Ankle boots

[zimzum77]

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=674979

A forum member is interested in these boots but would like to receive other opinions. Please let us know if you see anything wrong with these boots.

Many thanks in advance,

[BRUNO FRANCK]

hello

i think this are texbook boots,http://www.germanmilitaria.com/Heer/photos/H056068.html

i see a few diferents,,, 8 holes for the laces, the stitching,, and in the underside, the stamp 43 i think,,,, i think normal the stamp must be Example 28,5

but i am not an expert,,,, wait what the expert have to say

greetings bruno

[Alex Ciavaglia]

it would be interesting to know why it has only the holes and no one hook although marked '42. As far as i know this should be the '44 model...

[Grubhy]

These are TEXTBOOK M37's! Wish to have some saving to grab them Nothing wrong with this pair in BARGAIN price...And not I'm not selling them

[zimzum77]

These are TEXTBOOK M37's! Wish to have some saving to grab them Nothing wrong with this pair in BARGAIN price...And not I'm not selling them

Many thanks! Just to note that indeed one used to see these boots on sale for much much more 2, 3 years ago. I sold one pair for 980 Euros at that time whereas now a pair at 550 Euros triggers some interest but they are still not sold.

[Alex Ciavaglia]

These are TEXTBOOK M37's! Wish to have some saving to grab them Nothing wrong with this pair in BARGAIN price...And not I'm not selling them

despite the fact i consider them 100% original, the m37 was with hooks and holes and just on '44 appeared the only holes model. So why you considering them 'textbook'?

[BRUNO FRANCK]

hi Guys

and the size stamp on the undersite off the boots ???43 is this correct

greetings bruno

[Alex Ciavaglia]

hi Guys

and the size stamp on the undersite off the boots ???43 is this correct

greetings bruno

I think could not be correct the '42' under the sole...

[siton12]

The only holes and not holes/hooks model appeared in early 1943.Some collectors call them Hybrid,others M34/43 which is more correct IMO and others
just M43.

[screensize]

hi Guys

and the size stamp on the undersite off the boots ???43 is this correct

greetings bruno

43 is not a size stamp.

The size here is 28,5 long and 6 wide.

Todays usual european shoe size system of 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45 and so on did not exist in German WW2.

[Alex Ciavaglia]

43 is not a size stamp.

The size here is 28,5 long and 6 wide.

Todays usual european shoe size system of 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45 and so on did not exist in German WW2.

For what reason it's presence?

[zimzum77]

The stamps says 42 and not 43.

42 corresponds to the date set forth on the leather so it does not seem that odd to me.

28,5 corresponds to a size 44,5 in modern European sizes so there cannot be any connection between the size and this 42 stamp.

Everything on these boots are textbook from my perspective.

[Grubhy]

Alex, my Friend, and other interested:

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...ight=37&page=4

Post #49, first pair from left.

despite the fact i consider them 100% original, the m37 was with hooks and holes and just on '44 appeared the only holes model. So why you considering them 'textbook'?