Brian, lets not forget that the maker SE in general produced the least helmets, so you rarely see SE in any branch, let alone SS.
Brian, lets not forget that the maker SE in general produced the least helmets, so you rarely see SE in any branch, let alone SS.
Doug, I agree that COA's are dodgy. I acquired mine from Ken N. simply to make a point. The WAF would not accept that it existed, but since they respect Ken opinion, his COA forced them to accept it the helmet. I just wanted to prove a point. And I did.by DougB
Most reasonable (and I say reasonable) collectors can easily see that my ventless helmet is authentic upon examination of some clear photos.
I don't recall talking about SE SS helmets with you Brian. And you've had 12,000 helmets in hand? I didn't think so. Keep on topic.
I believe SE was the second largest producer, starting production in September 1935. Fewer observed examples of SE/hkp helmets in the collecting world today may simply be due to the factory's location closer to the Eastern Front, which soaked up approx. 85% of German forces.
I would highly doubt that the WAF as a community would keel over and stay silent after seeing a COA since most collectors visit multiple forums.
And a lot of those frown upon COA's.
I'm leaning towards "C". If the die would break, it would most likely break on the left side of the die as most of the force is would be applied there making it less likely for the right side of the stamping die to break, if that makes any sense of course.
WAF accepts your helmet as original??????? The ENTIRE forum? Seriously. Ken N isn't God. COAs are toilet paper. WAF as a whole has accepted your helmet only on the basis because Ken raised his right hand and said "make it so, and there shall be an M45 ventless A and B designation". No wonder there's so many idiots on WAF.
Give the WAF COA Ken N thing a break please as it's unadulterated horseshit.
Most reasonable collectors I speak with think its factory error.
OK, second, my mistake Brian, but nonetheless still producing very little helmets.
LOL that's a rapid exit Samir. Anyway Brian we agree to disagree on some things and an in person conversation is needed. I bristle at talk of forum domination by personalities and their COAs. I hate hearing it. Lets keep this on track, M45s can be another topic. This is about Samir's lot number, C or O. Pardon me for the bristling retorts, there is some blanket statements being made and deflection that get under my skin.
Doug
Last edited by DougB; 09-01-2013 at 11:40 PM.
If I may, since this is a discussion, and to keep it from turning into a "debate" among a few members, I would like to put forth my thoughts. Looking at the lot number, I believe the first character is a, "C" I saved and highlighted two marks which I believe provide some evidence that it is a, "C" more than a broken die stamp. On the first character, the ends of the distinctive curve are very sharp, sudden ends, and are evenly spaced. I suspect a broken die stamp would have uneven ends to the curve and not so uniformly and evenly spaced. Furthermore, there is a faint line from one end of the curve to the other, either top to bottom or bottom to top, whichever way you choose to look at it. If you look at the next character, the, "4," there is a line of similar thickness and depth as that on the first character, but shorter due to the shorter distance between the points it is connecting, it is not as noticable. I think the third character is a, "0" (zero) lightly struck, due to where the heavy stamped lines end. I do not see any signs of a lighter, thinner line on the, "7" like there is on the, "C" and "4." To conclude, that's my "forensic examination," so to speak, of why I believe it is a, "C"
Similar Threads
Posting Permissions
.
Bookmarks