M40 Steel Helmet - Original Shell?

**Adravor** · 07-02-2019, 01:52 PM

Hello everyone,
I just recently got a bit into collecting WW2 Stuff, and i bought an empy, for my inexperienced eye, good looking shell, with what i still believe to be reproduced paint? After i heard some... rather bad stuff about the seller, Sammler32 i´m rather unsure about the helmets originality. So i´d like your opinion on it. The liner and the split pins are of course reproductions i added myself.
Thank you very much for your time and help,
Adravor

**Espenlaub Militaria** · 07-02-2019 01:52 PM

We also buy and trade your items and full collections!

**BlackCat1982** · 07-02-2019, 02:09 PM

I would wait to see what others think, but I'm not happy with the ET markings either, the lot number isn't one I've seen listed and the ET stamp looks dubious.

**PotatoDigger** · 07-02-2019, 03:00 PM

Not 100% on the stampings but it looks like a good shell.
The seller does not sell fake shells, they are original, at least the ones I've seen so far.
Just that he does not really care about the history behind them. ( for example the Norwegian lid I sold to him only to see reappearing a few days later stripped and as parts)
The paint, if you thought that was original, I do not think it is, but better pictures would be needed to say for sure.
The rim of the helmet has the characteristic line in it that I'd expect on an ET produced shell(at least it is always important when authenticating FJ shells and since normal shells also exhibit this, I thought I'd include it aswell), the shape also looks correct.
Not like those cheap repro things.
Luis

**BlackCat1982** · 07-02-2019, 03:10 PM

I don't think the repro ihnenfutter does it any justice. Perhaps with a period produced liner it might look a little better.

**Adravor** · 07-02-2019, 03:19 PM

Yeah, but one who does not care about the historic aspect, may also not care if they are real. So better ask the experts.
But that sounds good, i also believed it looked good, compared to the shells i found here on the forum. I´m not believing the paint is original, but then i´m not an expert, what kind of pic would you need for clarification?
Thank you all for the answers.
Adravor

**Adravor** · 07-02-2019, 03:21 PM

I did not find any good original liner at that time, also better a reproduction then a other poor helmet stripped of his originality.

**PotatoDigger** · 07-02-2019, 03:28 PM

Well, for better pictures, just try out some good lighting, or maybe take some pictures outdoors, that's always good.
For a 66 size shell finding liners is a tad more difficult than for 64 size shells, but they are out there, some are pretty pricey though..
I got a battle damaged liner for my 66 size shell , but I would need one with a different date so it would fit with my helmet, depending on how you want your helmet if the paint is original it might fit for you.
The liner is dated 1944 but for my M42 shell I'd need a 41-43 dated one.
If you make yours a ND reissue M40 I guess it might fit.. But that's beside the point, let's first find out if the paint is original.
Luis

**Adravor** · 07-02-2019, 04:15 PM

So, i went outside and took some pics... lets see if my phone camera is good enough...

The different colours are because of different focusses of my camera...
Adravor

**MAP** · 07-02-2019, 04:24 PM

Shell looks original. But new paint.

I wouldn't put anymore money into the helmet. If the helmet had original paint it might be worth to source an original liner, but as it stands now, I would leave it as is. Just my opinion though

**PotatoDigger** · 07-02-2019, 04:39 PM

I would agree with MAP on that one,
add to that, that M40s in this lotnr range would have also had a decal(according to the ghv database), but there is not trace of it, also the paint is lacking any texture it should have had given it being an M40.
But as already stated it is post war paint.
Just keep the repro liner in it, it's good enough, not worth investing in a liner that is worth more than the shell itself.
Luis