Deschler skull: M1/52 or 254/42

[militaria.no]

Hello guys

Now I have one more question regarding this visor and I hope you can help me as I am trying to learn the difference:

Is the skull on the visor marked M1/52 or 254/42? Both Deschler - right?

[militaria.no]

Visor:

[militaria.no]

These photos I have found on WAF.

M1/52:

[militaria.no]

254/42:

[MM1985]

RZM 1/52 the most common Deschler skull IMO

The early skulls like the 254/42 or the RZM 52 where made out of cupal / nickel silver i think.

I have a few different Pictures in my files from 254/42 skulls from different collections all made out of cupal

Your skull don't look like this materials.

Regards Martin

[ZabirskyPoint]

Skull on the visor is probably zinc aloy M1/52 Deschler.
Skull marked 254/42 is late version of Deschler , not ealier.
Ealier version is RZM 52.
On the pics skull marked 254/42 (Deschler) has probably not orginaly attached prongs

Regards Peter

[SScollector]

The early "RZM 52" skulls were made of brass/bronze. The "254/42" marked skulls were made of CupAl like the "M1/52" marked skulls, ("M1/52"s also came in aluminum and finally zinc as well), but the "254/42" skulls are not early, hence the 42 date. They were in fact, among the final run of CupAl skulls made by Deschler, IMO. As for telling the difference from the front side, there is no way, as the "254/42" skulls were made exactly like the "M1/52" skulls, same front die, same CupAl materials, etc. However, it should be safe to assume that yours is "M1/52" marked, because it appears to be made of zinc.

Hope this helps!

Chris

[Ian Hulley]

However, it should be safe to assume that yours is "M1/52" marked, because it appears to be made of zinc.

That was my opinion too but I wasn't sure enough to post it.

Ian

[militaria.no]

Thank you for your good help guys

Are "M1/52" marked zink skulls difficult to find loose?

[ZabirskyPoint]

In my opinion they are quite common.(not so very rare)
Peter