SS Visor cap..... please help.

[Buckeru]

Hello

A friend of mine found this visor cap. The people want to destroy the cap so they rip out the inner cotton but my friend took it out from the trash.....

What is your opinion?

Thanks and all the best
Buckeru

[Buckeru]

2...........................

[Buckeru]

3...............................

[Buckeru]

4..........................

[Buckeru]

5.............................

[Buckeru]

6....................

[Buckeru]

7................................

[Buckeru]

8........................

[Buckeru]

Hello

Opinions?

Best Buckeru

[Sonderkommando]

*

My question is...
If the "people" wanted to destroy the cap, why just rip out the lining and then throw the whole lot in the trash?

[focke1968]

Hello,

I believe, it looks good ...

lg H.

[focke1968]

original

Hello,

here is the answer - there is no doubt, that the visor-cap is original ....

http://www.warrelics.eu/forum/ss-uni...arbage-659380/

lg H.

[Funia]

My question is...
If the "people" wanted to destroy the cap, why just rip out the lining and then throw the whole lot in the trash?

Because they were searching for something under the lining.
It could be the Amber Room.
Peter

[enorepap]

At this point, the discussion can not end up in oblivion as usual, given the conclusions reached on the other forum.

In summary, in my interpretation, this visor was there deemed authentic for the following causes:
- the caps of this type have inferior and fuzzy velvet textiles. It is not the normal Lindensamt of 1936 or even 1939. The later-made visors have inferior velvet, due to the course of the war, but, anyway, the quality of textiles was being reduced even before the outbreak of war, according to the RZM circulars.
- the lacquered peaks in the later caps are also not well made versus the hand lacquered peaks of the earlier period and so forth.
- consequently, for comparison, the pre-1938 SS caps are usually of much higher quality than the later variants.

All these arguments are highly sharable and respectable, besides very obvious. In our case, however, we are able to see the inside (shot no. 5): a capboard, stuck with some apparently rusty staples and this, in my opinion, is not very comforting. With regard to the other construction details (stiffener; sewing of the sweatband and reed; remaining internal protection of the dome; front padding, etc.) it would be needed, in my opinion, a deeper discussion. I also add that the lining was literally torn to pieces, and there is no trace of such a violence in the images. If its destiny was the trash I can not understand the reason for gently unstitching it with the scissors …

[enorepap]

Given that "all is quiet on the Western Front" I try to make another step forward, partly because not every day we can see the construction details of a visor so skillfully dissected (it was a long time that this was not the case on this forum ). So I try to focus on the reed & sweatband which seem to me related to the production of Clemens Wagner. From the pictures no. 3 and 4, however, I see a very strange thing: a double and superimposed vertical seam and an horizontal one (between the reed and the sweatband) with very long and exposed stitching. This is a point that deserves to be investigated. The lining is so mistreated that I can not make a serious judgement.

Best regards