Article about: Hi Guys , I have been checking out this forum for some time now and I think there are some very knowledgeable people here. With this in mind would you give me your opinion on this helmet. I
I have a M42 clk 64 with the exact same lot number 3033 , my liner is nowhere near the condition of yours or the chin strap but i must admit yours worries me for all the reasons previously stated , theres no doubt its an original shell but i 'm not convinced on the camo or the liner , i would like to see the rear of the liner and the felt padding , also the condition of the pins internally , also check if theres a dome stamp , addionally i have always been under the impression that chin straps are usually equipped with 13 holes , but in your case may depend where yours has been cut off
H Davejb, No dome stamp and I will take more pics tomorrow. As I said there is a stamp into the band that says 64 NA and 57 at the spot where stain is.
Hi,this is a tough call!! I really think if you have any way of getting this to any of the experienced members here for an in hand inspection it may well be worth you while! The wear over the vents look as though it is caused by another helmet being "stacked"on top of it as you can see a clear band of wear at that level all the way round.Original/fake,i really would not like to commit either way,this one really needs to be seen in hand as I said. Leon.
After all that's been said, I personally still fancy the chances of the interior. The blood rot would only have set in really badly if the helmet was stored in poor conditions, I don't see a problem with a shortened strap as these can be seen field shortened on helmets in any condition, or perhaps it was a KIA helmet that was cut from the original owner? The difference in wear between the liner and chinstrap could be down to them both being two different kinds of leather, which age differently? The liner band looks like a good fit without any obvious kinks or tampering. Unfortunately I can't comment with any certainty on the camo but from my novice paintwork detection skills, I don't see any inconsistent wear or sanding, but sure someone who has more knowledge on that front can comment better than I.
I like the liner - the key is the maker - Ckl made these soft 'chamois-like' liners and many have turned up on the forum with exactly the same look and limited wear and after some resistance were accepted as legit. The attached photos are of my M42 ckl66 that has been checked out on GHW and initially doubted but when I showed them photos of the inside stamps and felt it was accepted as original.
They wear and age differently to other liners for sure, and that is what makes them look too new .... but IMO its a good'un.
Dan
" I'm putting off procrastination until next week "
The reason i wrote the liner off as a repro was partly that the liner band does not have a slightly bent/rolled edge, but looks to be straight/flat. I'm still not 100% on the camo paint but from the pics, many of the scratches look very new. Some chips are rusty and some are not. Some chips also look very new making me think it have been used not too long ago. The single rusty liner split pin is a bit odd too. The discoloration can easily be made by holding the helmet over a candle or a oil lamp. Soot will build up on the surface and then you wipe it off with a cloth towel. Just my thoughts. Interesting helmet
It is Luftwaffe, and I quite like it, and there is some rotting of the liner in the area of the blood stain. Camo helmets are pricey items and the fakes are pretty good, so hard to be 100% certain from pictures.
I think this stands a great chance to be authentic including the liner however I wouldn't bank on it without an in hand. If you live out west or wanted to mail it I'd be glad to look at it Cannuk.
Re-the liner pics, the shell is taken in shade and or overcast, the liner pics have direct sun so the exposure of the photos is completely different. The liner looks ok to me.
Re: Camo M42- your opinions please !!!
.
its just an opinion.
Bookmarks