SS Crusher opinions please..

[TonyS]

Kevin Finley - haven't seen him post for a long time. Kev knows his stuff when it comes to SS caps.

[Ian Hulley]

Kevin Finley - haven't seen him post for a long time. Kev knows his stuff when it comes to SS caps.

Yes indeed, hope he's well ? One of the great SS cap experts.

Ian

[MM1985]

Interesting discussion so far - i will post a few Pictures of the example i refered to earlier in the thread (the Veteran traced back Alter Art).

[MM1985]

2

[MM1985]

3

[MM1985]

4

[RobertE]

Sure looks like the same type of cap. This also has the black heavy gauze stiffening band instead of the burlap-type stiffener typically seen.

Notice how the lower piping on this cap is roughly the same shade as the top band and cap piping, despite being heavily worn. The example that started this thread has a very yellowed lower piping - but this one doesn't and they have roughly the same wear.

The puckering around the joined panels still looks odd to me. Mothing can make seams lay oddly, and that's possibly all it is.

There was no special way that SS caps had their two piece insignia sewn on that would account for faded thread on the skull - or green thread which is even less plausible - and the solid black thread that the eagle is sewn on with. They are two different colors. The eagle could have been sewn back on, post-war, which is certainly a possibility.

regards, Robert

[Graham G]

Sure looks like the same type of cap. This also has the black heavy gauze stiffening band instead of the burlap-type stiffener typically seen.

Notice how the lower piping on this cap is roughly the same shade as the top band and cap piping, despite being heavily worn. The example that started this thread has a very yellowed lower piping - but this one doesn't and they have roughly the same wear.

The puckering around the joined panels still looks odd to me. Mothing can make seams lay oddly, and that's possibly all it is.

There was no special way that SS caps had their two piece insignia sewn on that would account for faded thread on the skull - or green thread which is even less plausible - and the solid black thread that the eagle is sewn on with. They are two different colors. The eagle could have been sewn back on, post-war, which is certainly a possibility.

regards, Robert

I need to disagree with them both having the same wear. The last one seems to be worn of course, but doesn't appear to have been worn as much. Also, different climates etc can all lend to the wear on the piping (more sweat, etc.). For the skull/eagle's different thread: insignia comes off pretty easily if the hats been crushed, so its not too worrying if its simply been re-applied partially IMHO.

[SgtB]

You managed to wrap both an absurd assertion and multiple insults in with a single post. Like most vague "rosetta stone" statements alleging great knowledge and insights most can't grasp (or would be provided directly to the fakers at great danger to niche area collectors), this offers no actual substance to the discussion. I would have preferred a 14-year-olds opinion if it came with less rancor, and some simple facts as to why you believe this is original. s/f Robert

Oh dear me! Pardon my faux pas. I didn't realize I was in such genteel company.

[QUOTE=RobertE;7180856]Yes, I own plenty of field worn caps. I don't agree this shade difference is natural, nor other features, but as long as you are satisfied with it than that is what matters.regards, Robert[QUOTE]

That is every bit as cocky and condescending as my post, plus it's just plain WRONG!

And yes, you are allowed to voice your opinion just like everybody else, but what is the point if it is wishy-washy, based on nothing solid, and changes with the wind?

One of my pet-peeves, (and I've seen it hundreds of times at shows, flea markets, and on this forum) is when somebody asks a "guru" for an appraisal of a piece, and he's too proud to just say he doesn't know for sure. He always says, "It's a fake." That's because you can't prove him wrong. Nobody can prove that an item isn't a fake because nobody was actually there to watch it being made. It's the safe way out without losing face. Now if you say, "Yeah, that's a good one!" somebody can always jump out of the bushes and say, "Ha ha! I just got that from Reddick last week! I took the belt-sander and blow-torch to it, wore it while I mowed the lawn and took a shower, and left it outside at night until a raccoon took a dump in it!" It takes much bigger balls to declare an item good than it does bad.

BTW I am not the least bit ashamed of my many years in this hobby, in fact I'm quite proud of them. For the most part they've been very good, and I have many fond memories and have met some very interesting people. Plus, that experience has enabled me to make a correct assessment of a cap like this with damn near 100% certainty and just a couple of glances at a few photos with nobody else's input. Many find that very difficult. But when you know what to look for it's really very easy.
I can't believe it's been 45 years! Where does the time go?!?!

But let's drop it and talk about the cap, shall we, hmmmmm?

I don't believe I've ever met Mr. Finley, but I of course agree with his hands-on assessment. Had it been different, however, my opinion would not have changed.

I think a big part of the problem, for many, is that these caps are indeed quite rare and heavily faked. Thus, many search for the slightest discrepancies and try to build a case around them for the cap to be bad. This is the wrong approach IMO, for you completely miss all that is right with the piece. You can't see the forest for the trees, so to speak. Better yet: "A few missing stitches do not a fake make!"

There is NOTHING wrong with the subject cap IMO, except maybe the condition. But since it appears totally natural - nothing contrived at all, it
lends itself even more to the authenticity of the cap. It is what it is.

IMO the eagle looks to have been on there from Day No. 1. Bevo insignia in general, and flatwire in particular, have always been a favorite study of mine and I have been very interested in their application. If that is a repair job, it is as good as I've seen. Indeed, if a faker or simply a restorer could do that, why wouldn't he put the tk on the same way and improve the cap that much more.

You see, this is another reason why the cap is refreshingly honest.

The tk is definitely re-attached. But when? And by who? And why was it missing to begin with? And who really cares? On a more common Heer cap you might be able to shave a $100 off the price. But on a cap like this it doesn't matter much at all. I lean towards it having been done by the man himself, in the field, anyway. The thread certainly looks period.

Not everything was as perfect during the TR as many collectors delude themselves. And not everybody was an expert seamstress.

The type of visor on the cap is quite common to SS crushers, more so than the thicker, drippy asphalt type seen more on Heer crushers, but I've seen them thick, thin, smooth, rough, leather, pressed paper, glossy, dull, with an edge-bead, and even with edge-trim like a LW cap.

Brown sweatbands are more common in my experience, but grey is just fine too.

The inner band material certainly is good, but if it had been cardboard it wouldn't be any more out of place. I've seen them cardboard, both treated and untreated, canvas, treated and untreated, buckram, treated and untreated, and oilcloth, etc.

The German's opinion of what a "true" alter art was and that of some collectors today, don't always match. The materials changed with availability and the wartime circumstances, and they made do with what they had.

I've seen it written in many books that cap cords never originally came on these caps, but I don't know how anybody can say that for sure. They were often added to crushers during the war due to promotions, regulations, etc. but that doesn't mean you couldn't buy a new cap with cords already in place. Several NCO crushers I've seen had chinstraps in place that appeared original to the piece.

MM1985,

Thanks for the pictures of the other cap. It's a beauty too! You have a good eye for this stuff. So do Pieand and Ritter!

Others, like Robert, just have to do more homework.

[viva_giulio]

I think pics are not clear at all moreover firsts to say that's a one looker visor.
Last are much better but Iwould see the black band. Clearly and where it seems to see a rebanding. Seems.
Of course I respect 45+ years of collecting but at same time I remember to all these days one of the guru of ss helmet is in the centre of the typhoon. The greatest heartqake on as helmet for a decal, champagne, which is really embarrassing after Doug studies and macro. Embarrassing.

[RobertE]

This discussion isn't about being right, it's about the originality of a cap. I respect the opinions of Stonemint, Phild, Jacques, and others when it comes to this type of headgear and have no reservation's about saying I'm wrong when I'm wrong. Unlike many on this forum, who simply slink away, I'm fine with adjusting my position as the discussion continues. It's about the piece, not ego or being right.

Your evidence is just a recounting of old threads. Do you want to share something original, like why " the different threads on the two badges is a sign of complete originality on this cap."? What was the sign of complete originality on two pieces of insignia, sewn with different thread indicating at least one was replaced?

Two caps, likely of the same maker, with similar wear, and one has a uniformly yellowed lower band of white piping. The other doesn't. Besides poor storage, the caps both show heavy wear. Don't give me the hair oil (or snake oil) answer: crusher or regular visor, they fade the same way from sweat and other substances.

These points, and the unusual bunching in places and odd piping layment, are odd for me but acceptable by people whose opinion I respect on this particular type of headgear. I'm happy it's being considered as real.

s/f Robert

[BenVK]

It's curious how personal egos always surface when discussing potentially rare and valuable items but they tend to forget one crucial thing..

Nobody, not matter who they are, can be sure of their opinions of an item until they have it in their own hands.

That's the bottom line and always has been in my experience.

I don't see any problems with either of these caps based on the photos but that's about 50% of the evidence I need to authenticate a cap.

So, for that reason, I don't understand all the bickering and animosity between certain collectors here.

They should know better IMO.

[TonyS]

It's curious how personal egos always surface when discussing potentially rare and valuable items but they tend to forget one crucial thing..

Nobody, not matter who they are, can be sure of their opinions of an item until they have it in their own hands.

That's the bottom line and always has been in my experience.

I don't see any problems with either of these caps based on the photos but that's about 50% of the evidence I need to authenticate a cap.

So, for that reason, I don't understand all the bickering and animosity between certain collectors here.

They should know better IMO.

Lol - according to our "friend" you should not be voicing your opinion either Ben -

" If you can't see that this is an original SS crusher (without any doubt in your mind ) just from pics #1, 2, & 8, then you shouldn't be offering any opinion at all."

It has nothing to do with ego - just common courtesy to other members here......

[BenVK]

Well Tony, common courtesy on online forums is as rare as an original SS crusher!

Look, I can totally understand how frustrating it is when forum members raise doubts about something despite the fact you have the item in your hands and your convinced of it's authenticity. It might be a "one looker" in your eyes but photos can be very deceptive. In situations like that, you just have to calmly address each doubt with evidence that backs up your opinions.

But there's no point squabbling amongst each other when we only have photos to go on.

For example, the issue has been raised about the different shades of piping.
Did anyone not notice that the camera used for the first cap has over exposed the whites in places and under exposed them in others? My advice would be to never trust a camera to accurately capture the true colours and shades of these items.

[phild]

I agree that there is no shame in having doubts from photos on this cap. I do agree with every point SgtB made about SS crushers, but RobertE is one of the good guys in this hobby and has posted some fantastic items....including at least one SS crusher that I recall. I think that this cap is right, but I can also understand some of the questions raised by the first set of photos of it posted.