M45 Helmets

[RH1941]

Brian can we have closer photos of the liner then? Gary

[Brian]

1. "Incorrect shape, not matching with photos and descriptions"

I would caution using those photos when judging exact shape. As mentioned, the negatives could have been distorted at some point.

As far as descriptions are concerned, why not use those found in Baer p.385

"The Model B developed by Dr. Hansel seemed to solve all of the problems inherent in the Model 35 helmet. It is readily recognizable through its simple shape, marked by a very flat angle of inclination which is a maximum of 55 degrees on the front and 60 degrees on the sides and rear" paragraph 2
emphasis mine


"An alternate model was designed by Dr. Hansel and was called the Model B/II. It has additional ear and neck protection, but retains the same angle of inclination as the Model B." paragraph 4---emphasis mine

Photographs can be distorted. These angles of inclination do not change.

[hawk82]

1. "Incorrect shape, not matching with photos and descriptions"

I would caution using those photos when judging exact shape. As mentioned, the negatives could have been distorted at some point.

As far as descriptions are concerned, why not use those found in Baer p.385

"The Model B developed by Dr. Hansel seemed to solve all of the problems inherent in the Model 35 helmet. It is readily recognizable through its simple shape, marked by a very flat angle of inclination which is a maximum of 55 degrees on the front and 60 degrees on the sides and rear" paragraph 2
emphasis mine


"An alternate model was designed by Dr. Hansel and was called the Model B/II. It has additional ear and neck protection, but retains the same angle of inclination as the Model B." paragraph 4---emphasis mine

Photographs can be distorted. These angles of inclination do not change.

I agree, but these angles are not at your helmet. Not at all.

The negativs distorted...
Baer also shows an M35, an M42 and a polish helmet in this connexion. All from Bundesarchiv. They have exactly the shape one would expect.

Not the picture is wrong, your helmet is.
Follow the 3 steps I've posted with the M56 and you will get an exact clone of your B/II.

[Brian]

How do you know the angles of my helmet are not as per Baer?

Here is what I don't understand:

Why would I go to all of the trouble to reshape a DDR M56 to give it a steeper, higher dome, and then try to pass it off as original (as is alleged)

when the Baer photos seem to show a flatter dome?

[hawk82]

How do you know the angles of my helmet are not as per Baer?

Here is what I don't understand:

Why would I go to all of the trouble to reshape a DDR M56 to give it a steeper, higher dome, and then try to pass it off as original (as is alleged)

when the Baer photos seem to show a flatter dome?

Because an NVA M56 has exactly those angles and your helmet is not (longer) conform to an M56 as you say.


The higher dome of your helmet was a not wanted secondary effect of making the helmet wider.

[Brian]

2. incorrect paint

Hawk, having never handled an original, how do you know the paint on this helmet is "incorrect" ??

2 1/2 no matching to any original 60 year old german stahlhelm,

I'm not sure what this means. Original WWII German helmets have been found in all conditions from relic to mint. This one displays very light wear.


3. incorrect liner

Incorrect statement. This helmet has the M44 liner described in Baer p.388

I'll get some detailed liner shots when time permits.

[hawk82]

The paint should be the same as on ckl M42s made in summer 44.
I don´t know a steelhelmet that has a matching colour.
I know lot of fakes which have this RAL 6006 feldgrau paint.
But after 65 years it shouldn't look like straight from the factory, even if the helmet was only in the showcase all the time.

The recent red rust only visible with the daylight pictures is another red flag.

[hawk82]

2. [I]


I'll get some detailed liner shots when time permits.

You mean, when you have attached the forgotten rivets to your repro-liner?

[bikerboyzx6r]

But after 65 years it shouldn't look like straight from the factory

I understand your points but you are incorrect about the paint. I have see almost mint original examples!

I am 50/50 about this helmet... Let the man prove it is genuine rather than spend all day slagging him off, its not good for the forum!

If he has nothing else to say, please let this thread end.

Cheers
Dan

[Brian]

You mean, when you have attached the forgotten rivets to your repro-liner?

Hawk, you have apoligized for using strong language, but you are still bascially calling me a liar and a deceiver in every other post!

No biker-boy, that is not good for the forum!

For all concerned, I'm not really here to 'prove' my helmets. I'm here to 'discuss' them.

Discussion IMO, does not involve being accused of fabricating a well-crafted fake, and then attempting to deceive the collecting community with it.

Why do you think that many knowlegable, experienced collectors do not/no longer post on forums ??
(hint--they are tired of this kind of stuff)


The paint should be the same as on ckl M42s made in summer 44

No Hawk, we are talking about prototypes here, not general production. A completely different shell, different liner, why not different paint ?? The color is close to slate gray, BTW.

Why after 65 years are there still other helmets about that appear nearly mint, straight from the factory ?