Jump to content

SouthShore 8754

Members
  • Content Count

    54
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

124 profile views
  1. Hi Craig, thanks for replying to the thread. The only thread on here I found on the third pattern trousers was this reference thread; that also was mentioned in your thread you attached: https://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?/topic/5935-usmc-p1941-p1944-hbt-utility-trousers/&tab=comments#comment-36437 According to the author of the thread, the third pattern P41 trousers didn't have size or maker marks. The third pattern pair that I posted above doesn't have any maker marks or size marks on the inside either. The only mark is an old stamp from the western costume
  2. This photo is from Glenn's book, photo might have been taken early war in the Solomon Islands based on the paint on their dungarees.
  3. I haven't been able to find much information on the USMC P41 "Third Pattern" trousers that had the patch pockets. There is only one post on the forum that shows a picture of these and the post only mentions they were the "Third Pattern". Does any one know if the third pattern with the patch pockets was the first style to be issued to marines early in the war or were they issued along with the other variants (1st, 2nd patterns) around the same time? I'd greatly appreciate some input on this, as there is not much information about these trousers online and they don't seem to pop up as often as
  4. Thanks for looking it over and confirming that its an authentic early McCord! I thought the Hawley might be a later pattern because of the A washers. I think the steel pot and the liner are probably a matching set. However, if you look at the rust on the helmet cover, it doesn't match the wear on the helmet. The helmet has virtually no rust marks whatsoever, so I am leaning towards believing that the cover originally belonged to a different helmet. Would like to know your thoughts on that. I may be wrong, haven't had much experience collecting helmets.
  5. The helmet also came with a stilted helmet cover, and a hawley liner. Not sure what type the hawley is. I have no doubt that the cover and liner are both authentic. Just not sure about the steel pot.
  6. I have had this M1 fixed bail helmet in my collection for a bit, I always thought it was authentic fixed bail , but after seeing some recent posts on the forum about other helmets, I thought I should post it up and ask to put any doubts to rest. I have posted some photos of the bales and the stitching up close. Please let me know your thoughts as helmets are not my strong point in collecting and it seems that helmet collecting these days is basically like navigating a mine field. Do the fixed bales look to be made of the proper material? Do they look to be welded on correctly? Als
  7. @kammo-man and Dogsbody, Thanks for providing your opinions on the jacket. Glad to hear both of you also agree that its genuine.
  8. Awesome, glad to hear. Thanks again for helping me authenticate!
  9. Please let me know if you all think it is authentic or a good reproduction. I would greatly appreciate it!
  10. I recently came across this USMC P41 Jacket. I am having a hard time determining if it is an authentic period example or if it is a good reproduction, From the photos you can see that the contractor is the "Rosenbloom" company and the date of manufacture is 01/10/44 with an alleged contract number of 42962. When I looked the contract number up in grunt gear, it is a real number and the book states that approximately 200,000 of these jackets were made in January 1944. At first glance it seems convincing, but the buttons and the thread used in the stitching are throwing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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