Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Recent Profile Visitors

189 profile views
  1. SouthShore 8754 - thanks for your additional thoughts and photos on the patch pocket trousers. I think another question that needs to be asked in regards to the patch pocket trousers and camouflage uniforms as well is - Why would S. Rosenbloom, Keystone C & A, Crown Overall, United Pants, Sure-Fit, et al. be required to label utility uniforms from 1941-45 and whoever made the patch pocket trousers and all of the camo uniforms not be required to also? And Mario Mirabelli, for that matter, did label other clothing items they manufactured for the Marine Corps. Could it be po
  2. Some collectors refer to a P-47 utility set. I always assumed that this is what they were referring to, but I'm not sure because the date is a little outside of what I focus on. I'm not sure either whether any changes were made to the coat during the post-war years, or if you would be able to tell the difference between a WW2 and post-war coat other than possibly by the composition of the buttons. One last example from a Sept. 2020 eBay Auction and a complete set. The trousers are dated 1949 on the pin ticket:
  3. Another example from a 2017 eBay auction that is dated 1952 on the fabric ticket:
  4. I wanted to add to this discussion by posting a couple of examples of the watch pocket trousers that strongly suggest they are a post-war iteration since the question of what number pattern these were was brought up. None of these photos are mine. They are from various eBay auctions that I saved for my own reference and education. #1 A 1951 pair ink stamped on the inside watch pocket: Note this pair of trousers was made they Blue Anchor Overall Co., the manufacturer as the 1950s dated camouflage helmet covers:
  5. In regards to the patch front pocket USMC trousers: I've attached a photo of an unissued pair. They do not have a contractor's label, just an ink stamp showing the size 34x33. I will say also that the buttons are the magnetic type with a copper wash. I mention this because, apparently, there was a progression of different kinds of buttons used on these uniforms that may help date them. I've yet to see this type of trouser with a contractor's label. However, the pin tickets that the USMC used often included the last two digits of the year of manufacture and in this case it is 1942. Unfort
  6. Really, really awesome. Thanks for sharing.
  7. The EGA's were poked right through the material. Chris
  8. Wow! Thanks for sharing this. I found one of these jackets a couple of years ago and have always thought it was Australian made because of its similar styling to the wool type issued there. Shows how much there is to learn. It looks like mine is nearly identical down to the pocket snaps, though there is just plain jane SSI on it. Thought I'd post a couple of pics for reference. Chris R.
  9. Allan, Thanks for the response. The Bando site is what I referred to as the "101st patch site" above. When I was on it I sort of ended up with the same conclusion as you did, but left more confused than anything. I agree that if the eye is the focal point in determining the era, then it has most in common with the Type 14 images. But then the tab looked like it had more in common with types listed as WW2. Additionally, if you consider other characteristics such as the thickness of the beak, especially around the corner of the mouth, and tongue has more in common with types listed as
  10. Hello, I am hoping I can get some opinions on what era these patches are from. I am hoping they are WW2. Especially the 82nd since I am planning on using it as part of a Veterans Day exhibit at my local library to help honor a Market Garden vet. My patch knowledge is limited to cut vs merrow edge, white backs being up to 1960's and green backs WW2. I post these because there seems to be more specialized knowledge of airborne insignia. My concerns are I bought them loose and from what I can tell they seem larger than typical patches, hence the tape measure for scale. the 101st has glu
  11. Thank you all for your answers. I also believe 1937 is the correct date for the new cap badge. After digging thru my reference material, I finally found an August 1943 AR 30-3000, Price List of Clothing & Equipment that lists the EM cap badge and collar discs as M-1937. From what I could find out, there was a lot of changes to the Army EM uniform in 1937: New cap badge New collar discs New darker color for serge wool Cap and Service Coat New trousers with new color OD 32, light shade. This is all consistent with the examples I have. I wanted to clear this up be
  12. Hello, Does anyone know the official date or year the EM cap badge changed from the gilt one-piece flat type to the domed two-piece type? I'm sure this must be in Army Regs somewhere, but I don't have any that go back that far. From this type: to this type: Thank you
  13. Hello, Neat trousers you got there. I really don't know the answer to your question for sure, but my guess is the pair with the pocket flaps was probably a design intended for officers. Note in addition to the pocket flaps the second pair has internally hung pockets. For sure we know the first pair is for enlisted men. We know that they produced distinct ETO jackets for both officers and enlisted men. So why not trouser for the officer too? Rear pocket flaps were a traditional earmark for WW2 officer's trousers. p.s. There is a least a little bit of information on the histo
  14. Nice WW2 boots. As mentioned the rivet indicates early in the mass production phase. These boots were essentially the rough-out service shoe with an elongated tongue and cuff added. Thus their evolution mirrored that of the standard rough-out service shoe. GX is one of the manufacturer codes for International Shoe Company. CR
  • Create New...

Important Information

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