GeneralCheese Posted June 25, 2016 #1 Posted June 25, 2016 I just got this in, and I thought you all would be interested to see. From the research I have done on the forum, this cover matches the other known examples exactly.
GeneralCheese Posted June 25, 2016 Author #5 Posted June 25, 2016 The only marking on the whole cover. Looks like "36?" . Don't know what the last character is.
GeneralCheese Posted June 25, 2016 Author #6 Posted June 25, 2016 Cinched around the rim. Excuse the rusty M1917, it's all I had lying around.
'Flage Guy Posted June 25, 2016 #7 Posted June 25, 2016 I don't quite know what to say here...absolutely stunned!
sgtdorango Posted June 25, 2016 #8 Posted June 25, 2016 Wow i didnt even see this one!..ebay grab?!....awesome cover.....mike
GeneralCheese Posted June 25, 2016 Author #9 Posted June 25, 2016 Wow i didnt even see this one!..ebay grab?!....awesome cover.....mike Indeed... and for a price I couldn't quite believe.
BILL THE PATCH Posted June 25, 2016 #10 Posted June 25, 2016 Holy smokes, never new they even made them Sent from my XT1031 using Tapatalk
American Graffiti Posted June 25, 2016 #11 Posted June 25, 2016 Hard to believe in such great condition. The fact this stuff is 70+ years old is incredible, and is rare, and is virtually unused, makes this special. Very important in my opinion in the WWII camouflage story, AG
GeneralCheese Posted June 26, 2016 Author #12 Posted June 26, 2016 And just so both threads are linked to anyone searching in the future, here's the other one that a forum member owns: http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?/topic/213372-field-made-m-1917-usmc-frogskin-cover/
blitz67 Posted June 26, 2016 #13 Posted June 26, 2016 Sorry, but I don't like it. I think it was cut from a pair trousers, hence the "36", also the brown thread looks very odd and the stitching looks like it was done by an amateur seamstress(very amateur). Why doesn't the thread on the seam match the thread around the drawstring edge? Total fabrication in my mind.
GeneralCheese Posted June 26, 2016 Author #14 Posted June 26, 2016 Sorry, but I don't like it. I think it was cut from a pair trousers, hence the "36", also the brown thread looks very odd and the stitching looks like it was done by an amateur seamstress(very amateur). Why doesn't the thread on the seam match the thread around the drawstring edge? Total fabrication in my mind. Why then would the other known example have the same marking in the same spot?
blitz67 Posted June 26, 2016 #15 Posted June 26, 2016 Not sure, just want to give you an honest opinion. I could be all wrong. The thread difference really worries me as does the "36", just doesn't seam right. The picture of the size marking really highlights the thread and stitch line, that quality or lack there of would never have been accepted by the military. I don't know.
blitz67 Posted June 26, 2016 #16 Posted June 26, 2016 Does the seam that goes down the center or side of the helmet have cut off cloth stitched to it? It almost looks like a pocket was cut off.
GeneralCheese Posted June 26, 2016 Author #17 Posted June 26, 2016 You could be right about pants being the material donor. There doesn't seem to be any remnants of a pocket. But there are a few threads in the middle of the fabric. Overall it seems like something that was made in a small batch, so the amateur stitching doesn't really worry me.
pump 150 Posted June 26, 2016 #18 Posted June 26, 2016 Glad to see this one here as I didn't catch it till the sold listings and wanted to see some close ups. As the owner of the other shown, although my pics are rather dark now that I see them again, it is a near perfect match. The only difference is mine has the double row stitching, however not chain type, just two rows. Other than that it is the same down to the rolled edge, and twine drawstring (which on mine is very brittle and cannot be tighten without breaking). How and where I obtained mine is in my thread, and I have seen one other one to date. Experimental, field made for the M-1917 for a unit when the camo was first adopted, repro, I can't say for sure as there are no documents and very few photos of these in use during the testing phase. Mine was the first one I had ever seen so picked it up, and so far at least I like it. Blitz, to answer your questions, no, there are no other linings or pieces on mine. It is simply two pieces of Frogskin HBT sewn together in a center seam with a rolled edge for the drawstring. One of the things that I did kinda like about it personally was the rough sewn Greenside seam. Although the Brownside was worn for many battles and seen worn in camp a lot, for collectors, they always like to display these Greenside out. If repro'ed my first instinct anyway would to make that side the "pretty" side for sale. Just a thought. Also from my seller who stated in his story the marine had a small quantity as posted, mine was the only one marked in the group that he kept. It is not field or repro made from a "First" model cover as there are no fold over pleats like seen at the crown of the production covers. Thanks for showing it, very interesting to see another to compare.
pump 150 Posted June 26, 2016 #19 Posted June 26, 2016 As for the "36", not sure exactly but maybe a Lot number for the bolt of fabric? Uniform guys with more experience in large sections of cloth are welcome to chime in as I'm not sure about this. It is very uncommon to see such stampings on a helmet cover, however here is a WWII no foliage slit "First" model cover in my collection that has had the sewn Diamond EGA added in the late 1950's with a similar ink stamp of approximately same size. Here it is "71".
anton67 Posted June 26, 2016 #20 Posted June 26, 2016 Experimental, field made for the M-1917 for a unit when the camo was first adopted Maybe it was something field made. That is my vote so far. Neat piece.
jbassmaster18 Posted June 26, 2016 #21 Posted June 26, 2016 Man!!!! You are on a roll!!! One of these is on my dream list!! I scoured eBay and couldn't find the listing. Care to share what you snagged it for?? Jon
blitz67 Posted June 26, 2016 #22 Posted June 26, 2016 That number "36" is a size stamp, look at the differences in the font and stamping. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but this is a fantasy item, it could be a re-enactor cover or something made to deceive, but it is not military issue, prototype or otherwise. Brad
jbassmaster18 Posted June 26, 2016 #23 Posted June 26, 2016 That number "36" is a size stamp, look at the differences in the font and stamping. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but this is a fantasy item, it could be a re-enactor cover or something made to deceive, but it is not military issue, prototype or otherwise. Brad I 1000% disagree.
Ronny67 Posted June 26, 2016 #24 Posted June 26, 2016 This helmet cover was made in the last 20 years from original WWII USMC fabric. I hope you did not pay much.
ParanormalTrooper Posted June 26, 2016 #25 Posted June 26, 2016 Awesome cover, looks real to me from my limited knowledge.
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