From the reference topic, this is what an ET/CKL decal should look like:
I'm horrible at comparing two pictures, so don't use my opinions as a solid reference; but I think the border on the one you posted is thinner, and more pointy at the bottom.
Was just looking at that myself. I know they dont match but I was going down the liner of a CA pocher decal. Its rare but hey never hurts to ask.
Ah, didn't think of that. Comparing it to a CA, it does look ok, but I dont know how to distinguish a fake... I'm curious as to what the experts will say.
It's a fake decal on what should be a no decal CKL helmet. It's has a too high lotnumber.
Only decal type accepted on high lot CKL's by some collectors are the champagne runic shield. Safest to buy if you just want one SS helmet are the ones with the ET runic shield.
(If buying an ET/ckl).
Beyond just the type of decals used, I noticed that the wear on the decals does not match the overall condition of the helmet very well.
Good point Joe. SS lids aren't my strong suit hence this topic.I never expected it to be real. Defiantly not a 66 either, just had it up near a 64 and it's smaller, maybe 62. Could it be anything other than a ckl? It's a bad strike and can only see a k.
I was looking at the damage to the decal as well, no usual sanding marks or machine made scrapes. Not that I have ever experienced a real SS but this one is light years over anything else I have ever had. not trying to make it real, just my observations
The paint and liner look good on this one. Someone has tried to be clever and put a fake decal on an original helmet so that it all looks good together.
My advice would be to buy it for $300-$400 and take that decal off.
It is a ckl, and a late one too, most likely produced mid-1944 or so.
Looking for WWII U.S. dog tags
I agree with Frank 100% A fake decal for sure. A plain jane M42 is what it really is.
Cool, what I though it would be the end of the day.