doyler Posted December 6, 2016 Share #126 Posted December 6, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkash23686 Posted December 7, 2016 Share #127 Posted December 7, 2016 M2 I mentioned with the odd number. 2016_1205milstuff329130033.JPG 2016_1205milstuff329130031.JPG 2016_1205milstuff329130035.JPG That just looks like a lightly stamped 219B to me. Not all that odd in my opinion. Also your feed are spot on to what they should look like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doyler Posted December 7, 2016 Share #128 Posted December 7, 2016 I agree just a light stamp,worn out die of an 8 or 9 just showing anomolie and how things may not look or be text book and still went on to be used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkash23686 Posted December 12, 2016 Share #129 Posted December 12, 2016 I agree just a light stamp,worn out die of an 8 or 9 just showing anomolie and how things may not look or be text book and still went on to be used. Actually with your example I'd say its 100% textbook. Something like a lightly stamped heat number is not going to cause a steel shell to be rejected. Your example however does have textbook D loops with 100% right as rain bails and feet as well as the way the straps are sewn on correctly. With the helmet which was started with this original thread there are so many red flags to me that make this a reproduction, the straps were added and the bar tacking is sloppy, the feet on the loops are far closer to fakes than any original I have ever seen or held in hand and the heat stamp isn't lightly stamped or unreadable, it just doesn't fall between the lot numbers known thus for with iron clad M2s. I know there are often anomalies that are encountered while collecting, but again this thing just has way too many for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doyler Posted December 12, 2016 Share #130 Posted December 12, 2016 Thanks for the posts and observations.Makes for a great discussion and highly informative topic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugme Posted September 5, 2017 Share #131 Posted September 5, 2017 UPDATE 9/5/17Well, Frank stopped by on his way through the area on his vacation. I looked this thing over for 30 minutes. My eye's hurt by the time I finished but I could not find 1 single anomaly that would cause me to question it based on what it is. So, what may be to the dismay of many here, this helmet is 100% legit. I can not explain the 660 lot number other than to say we don't have a complete database. Currently there are not enough M2 helmets documented to have any kind of true accuracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccmax Posted September 5, 2017 Share #132 Posted September 5, 2017 A 1% sample is a huge one. The "tyranny of numbers" comes to mind from statistics class. If there were 500 original M2s sitting on tables and each one was carefully examined and documented, someone could honestly say they have seen 500 original M2s, but you've still only looked at 1% of the population. That's all I was trying to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugme Posted September 5, 2017 Share #133 Posted September 5, 2017 Here are a few shots I took with my mobile phone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugme Posted September 5, 2017 Share #134 Posted September 5, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugme Posted September 5, 2017 Share #135 Posted September 5, 2017 A 1% sample is a huge one. Since the most current database with lot numbers for the M-2 has less that 50 proven helmets, we are not even close to 1/10 of 1%. This is still a work in progress and we won't have a really good sampling for years. Till then, we have only our best guesses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning Hazard Posted September 5, 2017 Share #136 Posted September 5, 2017 hmmm, just wondering, the inside crimp looks star(?) shaped? Didn't originals have round crimp on the inside? Pat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning Hazard Posted September 5, 2017 Share #137 Posted September 5, 2017 Just a montage of a couple of snaps (the one on the left came from Shelton's helmet and is a confirmed fake) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Costa Posted September 5, 2017 Share #138 Posted September 5, 2017 with the recent BS that has been found--- going on with helmets, I would try and stay cautious and safe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doyler Posted September 5, 2017 Share #139 Posted September 5, 2017 Crimp looks like the one on the helmet I posted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugme Posted September 5, 2017 Share #140 Posted September 5, 2017 You can debate the snaps and such if you'd like, that is what this forum is about. I just want to point out that he is not trying to sell it and he bought it for an insanely cheap price at an estate sale. He just wanted to know if it was real, which it is, so he is happy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doyler Posted September 5, 2017 Share #141 Posted September 5, 2017 I like it and always have. Im glad you were able to hold in hand real time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catfishcraig Posted September 5, 2017 Share #142 Posted September 5, 2017 I like it and always have. Im glad you were able to hold in hand real time. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doyler Posted September 6, 2017 Share #143 Posted September 6, 2017 OP Helmet Mine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silverado Posted September 6, 2017 Share #144 Posted September 6, 2017 Since the most current database with lot numbers for the M-2 has less that 50 proven helmets, we are not even close to 1/10 of 1%. This is still a work in progress and we won't have a really good sampling for years. Till then, we have only our best guesses. I have an M2 I could submit pictures of if anyone wants to add it to the sampling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant G. Posted September 6, 2017 Share #145 Posted September 6, 2017 I have an M2 I could submit pictures of if anyone wants to add it to the sampling.That would be great, Silverado! I am glad Scott didn't see any issues with it during the hands-on inspection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattS Posted September 6, 2017 Share #146 Posted September 6, 2017 Since the most current database with lot numbers for the M-2 has less that 50 proven helmets, we are not even close to 1/10 of 1%. This is still a work in progress and we won't have a really good sampling for years. Till then, we have only our best guesses. Exactly my original point 10 months ago, thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
326thAEB Posted April 18, 2023 Share #147 Posted April 18, 2023 On 9/5/2017 at 4:16 PM, Bugme said: Since the most current database with lot numbers for the M-2 has less that 50 proven helmets, we are not even close to 1/10 of 1%. This is still a work in progress and we won't have a really good sampling for years. Till then, we have only our best guesses. I found this thread while doing some M2 research. I thought I would mention that a friend of mine in France has an M2 with rock solid provenance from operation Dragoon. I had the pleasure of handling it last time I was there and it had a lot number in the 290s which is slightly outside of what is commonly accepted. My thoughts are this could be one of the last M2's made. I will ask him to send me photos of the helmet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugme Posted April 19, 2023 Share #148 Posted April 19, 2023 15 hours ago, 326thAEB said: I found this thread while doing some M2 research. I thought I would mention that a friend of mine in France has an M2 with rock solid provenance from operation Dragoon. I had the pleasure of handling it last time I was there and it had a lot number in the 290s which is slightly outside of what is commonly accepted. My thoughts are this could be one of the last M2's made. I will ask him to send me photos of the helmet. The current database, which has grown substantially since 2017, shows a range of 102C to 232B as the highest numbers we've found thus far. If a D-loop in the 290's can be verified, that would be helpful in establishing a range. That said, the fact that nothing has yet been found above 232 does cause concern for the huge jump to the 290, may mean it is not legit. We'll know more once your friend verifies this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
326thAEB Posted August 1, 2023 Share #149 Posted August 1, 2023 On 4/18/2023 at 11:20 PM, Bugme said: The current database, which has grown substantially since 2017, shows a range of 102C to 232B as the highest numbers we've found thus far. If a D-loop in the 290's can be verified, that would be helpful in establishing a range. That said, the fact that nothing has yet been found above 232 does cause concern for the huge jump to the 290, may mean it is not legit. We'll know more once your friend verifies this. I wanted to expand on the lot number list and will share this helmet that sold on AIOLFI some time ago. It was pictured in the De Trez book as well as some other French publications. This example belonged to a Sergeant Corrington and was found near Ste. Côme du Mont in 1985. The number inside of this helmet is 237A. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
326thAEB Posted August 1, 2023 Share #150 Posted August 1, 2023 On 4/18/2023 at 11:20 PM, Bugme said: The current database, which has grown substantially since 2017, shows a range of 102C to 232B as the highest numbers we've found thus far. If a D-loop in the 290's can be verified, that would be helpful in establishing a range. That said, the fact that nothing has yet been found above 232 does cause concern for the huge jump to the 290, may mean it is not legit. We'll know more once your friend verifies this. I meant to respond to this sooner. Although the helmet is an airborne marked helmet from operation dragoon with rock solid provenance, I misremembered. It is a fixed bale type and not D bale. If there is interest I can ask permission to share photos of it in a separate thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now