Jump to content

GIJive

Members
  • Content Count

    299
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

  • Location
    Illinois
  • Interests
    WWII Army and Marine Corps Uniforms. WWII firearms, particularly Thomspon submachine gun.
  1. South Shore 8754, The weight of the HBT material did not change between the two styles of trousers. It is the same weight HBT weave, there is the big enclosed pocket on the rear of the later style, along with additional metal snaps and pocket flaps that may cause the weight of the two styles to vary by a few ounces, otherwise the material is the same. BTW, very nice looking set.
  2. Dean, I didn't say it was exactly like it, it has the color variations seen on genuine camouflage HBT material from WWII. The type seen on one-piece camo suits and the two-piece US camo uniforms. Sometimes the dyes came out as a softer brown than the predominant "chocolate" color brown usually seen. I only suggested that an in-person examination might be warranted, By the way, is not the stitching on the brown-side seam, chain stitching, as it should be? It appears to me it is from the photographs. The edge stitching along the brown-side also has the saw-tooth appearance commonly
  3. I disagree with your assessment. The cover I have is real and there is no reason for me to doubt its authenticity. I have collected USMC covers sine the late 1950's and have seen many color variations. Posting pictures on this forum certainly wouldn't convince me it is a reproduction, especially with some of the erroneous opinions I have seen over the years from some of the members here.
  4. Sergesquadron, I'm not so sure your cover is a reproduction. I see chain stitching and the "zigzag" stitching on the brown side, just like originals. In fact, I have a cover in my collection that has essentially the same green side subdued brown colored spots. I'd get another opinion from someone that can observe the cover in person.
  5. And for you guys worrying about the different shades of paint, General Cheese is correct, lighting in photography affects color. Do you really think the U.S. Navy in WWII ordered helmets painted and then told the person painting each individual helmet, paint one helmet, throw away the remaining paint, mix a new shade, paint the next helmet, etc. Batches of paint would obviously have been issued to various Navy D-Day Units and instructions issued on how to paint the helmets and guess what......... the batch of helmet paint issued to a particular Unit may have been enough to paint several helm
  6. I'm sure the helmet was actually was worn and suffered wear prior to the June 1944 D-Day paint scheme being applied. The wear to the helmet prior to painting wouldn't be a concern to me.
  7. digi-shots, WWII and Korean War vintage helmets covers were all the same Army Weave. The werent made with Marine Corps HBT weave. juodonnell2012, The space or gap around the colored spots in the camouflage patern has to do with the printing process and stencils used during the manufacture. The gaps vary from production run to production run, as do variations in the dye shades. That is not a way to determine a real cover from a reproduction. The cover in question looks okay.
  8. m1a2u2, In my opinion, the rationale is that he doesn't know what he is talking about. There is nothing wrong with the cover with the stamp on it, it is real. Hopefully, since this thread was posted he has seen some more real covers and gotten educated.
  9. Blueprint, Although it appears that the cover in question could be a non-slit pattern, the resolution isn't sufficient to make a positive conclusion as pump 150 has demonstrated many times in this thread. Besides, just because the documentary is about Tarawa doesn't mean that specific clip of color footage is from the Tarawa operation. Documentaries intercut color footage from different Pacific invasions all the time. It could have been shot during the Iwo Jima or Okinawa invasions.
  10. The cover and fabric are real, in my opinion.
  11. This photo has nothing to do with the slit/non-slit debate, but I thought maybe some members would like to see some sort of hand applied insignia to the USMC camouflage cover by an individual Marine, Not sure what the insignia is supposed to be or represents, but I thought some might find it interesting. The stills are from a newsreel on the invasion of Kwajalein-February, 1944
  12. Okay, my apologies. At any rate the trousers are genuine.
  13. Nothing wrong with those trousers, they are the real deal. Not sure how you missed the washed-out Manufacturer's Tag in the pocket, you show it in your pictures?
  14. Just wondering what is wrong with the bartacking? Looks similar to what I have seen on legitimate helmet straps. I am not saying the straps are legitimate, they look a little fuzzy to me as well, just inquiring about the bartacking.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.