Lovely camo on ebay uk

[Scout]

+1

[StG45]

I challenge you to quote the "advice" you got out of this 6 pages of name calling and "who won the war " nonsense . I only saw two short paragraphs {thank you Doug} actually describing WHY this helmet is a fake!!! The Duke has a very valid point -- just stating "I would pass" etc etc IS USELESS. If there was ANYTHING of real value for the inexperienced collector here I guess I'm too stupid to see it.

[Paul D]

I challenge you to quote the "advice" you got out of this 6 pages of name calling and "who won the war " nonsense . I only saw two short paragraphs {thank you Doug} actually describing WHY this helmet is a fake!!! The Duke has a very valid point -- just stating "I would pass" etc etc IS USELESS. If there was ANYTHING of real value for the inexperienced collector here I guess I'm too stupid to see it.

Totally agree with you that stating"i would pass" is is in no way helpful we try here to get more discussion going than that and encourage mor einformative posts.

The way this thread went due to certain comments has been dealt with so why bring it up again.

The advice i speak off goes throughout the Helmet forum not just this thread so why do you feel the need to make " challenge " .

Dougs or Frank's comments alone are enough for the inexperienced collector to learn and make a decision and we can all learn from knowledge like that to make better .
informed judgements and hopefully spend money on the real deal.

Instead of issuing " challenges " which isn't really very helpfull either why not give us your views and opinions on the helmet ion question ?

[crazy horse]

I listen to what most of the guy's on here, because I haven't been collecting long, there is a lot of stuff, that I have no clue as to what it is, so I'm learning, I read their opinion's without even looking at what country they are from. I will make this as short as possible. in 1991 a buddy of mine & I went to get some part's for one of our field artty gun's, well on the way back, a truck was just sitting alone out in the desert, we pulled over & a young british soldier was sitting there, his truck was broken down & his unit left him there, so we started looking at his truck, he had an electrical short, we helped him fix it & followed him back to his unit, plus he had no water, we gave him a couple of bottles. I'm just saying we stopped because he was our ALLIE. theres no way I would have just drove away. but back to the subject, I have learned a lot from people on here, not their country.

[Isle of Wighter]

I have noticed a couple more things about this one that make me suspicious. I will now present my evidence..
1. The bullet/shrapnel hole is in a position which would lead me to believe that the wearer would have been killed by the projectile, leading me on to..
2. The lack of blood staining/ rot on the liner which one would expect to see in correlation with a bullet hole. This to me suggests the liner has been changed, the evidence of this..
3. The rivet shown in the photo I have uploaded has clearly been 'tampered with' suggesting that the liner has indeed been replaced. Therefore this helmet is probably not 'original' as stated in the description.
This coupled with the sellers suspiciously endless supply of 'rare' lids, as I stated in a previous post in this thread, should be enough to put any collector with half a mind off purchasing this helmet.
God I love this forum!

[Scout]

I challenge you to quote the "advice" you got out of this 6 pages of name calling and "who won the war " nonsense . I only saw two short paragraphs {thank you Doug} actually describing WHY this helmet is a fake!!! The Duke has a very valid point -- just stating "I would pass" etc etc IS USELESS. If there was ANYTHING of real value for the inexperienced collector here I guess I'm too stupid to see it.

Im with Paul on this one; the thread does not need to be derailed any further. Constructive comments are needed, not harsh language.

As for you being stupid. I will let your comment speak for itself and let others be the judge of that. You mention inexperienced. I am certainly inexperienced regarding fake helmets and learned something today.

Hmmm, what is this with issuing a "challenge" to a fellow forummember!

Doug wrote what was for me an at least en eye opener (I realize you might be an expert on lids, which Im not):

"This helmet shows clear signs of post war paint and no signs of being period painted. What we have here is a relic battle damaged shell worth not much more than the price of postage that has been cleaned and repainted, then aged and paint scored to look like real wear and tear.

The paint shows very clear signs of false scoring, directionally with a hand held instrument that is creating paint scratches on the surface paint only of a consistent length and width. Damage like this requires a trained eye to know what to look for using real and reproduction examples hands on.

With painted helmets you must look past the pretty designs and neat colors and focus on the not so obvious, and that requires the discipline to accept that it is not real until you can prove to yourself otherwise."

Im not in the market for ebay helmetss, as I prefer to find them myself with my detector, but this I still find very useful information.

Now, I realize that English might not be your native language (it is not mine either), but issuing a "challenge" to other friendly forummembers is actually pretty harsh language as is you post.

I take it in my stride and do not get upset, since people started lobbing grenades at me and shooting rounds in my general direction, this kind of stuff is really kind of petty and it takes a lot to get me started these days.

You are a noob as am I compared to some of the guys here. What you have to realize and what I assume by now, is that on this forum, there is a fine line between spreading useful information and divulging tricks and tips to the abominable fakers out there, who no doubt is listening in. You can see it in some threads, where collectors will not show the back of rare medal and badges in order to stave off the fakers for a little while longer.

Maybe this is a factor, as the experts no longer divulge their ways of shedding light on fakes as a mere knee jerk reflex?

I count myself lucky to have found this forum with this wealth of knowledge. I am in awe of some of the guys here, their knowledge and their collections and appreciate the fact, that they want to share it with us. Let us keep it that way, please.

[Scout]

I have noticed a couple more things about this one that make me suspicious. I will now present my evidence..
1. The bullet/shrapnel hole is in a position which would lead me to believe that the wearer would have been killed by the projectile, leading me on to..
2. The lack of blood staining/ rot on the liner which one would expect to see in correlation with a bullet hole. This to me suggests the liner has been changed, the evidence of this..
3. The rivet shown in the photo I have uploaded has clearly been 'tampered with' suggesting that the liner has indeed been replaced. Therefore this helmet is probably not 'original' as stated in the description.
This coupled with the sellers suspiciously endless supply of 'rare' lids, as I stated in a previous post in this thread, should be enough to put any collector with half a mind off purchasing this helmet.
God I love this forum!

Now THAT is useful info and food for thought instead of useless comments. Made me go look again. In combination with Dougs advice, it certainly makes one want to stay far away from this lid. Thx.

[crazy horse]

I did notice that rivet was out of place, and there should be a bullet hole in the liner, but I'm a newb here too, just trying to learn & have learned a bit since finding this place also.

thanks
Marty

[Schwerpunkt]

Not a lid I would put on my shelf. Some camo's will remain a controversial subject on any forum.
It's wise to look at the track record of helmet sellers on ebay and draw conclusions from that as well.

[Scout]

Good point