Interesting M42 helmet

[duska]

If anyone was wearing that lid and took that shot I would think there would be some serious body matter spattered all over the inside. Just my opinion but it seems contrived to me.

You would think so, but considering this soldier is wearing white, there seems to be little if no blood at all.

[James C]

Steve An interesting Helmet and topic of conversation with a good background provenience too thanks for sharing and also for the extra daylight pictures not really my area of expertise on complete helmets so Ill sit back and see what develops
Thanks James

[HARRY THE MOLE]

A field refurbed lid could explain the earlier liner and the painted inner. Just being devils advocate!...

Feel free to examine it at leisure Gunny, you are only down the road from me.

While we are on the subject of what might be fakes... here is a 'battle-damaged' helmets which was posted by one of our more knowledgeable members three years ago. apparently DougB wasn't that impressed though, but several members gave it the thumbs-up... Now those scratch marks would have set alarm bells ringing for me... Its a funny old world at times!

[Tank Destroyer]

Camo helmet and many more fakes of all nations showing up is one of the reasons I am think about getting out of the collecting business. I am not making comment about this helmet, just helmets in general. I believe because of the fakes and there am so good ones I think they will dive the market value down. This is my opinion only.
Marty

[HARRY THE MOLE]

The trouble is Marty, that there are too many people out there that only see how things 'should' be. And if something is different in any way - then it must be a fake. My Gew98 is a good example of how military hardware was often refurbished at field repair shops. It is all matching numbers - but in the true sense of the word it isn't, because it was repaired by using two rifles. The donor rifle parts were given the serial number of the rifle being repaired. Does this mean the rifle is a fake?

[Gunny Hartmann]

Feel free to examine it at leisure Gunny, you are only down the road from me.

While we are on the subject of what might be fakes... here is a 'battle-damaged' helmets which was posted by one of our more knowledgeable members three years ago. apparently DougB wasn't that impressed though, but several members gave it the thumbs-up... Now those scratch marks would have set alarm bells ringing for me... Its a funny old world at times!

Thanks for the offer Steve, i'll have to pay you a visit to get you to sign one of your books when i eventually buy one Talking of scratches when we were kids playing war my mate had an M35 that his Dad had brought home, it was kicked up and down the street and thrown around and ended up looking like a well used skating rink. Who Knows what has happened to a lid in the past 70 years?....

[slados28]

That relic posted above is certainly a one look garbage fake --- that ebay seller churns out this rubbish by the dozens. Can't remember many credible "likes" for that one back then either, if so they were very misguided as that's a "textbook" ebay turd

As for the M42 I can only agree with the others, the same type of scratches all over, including the inside, oddly shiny and flat texture to the outer paint. Polar opposite of the "untouched" look. And then there's the painted inside dome, odd artificial looking aged leather liner and strap --- Soot? Sounds like a half ass attempt at aging new leather to me. I'll leave the actual authenticating of the leather to others, I'll just note, as before, "odd" looking and definitely not something I would trust. Honestly, I can't find a single good thing about it besides the fact that the shell is probably original.

Also, regarding the fact that the man was a veteran; how unlikely would it be for him to either purchase an aged fake or to concoct one himself for his own enjoyment/to have as a representation of the foe he once actually stood up against (in lieu of the real deal)? I say not unlikely at all, especially when presented with the look of this m42 here.

[MAP]

Camo's, Camo's Camo's....so much subjectivity. Whether it be "tool marks", not enough wear, too much wear, wear on the edges, dug out decals, sprayed vs brushed, color schemes used, painted domes, etc. etc.

Unless there are obvious signs of forgery or "one looker" originals, it is basically all just opinions.

But I will say, experience and study usually presents a strong argument for or against. But in the end, these are only pictures and "in hand" is the best way to judge.

[Blackdog]

Can I just add that the split pin arms are very rusty but the washers are untouched, especially the first pic where the washer is butted up against the arm but no rust has migrated onto the washer? Remember we can are only judge on the pics posted and on your own admission the colour of the helmet in the pics is not the colour in hand.

[Gunny Hartmann]

Hi, there is nothing I like about this helmet although the shell might be original, I agree with all the above and will add that I don't like the liner also (looks like it's trying to be a m35 liner, reinforced, square D rings) on a m42. Sorry.

From German-Helmets.com!.....

"In 1940 factories began producing the zinc pattern metal rings used for helmet liner assembly. Parts left over from aluminum liner band production were often inserted and used on zinc pattern liner bands. As a result, it is not uncommon to see a zinc pattern liner band with "D" ring mounts intended for aluminum bands, or visa versa. Likewise, aluminum liner bands produced in 1940 commonly used the newer, round pattern "D" rings most often associated with the zinc pattern liner band ring. When liner bands are encountered with these odd variations it is generally a good sign that the liner band is original and dating from the 1940 to 1941 time frame. Common sense holds that factories used whatever parts were available until they were used up entirely. Older parts were mixed with newer parts until depleted."