Jump to content

Crusher Values


Bearmon
 Share

Recommended Posts

I am a patch guy but have problems passing by what I think is a good deal.

I picked this chrusher up along with patches and DUI's and am wondering about its value.

I notice that this one has a smaller Eagle than most I have seen, don't know weather this is good or bad.

The sweat band is seperating from the hat, only broken threads not damage to the sweat band.

No markings that I can find. But the Brim is totally flexable, and soft and undamaged.

The prices I see vary greatly for these covers, any idea what this one is worth?

 

The only photo I have right now:

 

post-582-1206382709.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a patch guy but have problems passing by what I think is a good deal.

I picked this chrusher up along with patches and DUI's and am wondering about its value.

I notice that this one has a smaller Eagle than most I have seen, don't know weather this is good or bad.

The sweat band is seperating from the hat, only broken threads not damage to the sweat band.

No markings that I can find. But the Brim is totally flexable, and soft and undamaged.

The prices I see vary greatly for these covers, any idea what this one is worth?

 

The only photo I have right now:

 

0311med16.jpg

 

It looks to me like a private purchase EM cap since it lacks the mohair band authorized for officers. The eagle appears to be an EM's also, but missing the backer disc. Not sure how I would value it.

 

G

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks to me like a private purchase EM cap since it lacks the mohair band authorized for officers. The eagle appears to be an EM's also, but missing the backer disc. Not sure how I would value it.

 

G

 

 

Good eyes G!!

 

One EM´s cap with same crusher shape:

 

12thcrusherht3.jpg

 

Best regards,

 

Ricardo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not a crusher, but rather a standard EM hat with the round stiffiner removed. A true crusher has a very pliable visor. This one has a very thick and not very pliable visor.

Kurt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks to me like a private purchase EM cap since it lacks the mohair band authorized for officers. The eagle appears to be an EM's also, but missing the backer disc. Not sure how I would value it.

 

G

 

 

The value is between $10-$20, probably towards the latter since it is a private purchase cap with what looks to be a gabardine top.

 

Beau

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kurt I think yoiu missed the part where I wrote the Brim is soft and veryu flexable.

I can roll it up I will try to get pictures as an example.

Thanks all for the comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kurt I think yoiu missed the part where I wrote the Brim is soft and veryu flexable.

I can roll it up I will try to get pictures as an example.

Thanks all for the comments.

No, don't do that - not good for 60 year old leather.

In the photo, it just didn't look like the thin crusher visor.

Kurt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Eagle certanly could also be an enlisted eagle with the disc removed.

 

The lack of mohair band would indicate an enlisted hat, certainly but, if I'm seeing the picture correctly, it seems to be made of officer chocolate elastique material rather than enlisted coarse OD wool. It doesn't seem like it would even approximately match an enlisted uniform.

 

It makes me wonder why it is made of chocolate elastique but without mohair?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Eagle certanly could also be an enlisted eagle with the disc removed.

 

The lack of mohair band would indicate an enlisted hat, certainly but, if I'm seeing the picture correctly, it seems to be made of officer chocolate elastique material rather than enlisted coarse OD wool. It doesn't seem like it would even approximately match an enlisted uniform.

 

It makes me wonder why it is made of chocolate elastique but without mohair?

 

 

Often enlisted men bought caps from companies like Society Brand and Imperial that did have that officer-quality top, but lacked the mohair band (so as to comply with regulations). Just like with privately tailored uniforms, those who were willing to spend the big bucks bought their own officer-quality, but definitely enlisted, visors. Its nothing particularly special, the soldier just had a little more money.

 

Beau

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As has been said before the hat is an enlisted hat and you can see the witness mark where the EM cap badge disc was. That being said what size is it? Right now the size is the biggest determiner of price. If it is a large size 7 1/4 to 7 3/8th I would put it at 75 -125 or so. If it is tiny (under size 7) then it would be in the 20-30 dollar range. I don't know where Beau is getting his prices but they are a little low.

 

 

Gary

I am a patch guy but have problems passing by what I think is a good deal.

I picked this chrusher up along with patches and DUI's and am wondering about its value.

I notice that this one has a smaller Eagle than most I have seen, don't know weather this is good or bad.

The sweat band is seperating from the hat, only broken threads not damage to the sweat band.

No markings that I can find. But the Brim is totally flexable, and soft and undamaged.

The prices I see vary greatly for these covers, any idea what this one is worth?

 

The only photo I have right now:

 

post-582-1206382709.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As has been said before the hat is an enlisted hat and you can see the witness mark where the EM cap badge disc was. That being said what size is it? Right now the size is the biggest determiner of price. If it is a large size 7 1/4 to 7 3/8th I would put it at 75 -125 or so. If it is tiny (under size 7) then it would be in the 20-30 dollar range. I don't know where Beau is getting his prices but they are a little low.

Gary

 

I disagree. The price range I quoted is the price I see these caps going for on eBay everyday. Since when have enlisted examples started going for that much?

 

Now, if the owner slapped the cap discussed in this thread up on ebay and describe it as a "true officer's crusher, with a strange mini-eagle variant," then I bet some sucker would pay that kind of money for an enlisted cap. The price you quote Gary is just one I haven't seen. If, however, that is the case today and I'm wrong, great, because I'll be glad to sell off my enlisted caps for that kind of money.

 

Beau

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As has been said before the hat is an enlisted hat and you can see the witness mark where the EM cap badge disc was. That being said what size is it? Right now the size is the biggest determiner of price. If it is a large size 7 1/4 to 7 3/8th I would put it at 75 -125 or so. If it is tiny (under size 7) then it would be in the 20-30 dollar range. I don't know where Beau is getting his prices but they are a little low.

Gary

 

I think that is an item where the price can vary a ton. Remember there were many millions of em caps made, so they are not rare. It is interesting that it is officer material, but it isn't an officer cap. That would be the only reason it would be worth more than $10-$20. A near-mint, run-of-the-mill em cap can be easily found for that. I don't know that the premium for it being made of officer material could be more than double or triple, at the most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please note, I said the price is dependant on size. As far as the base price for a small hat, the cap badge alone will sell for 10 bucks. So 20-30 is what I see on ebay as well. I may live in Carson City but I am not in a vacuum :lol::lol:

 

 

 

 

I disagree. The price range I quoted is the price I see these caps going for on eBay everyday. Since when have enlisted examples started going for that much?

 

Now, if the owner slapped the cap discussed in this thread up on ebay and describe it as a "true officer's crusher, with a strange mini-eagle variant," then I bet some sucker would pay that kind of money for an enlisted cap. The price you quote Gary is just one I haven't seen. If, however, that is the case today and I'm wrong, great, because I'll be glad to sell off my enlisted caps for that kind of money.

 

Beau

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CNY Militaria

I agree with Gary Here, $20-30 minimim, especially since it does have the gaberdine top and pliable visor. Try to find one of these for that price range at a show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...Often enlisted men bought caps from companies like Society Brand and Imperial that did have that officer-quality top, but lacked the mohair band (so as to comply with regulations)....

Not that it made much difference, either then or now, but an "enlisted crusher" did not comply with regulations. According to the Army uniform regulation in force during WWII (AR 600-35), Army Air Forces officers, warrant officers, and flight officers were explicitly permitted to remove the front spring and grommet stiffeners from their service caps. Enlisted men were not permitted to so modify their issue service caps and only by the wildest stretch of imagination could an enlisted man believe that he got around this regulation by modifying a commercial service cap, which did not conform to regulations for enlisted wear in any case. Photographic evidence abounds that wearing "enlisted crushers" was widespread in the USAAF during WWII but comply with regulations they did not. As for buying (or valuing) an "enlisted crusher" today, there is no refuge in the regs, so buyer beware.

 

post-1963-1206476535.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not that it made much difference, either then or now, but an "enlisted crusher" did not comply with regulations. According to the Army uniform regulation in force during WWII (AR 600-35), Army Air Forces officers, warrant officers, and flight officers were explicitly permitted to remove the front spring and grommet stiffeners from their service caps. Enlisted men were not permitted to so modify their issue service caps and only by the wildest stretch of imagination could an enlisted man believe that he got around this regulation by modifying a commercial service cap, which did not conform to regulations for enlisted wear in any case. Photographic evidence abounds that wearing "enlisted crushers" was widespread in the USAAF during WWII but comply with regulations they did not. As for buying (or valuing) an "enlisted crusher" today, there is no refuge in the regs, so buyer beware.

 

post-1963-1206476535.jpg

 

 

I wasn't trying to assert that a crusher conformed to regulations, I was simply stating that an enlisted cap was not supposed to have a mohair band. In any event, I think it has been determined that this cap is not a crusher, merely a private purchase service visor with the stiffner removed.

 

Beau

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another enlisted man's "crusher" cap, though like the one above it does not have a pliable visor and the stiffener is gone, showing that it is not a true enlisted man's crusher.

 

Came with a USAAF overcoat and shirt.

 

crushercap002-2.jpg

crushercap001-2.jpg

crushercap003-1.jpg

crushercap004-2.jpg

 

Did enlisted men who couldn't afford a private purchase cap take out the stiffener in their issued caps in order to have a crusher lookalike?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, I hate to rain on this parade, but I don't see any true crushers in this thread... dunno.gif just a few standard caps with the stiffener removed. If you want a bargain, buy a $20 cap on eBay and pull the stiffener out yourself....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...Guys, I hate to rain on this parade, but I don't see any true crushers in this thread... just a few standard caps with the stiffener removed. If you want a bargain, buy a $20 cap on eBay and pull the stiffener out yourself....

This thread has been very informative; however, I am now confused as to the terminology of the so-called "crusher" service cap (is anyone else?) We seem to have just plain "crushers," officer and enlisted "crusher" variants, a "true crusher" even, and then ordinary service caps from which the stiffening merely has been removed (which seemed to be the Army's solution to this issue, at least with respect to USAAF officers). Perhaps someone who knows the lore will kindly post a "crusher" tutorial for the edification of the uninitiated here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread has been very informative; however, I am now confused as to the terminology of the so-called "crusher" service cap (is anyone else?) We seem to have just plain "crushers," officer and enlisted "crusher" variants, a "true crusher" even, and then ordinary service caps from which the stiffening merely has been removed (which seemed to be the Army's solution to this issue, at least with respect to USAAF officers). Perhaps someone who knows the lore will kindly post a "crusher" tutorial for the edification of the uninitiated here.

 

 

I'll step up to the challenge! I might miss a facet or two, I make no promises!

 

The term "crusher" is often thrown about, and many people interpret it differently. For some, the term represents a service visor (your basic, generic, stiffened visor cap) that has had its stiffner removed, so as to give the cap the "crushed" look. Below is a typical service visor (uncrushed):post-88-1206556893.jpg

 

As we all know, the stiffner was initially removed so as to allow pilots to wear their headphones while wearing their caps. Then, makers like Bancroft, Fly Weight, Dobbs, and Knox, began to make what many of us consider "true crushers." Unlike the service visor "crushers," true crushers have the following features:

 

1. Flexible visor (so much so, that it can literally be rolled up).

2. Flexible frame (again, to allow it to be shoved in a pocket)

 

Here is an example of a "true crusher" (this one was manufactured by Dobbs).

post-88-1206556750.jpgpost-88-1206556763.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crusher Defined (Cont.)

 

Note that one will rarely see "true crushers" with the thick fur felt tops or even some of the thicker wool tops. More often than not, true crushers will incorporate either very light wool or light gabardine tops, like the Bancroft "Flighter" below.

post-88-1206557168.jpg

 

Now, it is true that some service caps have visors similar to crushers like the cap below:

post-88-1206557225.jpg

 

Is it a crusher? Well, nobody knows for sure. It has the crusher visor, but it doesn't have the body that one would expect of a true crusher. I would say, that to be declared a "true crusher," the cap must conform to the basic tenets of a flexible visor and a flexible body. This cap, while it does have that visor, lacks a body that can be crushed up and shoved into a pocket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple of examples.

 

Is this a crusher?

 

post-88-1206557456.jpg

 

Yes, most definitely. It has the single ply leather visor, crushable body, and light gabardine top. I have never come across a true crusher with a visor that is thicker than my bimonthly issue of WWII Magazine. You should be able to - though I wouldn't recommend it for fear of damaging the cap - just stuff that cap in your pocket. If it can't be done, it ain't a true crusher (in my opinion).

 

Alright, another example, is this a crusher?

 

post-88-1206557727.jpg

 

No! This cap is in the crusher style, but it is most definitely a service visor that has been made to look like a crusher. Notice the thick stiff brim, the heavy wool top, and the inflexible frame. Looks like a crusher, but does it act like one?

 

Disclaimer: the terms "crusher," "true crusher," etc., are all open to interpretation. The above definitions are simply my interpretations of the meaning of these ambiguous - and often abused - terms.

 

Beau

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Beau,

 

That's a pretty good example of the crusher. I do agree with you that the term crusher is way overused. There is a crusher and there is a service cap. A crusher is as you described flexible of both body and visor. All other configurations are not crushers. There is no need for the term "true crusher". A hat is either a service cap or a crusher.

 

 

Cheers

Gary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Beau,

 

That's a pretty good example of the crusher. I do agree with you that the term crusher is way overused. There is a crusher and there is a service cap. A crusher is as you described flexible of both body and visor. All other configurations are not crushers. There is no need for the term "true crusher". A hat is either a service cap or a crusher.

Cheers

Gary

 

 

I completely agree Gary.

 

Ricardo: your welcome!

 

 

Beau

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...