RACHD ww2 uniform

[thorne83]

Hi all,

what are peoples thoughts on the originality of this uniform for sale (uniforms are not my thing!)? Bib/dog collar are modern reproduction. Are all buttons/badges/cap badge correct? What are the buttons in photo four - I do not recognize them.

I'd appreciate feedback as, like I said, I'm not experienced in uniforms/buttons!

Cheers, Tom

[wizardman]

Looks like a good outfit to me..hat looks a bit moldy so you will have to address that asap..how much are they asking?

- - ------- - -

Looks like a good outfit to me..hat looks a bit moldy so you will have to address that asap..how much are they asking?

[Jerry B]

Looks possible OK from these pics, but some better close ups would help. Cap and collar badges are the post 1939 version, the buttons are wrong though being for the adjutant generals corp and I don't remember seeing the backing cloth used on SD tunics, though that on its own is probably not a problem.

As the label in the tunic appears to have been modified, it might have been messed with, and that and the buttons would concern me.

[thorne83]

Thanks gents,

it was those buttons that I couldn't identify, I spent ages 'googling' them with no luck! The outfit is currently at £146. My only interest in buying is to put with my grandpa's items for effect. I'll attach a photo of him below, wearing the same set up.

I'm not sure whether to put a bid in as it looks like it could have been cobbled together, rather than an original set but then I'm not experienced in this sort of thing?! Those AGC buttons would date from when, roughly? The only thing I am experienced at is research and going from the service number (or every variation I can read of it) in the label, I find no matches to RAChD men. I have found a RAMC officer with service no. 159915, that's about as close to an army officer as I've found so far. Is it at all likely that a jacket such as this could have had two owners or more likely that it has just had RAChD buttons added to an 'ordinary' jacket to then sell on?


Cheers,

Tom