Become our sponsor and display your banner here
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Please Help I thought this was Russian and Then Italian WW2 I JUST DON'T KNOW

Article about: I had not posted here for quite awhile so earlier I messed up and posted wrong helmet photos and could not figure how to edit the pictures. I'm really sorry so hope this works. I thought thi

  1. #11


    Quote by Greg Pickersgill View Post
    (Yes, its probably all explained in Baer, but my technical German is way behind my Romanian...)
    So, were all this made in one plant, or distributed production or what? The implication here is one plant does all.
    Even Germans find Baer's syntax a challenge. Initial development of the M56 was by VEB Thale (our old friend ET - Eisenhüttenwerk Thale, which had developed its wartime precursor the B/II) but while Thale continued to provide the steel, the main producer of helmet bodies from 1957-on was VEB Schwerter Emaillierwerke Lauter (the former Sächsische Emailler und Stanzwerk, Lauter). The liners were produced by VEB Schwerter Emaillierwerke Lauter.

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement
    Join Date
    Advertising world

  3. #12


    RVLucy is correct, I did a comparison with my 1971 dated shell and a 1987 dated shell, the earlier 1971 shell is the same shape as the original M56 while the later post 1976 dated shells had a slightly different shape around the brim, it was a little more flared out on the edge and the top is flatter and not as rounded.

    so it depends on the date markings on the shell

  4. #13


    Quote by RVLucy View Post
    The liners were produced by VEB Schwerter Emaillierwerke Lauter.
    Sorry a duplication here, the liners were in fact made by VEB Leder und Sattlerwaren in Tauche.
    Last edited by RVLucy; 02-17-2015 at 01:46 PM.

  5. #14
    JBR is offline


    Thank you for this interesting info, Roger. Mostly new to me and much appreciated. For years I thought the differences mentioned were due to pressing differences between sizes of shell - eg only the large (size 3) shell had the more pronounced rim turn. By the way, do you know if it is the case that at some late stage (1976?) sizes 1 and 2 were discontinued leaving size 3 as a one-size-fits-all? I don't know where I picked up this idea but as I've never found size 1 or 2 examples of the M56/76 it seemed to ring true. Incidentally, I've never found a size 3 M56 with or without the I-31 liner. Almost all that I've examined have been 2s, the single exception being a 1 a few years ago with the I-31 liner. All I have in my collection now is an M56 2/I-31 and an M56/76 3.

  6. #15


    According to Baer (vol.II page 3) the Size I M56 body disappeared sometime between 1967 and 1970. "Zu diesem Zeitpinkt (1967 bis 1970) fiel aus die Kalottengroße I weg."

    I have not seen a size III M56 either, and have only one size I - T1/56. With respect to sizes II and III, I have 1989- dated M56/76s in both sizes, as well as 1978 and 1984-dated size IIs.

  7. #16
    JBR is offline


    Well, I've just recently found a M56/66 Size 3 - after 20+ years of looking! So, I thought I too would compare the 66 with the 76 and here are the results.

    The 66 is dated 1971, the 76 1978. The 76 also has a faint bluish 'E' printed inside the crown:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	p4a.JPG 
Views:	11 
Size:	195.8 KB 
ID:	823031

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	p5a.JPG 
Views:	11 
Size:	149.2 KB 
ID:	823032

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	p5b.jpg 
Views:	13 
Size:	97.4 KB 
ID:	823033

    76 on the left, 66 right:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	p1.jpg 
Views:	12 
Size:	70.7 KB 
ID:	822973

    The 66:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	p4.jpg 
Views:	13 
Size:	95.7 KB 
ID:	822991

    The 76:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	p5.jpg 
Views:	13 
Size:	83.5 KB 
ID:	822998

    The 66 shell has a darker textured (on the outside) finish. The 76 is smooth inside and out and slightly matter - this may explain the 66 looking darker. 66 above, 76 below.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	p2.jpg 
Views:	16 
Size:	80.2 KB 
ID:	822974

    The liners of both are identical.

    The 66 weighs 1279g, the 76 1131g. These are the shell only, with the liners removed.

    Placed rim against rim, the shells are very nearly exactly the same in all directions.

    The 76 has a slightly more pronounced rim upturn than the 66, as mention before in this thread.

    The 66 rim front:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	p4c.jpg 
Views:	11 
Size:	100.3 KB 
ID:	823018

    The 66 rim rear:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	p4d.jpg 
Views:	14 
Size:	93.8 KB 
ID:	823023

    The 76 rim front:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	p5c.jpg 
Views:	10 
Size:	104.9 KB 
ID:	823028

    The 76 rim rear:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	p5d.jpg 
Views:	9 
Size:	87.4 KB 
ID:	823030

    Placed upside down, the 66 shell wobbles slightly more freely than the 76 which has a tendency to re-balance faster due to it's slightly flatter contour.

    Looking down on the shells, with them upright or upside down, the different crown contours are distinguishable by way of different light reflexions. Likewise, seen upside down on a surface with light behind, the differences can just be made out. 76 left, 66 right.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	p3.jpg 
Views:	17 
Size:	82.4 KB 
ID:	822975

    Looking down on both but swopping sides to even out light effect:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	p6.jpg 
Views:	12 
Size:	195.6 KB 
ID:	822981

    66 on the right:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	P1010409.jpg 
Views:	12 
Size:	148.8 KB 
ID:	822987

    The depth of the shells, at the deepest point measured to a line level with rim extending from side to side, is very slightly different - in the region of 1 to 2 mm with the 66 the deeper.
    Last edited by JBR; 04-01-2015 at 06:58 PM.

  8. #17


    well done ,looking forward to the pictures

  9. #18
    JBR is offline


    I've added the pics. Hope it all makes sense. My PC keeps throwing me out when I try to Edit Post, so I'll try tidying up another day.

    Some cautionary notes:

    1. The differences are quite slight, if you discount the finish and weight differences. But they do bear out other peoples comparisons and observations.

    2. This was not a scientific comparison. My measuring tools, for example are basic.

    3. Individual shells vary a great deal (maybe not so much in DDR production as in other countries) due to production techniques even without changes to the processes.

    Looking forward to comments!

  10. #19


    well that truly is a fascinating study between the model differances ,thank you for your time and effort

  11. #20


    Thank You JBR for that great comparision between the 2 models.
    Semper Fi

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 12-19-2014, 08:43 PM
  2. 03-30-2014, 04:15 AM
  3. 12-05-2011, 08:42 PM
  4. I wonder what they thought we thought?

    In Photos - Papers - Propaganda of the Third Reich
    07-17-2010, 12:28 AM
  5. Just a thought

    In Discussions
    07-17-2009, 07:11 PM


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts