o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
<TABLE class=MsoNormalTable style="WIDTH: 100%; mso-cellspacing: 0in; mso-padding-alt: 4.5pt 4.5pt 4.5pt 4.5pt" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 0; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #d4d0c8 1pt inset; PADDING-RIGHT: 4.5pt; BORDER-TOP: #d4d0c8 1pt inset; PADDING-LEFT: 4.5pt; BACKGROUND: #591111; PADDING-BOTTOM: 4.5pt; BORDER-LEFT: #d4d0c8 1pt inset; PADDING-TOP: 4.5pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #d4d0c8 1pt inset; mso-border-alt: inset windowtext .75pt">Originally Posted by Soldat de Fer <?xml:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" /><v:shapetype id=_x0000_t75 stroked="f" filled="f" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" o

referrelative="t" o:spt="75" coordsize="21600,21600"><v:stroke joinstyle="miter"></v:stroke><v:formulas><v:f eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @0 1 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum 0 0 @1"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @2 1 2"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @0 0 1"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @6 1 2"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @8 21600 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @10 21600 0"></v:f></v:formulas><v

ath o:connecttype="rect" gradientshapeok="t" o:extrusionok="f"></v

ath><o:lock aspectratio="t" v:ext="edit"></o:lock></v:shapetype><v:shape id=_x0000_i1025 style="WIDTH: 4.5pt; HEIGHT: 6.75pt" alt="View Post" href="http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2050927#post2050927" o:button="t" type="#_x0000_t75"><v:imagedata o:href="http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/fusion/buttons/viewpost.gif" src="file:///C:\DOCUME~1\Owner\LOCALS~1\Temp\msohtml1\01\clip_i mage001.gif"></v:imagedata></v:shape><o

></o

>
Hello...I don't believe any stories regarding this wrap , to me it could be either a well made repro or an messed with original , and don't tell me that they don't make them !!! .
.<o></o>
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Perhaps, but only if this one was made that well over 27 years ago as a deception. I think not. B. N. Singer"<o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
But on the hat which you entertain doubts(substitute repro), your comments would imply that repros were that good.
, <o

></o

>
"I have spent a good deal of time re-familiarizing myself with these examples of "officers M43 hats" and have come to conclusion that an outright condemnation of these hats is perhaps not warranted. There seems to be nothing "glaring" that I can point to specifically that indicates them to be reproductions.

Their overall construction is executed quite well, with what appears to be original wool. And I feel the lining material, although somewhat atypical, is certainly well within the boundary of acceptability. There is small wonder why many people accept these hats has " coin of therealm".

That being said, my “gut feeling” about these hats remains one of squeamishness, and in so saying, I probably stand alone with this opinion (an uncomfortable position but one where I have found myself in the past). "

In summation, once again, in all fairness to the piece, I must fall short of a total condemnation. I cannot point to a true “smoking gun” that incriminates their originality. So it might remain, that these examples will continue to be the topic of collecting debate until judgment day, some collectors accepting them as “legal tender” others not.

Personally, the “shroud of uncertainty” that I feel cloaks these hats will keep me from owning one. B. N. Singer" <o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
On Vet stories- In the past you have pretty much dismissed vet stories. The hat had several first and second hand accounts of vet finds as well as capture papers. In fact several posters stated they got the same hat direct from vets. Heres an example.<o></o>
<o

> </o

>
<TABLE class=MsoNormalTable style="WIDTH: 100%; mso-cellspacing: 0in; mso-padding-alt: 4.5pt 4.5pt 4.5pt 4.5pt" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 0; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #d4d0c8 1pt inset; PADDING-RIGHT: 4.5pt; BORDER-TOP: #d4d0c8 1pt inset; PADDING-LEFT: 4.5pt; BACKGROUND: #591111; PADDING-BOTTOM: 4.5pt; BORDER-LEFT: #d4d0c8 1pt inset; PADDING-TOP: 4.5pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #d4d0c8 1pt inset; mso-border-alt: inset windowtext .75pt">Originally Posted by Stormfighter <v:shape id=_x0000_i1026 style="WIDTH: 4.5pt; HEIGHT: 6.75pt" alt="View Post" o:button="t" type="#_x0000_t75"><v:imagedata o:href="http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/fusion/buttons/viewpost.gif" src="file:///C:\DOCUME~1\Owner\LOCALS~1\Temp\msohtml1\01\clip_i mage001.gif"></v:imagedata></v:shape><o

></o

>
...as one of the people who acquired one of these Army M-43 officer's caps directly from a vet, I think I can probably put this debate to rest. Barry<o></o>
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Sorry that doesn't do it for this skeptic! B. N. Singer"<o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
But when it comes to the wrap:<o></o>
<o

></o

>
"The truth, as far as I have known for well over thirty years, is that the details related by TGN are accurate; and I have to believe the seller of the wraparound knows this as well. I am also certain that there are other "older cadre" collectors who might know of both this jacket and the collector who originally found it as well as some of the circumstances of how it was found.

And just for a bit of "additional spice" as an aside to the piece, there was purported to have been an accompanying "black baseball hat," that was lost by the vet's son in a child's baseball game!!!!! B. N. Singer"<o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
"Well, if you do not believe what has already been posted concerning a "documented" history as to how long a piece has been known i.e when it was discovered, what difference would further details be? as it stands or with further details added, it all is nothing more than a story that is known to some of the older collectors. B. N. Singer"<o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
"Second, the story first related about the piece, i. e. that it was discovered from a "veteran source" (or at least one that would be akin to such), in the mid 1970s, somewhere in AZ is absolutely true as far as I and other "older collectors" know. I was not aware of any POW connection/association and cannot comment on this.(per B.N. Singer<o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
Again I mean no ill will in this posting. You have always been very tough in evaluating items. I can live with that. I just believe that the same standard should be applied to every item.. As one of the "guru's" in the collecting community your opinions carry a lot of weight. A simple "I could entertain some doubts" from you is enough to condemn an item.

I wonder if I had posted the wrap, with the same vet story, what the comments might have been like?
<o

></o

>
WR Jim<o></o>
<o

> </o

>
<o

> </o

>

Jim,

Thank you for your kind words; what do you wish from me?

I cannot say with certainty about ANYTHING, it is only an opinion which I can offer.

I have handled both, this wraparound and examples of this type of hat (several in fact). The one I have a favorable OPINION of and the latter I do not.

Quite simple and no double standard is applied.

B. N. Singer

**DennyB** · 06-25-2007, 01:51 PM

I truly believe that...

I seriously believe that if someone travelled back in time to May 1945 and picked up a pile of absolutely original SS tunics and caps, transported them to the present and posted them here, some people would nit-pick them to death. On the other hand, I have seen some old reproductions that looked better than some known originals. This hobby is a minefield and getting more dangerous every day.
Denny

**Chad1** · 06-25-2007, 02:13 PM

observation

I've been watching this and the other heated thread on the SS forum for a while. The one conclusion that I've drawn doesn't relate to the tunics in question.

Basically, this area isn't worth the money that it costs to play in. The fact that many thousands of dollars are at stake makes this an investment issue, whether you like it or not. With so much dough on the line, and such a wide range of opinions that can only go so far as "IMO", regardless of who you are, there is no guarantee in the end that you aren't throwing your money away, even if it's real. The true value should be self evident in an item and not require an argument to convince people otherwise.

A few months ago I posted a tunic that was from a museum, according to some "people in the know". It was dismissed as a total put-together by all these knowledgable collectors on the forum (no disrespect intended). When I pointed out the details that convinced me otherwise, nobody cared to respond with specifics. Not that anyone is required to respond, but if you are going to spoil some dude's day on the forum, it would be nice if you would back it up.

We know that there are lots of fakes. We also know that good tunics are looked at as fakes. So, right there, no matter how you shake it, it's not even about originality anymore.

The money begins and ends with "textbook", if there even is such a thing.

And at this point, it's not even about WWII history anymore. It's more like a competition, like who's a better collector, or a bigger WWII buff.

**Bob Hritz** · 06-25-2007, 02:40 PM

The term textbook is thrown around with considerable ease. What is 'textbook'? Does it mean identical to pieces in reference books; does it mean those that look like examples in the prestige collections; or, does it mean that are made to the specifications of the original govenrment drawings?

I guess it depends on the testbook and the author; whether literally or figuratively.

If it must match those in the prestigous books, then I would guess almost all tunics are fakes. The insignia and tunics in the books vary so much that finding identical examples would be a near impossibility.

If it must match those in prestigious collections, we must question the unusual eagles, and outright anomolies on those featured garments.

If it must match the government (German Third Reich) specifications, than any altered, field made, or foreign produced piece that slightly varies, must be dismissed as junk.

I am a bit more liberal. i believed that the German soldiers wore the best they could get, whether the issue garment for enlisted and NCO, or the varying quality tailored pieces for officers and lower ranks as they desired. Many period altered and customized tunic are prized in the most prestigious collections. God forbid they should be posted here. I went through Mike Beaver's tomes again, last night, and found scores of anomolies that would be besmirched, by many of the collectors who grace these cyber halls.

I take exception to the belief that this is an investment. For all I care, should I pass unexpectedly to the Great Void, my bride may take the stuff out and burns it in toto. It will matter nothing to me, when I am gone, and I spent the time and money to accumulate a modest collection that brings me much joy and pleasure, in life. Should my bride sell the material, that is fine and I would want my family to benefit from the toil of my lifetime; but the final judgement, on the disposition, will be my wife's.

Lets take a breath and remember that this should mean nothing to anyone who is not contemplating the purchase of the tunic. We have learned much, through this discussion and debate, and the joy we share should be the detective work to bring this tunic forward with all the information that can be had. It will be up to a potential buyer of the tunic, if it will satisfy his needs or not.

I know I would love to own the panzer wrap. Just because it has been relined means nothing to me. I would be happy with an original, insignia intact black pz wrap if the lining was removed or it suffered moth damage. It is only the prices that limit my ability, when an original surfaces.

Bob Hritz

**Chris_Werner** · 06-25-2007, 02:57 PM

I have read this thread with great interest.
The bottom line here is that much of the time, there are no hard and fast answers. Every collector needs to be educated to the best of his or her ability, listen to the folks that have been collecting and doing research, whether they are 5 or 50 year collectors having knowledge and experience to share, and handle as many "original" items as you can.
Whether it is a $30 West Wall Medal or a $40,000 Panzer wrap, the bottom line is a careful examination and analysis, along with the comfort level, of the person with the checkbook.

**John Pic** · 06-25-2007, 02:57 PM

Very very few "textbook" SS tunics depending on the meaning of "Textbook"
We see a Panzer wrap relined with another tunics liner, we see a tailored tunic cut in the style of a later war heer tunic. We,ve seen the TK cufftitle on a tunic with runes, strange eagles on high ranking officer tunics in the Beaver Books etc. etc. I went through those books and noted owner names associated with items pictured..some are guys that on the forums insist on text book perfection yet obviously dont adhere to that advice themselves based on these books and these threads.
What I see out there every time a tunic is offered for sale are these younger collectors learning from the older guys here in forums searching in vain for perfect textbook tunics.You have to use your head and instincts coupled with good knowledge of period items both textbook and non textbook.Money shouldnt be such an issue but whose fault is it that the market flew so out of control? One big dealer gets a righteous looking tunic and put a price $10000 over the rest of the market and to get it the guys who own nice stuff have to sell thier stuff at higher prices so they can have what they like..it does become a competition for the purpose of keeping value high on items we all claim "are rare as hens teeth" which in reality is part true and part sales pitch.
I hope to see it stop and to see the hobby become the fun search it was before such financial stigma was added by dealers with very expensive inventories and very selective trendy assesments of other peoples/dealers things.The internet has vast possibilities of change.

**nutmeg** · 06-25-2007, 03:10 PM

My two cents.

I was collecting this stuff on and off in the early seventies. By today's standards the fakes were very bad. However the knowledge level was lower and there were few reference books so we were easily fooled.Also one tended to know mostly only the area collectors so the pools of information were compartmentalized somewhat. Everything on what was bad was word of mouth.

Collecting today is like a witchhunt where there really ARE witches and probably as many good non-standard items are condemed with the guilty.
While less money was involved I had less money, my apartment rent in a very nice place was $200.00 per month and I was making about 12- 15k so the purchase of a Frundsburg cufftitle at $85.00 required serious thought.

I have one or two great vet bought non- standard items I have posted which were pissed all over by "textbook" learned collectors used to buying strictly from dealers or each other (which doesn't mean much since it probably still came from a dealer). My solution is I just don't post non standard things anymore. It's not a big deal for me since buying from estates there is moderate investment involved.

It is interesting because you realize that many don't really know as much as they think and the reference books while indespensible (not all) become a crutch which some cannot walk without.

Is there a solution? Not at all, and there never will be.

**Bob Hritz** · 06-25-2007, 03:15 PM

Yes, John, you are correct about the prices becomming too much for many of us to be able to afford.

However, on the posted SS panzer tunic, I know the first collector who bought it, in the 1970's. He got in in Arizona, from someone who obtained it from a POW camp. i don't know the details, but do know he had it for a number of years and sold it, when he liquidated his entire collection, to buy a home. Bryon was the next owner, although I never knew that, until the past few days. i recognize the tunic and never had the opportunity to take it off the wall and do an examination, back in the 1970s. At that time, I was only interested in SS cloth insignia and never cared about tunics, hats, or helmets.

I do not know the part about the removed markings, on the reverse, as I never saw the reverse.

Unfortunately, the first owner, from Illinois, is not a 'computer guy' and does not use such forums. There are many collectors, from the midwest, who remember this tunic. For whatever reasons, they have not bothered to chime in.

Again, the interested parties, in buying this tunic, may take what they desire or ignore what they desire, of the information that has been provided.

Bob Hritz

**B. N. Singer** · 06-25-2007, 03:27 PM

Originally posted by Bob Hritz View Post

...However, on the posted SS panzer tunic, I know the first collector who bought it, in the 1970's. He got in in Arizona, from someone who obtained it from a POW camp. i don't know the details, but do know he had it for a number of years and sold it, when he liquidated his entire collection, to buy a home. Bryon was the next owner, although I never knew that, until the past few days. i recognize the tunic and never had the opportunity to take it off the wall and do an examination, back in the 1970s. At that time, I was only interested in SS cloth insignia and never cared about tunics, hats, or helmets.

I do not know the part about the removed markings, on the reverse, as I never saw the reverse.

Unfortunately, the first owner, from Illinois, is not a 'computer guy' and does not use such forums. There are many collectors, from the midwest, who remember this tunic. For whatever reasons, they have not bothered to chime in.

Again, the interested parties, in buying this tunic, may take what they desire or ignore what they desire, of the information that has been provided.

Bob Hritz

Mr. Hritz, I thought that you too might recognize this one from "an age gone by"

And you are absolutely correct, any interested person should choose to ignore (or not) what they desire, of the information that has been provided.

with regards,
Bryon (B. N.) Singer

Announcement

SS Panzer Wrap

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread