M2 Helmet Lot Number

[jkash23686]

While its foolish to think you have seen everything, its also foolish to just ignore the data that has been gathered by many people for many years as well as the way these were constructed by looking at the iron clad M2s. Like anything production there were definitely anomalies. But for me personally this just has too many for me to look past and ever want it on my shelf. I could be wrong sure, but without anything other than the idea that it might be possible, I'm still not ready to say this thing is legit.

[Ronny67]

I agree J this one needs an in hand inspection before it could be said either way.

[doyler]

I can agree that data shouldn't be ignored.

 

But if the data isnt backed up by production records or contract records is it data or someone's theory thats being accepted because a chart in a book was published solely based on the idea that numbers represent a exact time period of manufacture?

 

Not trying to go off track or start anything up but when looking at production of US military weapons. There is specific time frames parts and drawing numbers that are recorded and known to positively put a production piece between a certain month and a certain date you can have a serial number of a receiver that was made in July of 43 on a M1 Garand rifle but the barrel maybe dated September of 1943 which is totally acceptable because of the type of production and what was being done at the time. When these items were being assembled the newer barrels were on top of the pile and as they got lower they run into older dates so you are going to find variation in the dates of barrels that were assembled to receivers that can run between on an average of three months one way or the other so you may have a six-month variation. My point is these are all trackable and verifiable production anomalies. Why isn't there this kind of information on production of helmets when there were millions of them made?

 

I'm not discounting the number on the inside of the helmet having something to do with production But without any hard evidence so far that I have yet to see anyone really publish are these numbers really anything more than a control number or a lot number or are they an inspectors number this is all I'm trying to get to the bottom of. I think the helmet we are talking about in this discussion really warrants a good hard look we already have a member here who I know personally and I trust his opinion as far as seeing something in hand. And as far as I know him and as well as I know him he has probably handled more helmets and bought and sold more helmets than anyone else I have ever known. There are always going to be those little items that give us pause to say hmmmm....

 

I agree we should not Discount any information as it is foolish but its also foolish to discount something coming from a source(family) whisking marketing the helmet as a super user rare airborne M2.

 

I can speak from experience on something similar to this matter I had a blood order document that was actually attributed and given to one of the top 3 German Nazis of World War 2. It came right from the daughter of a captain in the 36th division. All of the local super gurus around here discounted it and dismissed it because someone of my stature could not have absolutely in a hundred years found something like this and it was not original. I was just looking for information I was not shouting from the tops of the mountains that it was original This item had been brought home by the veterans.He had the item framd and hung in his office until 1972 when he retired and several years later he passed away and the daughter had all of this in storage when she became seriously ill she decided to part with some of her father's things. My point is all of these experts should have known it was original.They would speculate and say the document should have gold Laurel leaves on it or the document should have this or that. When I asked them if they had ever owned one or if there was a book on one or if they had ever handled one to each and every one the reply was no but this is what it should have. How can you make a blanket statement like that when you have never even owned one let alone handled an original document but yet they were dismissing something based on little or no information and because I owned it..These experts have been regarded as the pillars of the third Reich collecting community.Max Certified and blessed.I even contacted two separate individuals who are world know for dealing in high end TR items.Sent photos etc just to be ignored in the end and not even the courtesy of a simple reply.Their loss.There were a couple of serious buyers but one wasnt open or willing to share information.The other verified it as the real deal.

If I had been foolish to discount the families connection and story by doubting the details and circumstances just because the item didnt fit all the boxes that were perceived there would have been a significant document lost to time.

 

Im just thinking that there is possibly a lot to learn one way or the other here with this helmet and it maybe one to reset the record or what is known.Im of an open mind and havent seen everything and see new things come to light every day.

[aef1917]

Yes, lot numbers could be traced to specific periods of manufacture.

 

[doyler]

Thats great info Aef.

[Persian Gulf Command]

I am very much in support to what doyler has stated. As this discussion started to become provocative it reminded me of the rendered opinions and arguments that arise on the TR side of militaria. I believe that we all become experts when we possess a "no doubt" "one looker" as the characteristics of that item's manufacture and materials become an exemplar of an authentic piece. The trouble sometimes arises when we see another example that has variations to ours and then its off to the races about opinions. I had much experience in the field of numismatics long ago and as with any collectable the experts often rendered their opinion based on what they owned and its particular characteristics then offering little support for an item that did not match the one in their collection.

 

This would be my hope for this discussion, in order for it to become more definitively an addition to our knowledge of the M2 helmet. I acknowledge that some of these points have already been stated by the other participants here.

 

1. The straps: The owner needs to post detailed images of the both sides of the snaps. and all the bar-tacking. I feel that if it can be determined that the straps are authentic U.S. Airborne and original to the bales then we would be moving in the right direction. If the straps are not real the lot number of the helmet will not matter as much anymore.

 

2. If someone has a double digit or otherwise M1 with an "O" prefix letter next to the numbers, we can then say that this may be a 66 numbered M1 shell.

 

3. What is the opinion about the paint on the shell and how does it look around the bail welds on both the inside and outside? If the paint is original and was applied after the welds were finished then it would appear the bales must also be original to the helmet. Perhaps this will nullify the importance of the shape of the feet.

 

4. Do the "dimples" on the rim, where the bales were applied, look as they should? If the helmet is a 66 then there should be pronounced dimples as this helmet seems to have. However, I do believe that by the time a 660 M1 was being produced this feature on the rim was no longer seen. Does anyone have an M1 in the 600 number range with these dimples still evident?

 

What is happening here is the owner has an item that may not be fitting into the norm for M2's. However, if he does have a new authentic exemplar we may be witnessing the creation of a new expert in M2's, who will now begin rendering his opinion to the discussions. I have a good "feeling" about this item (I am not an Expert). Although, if someone has created this helmet as a post war copy and surrounded it in a rather convincing story, the risk one takes in acquiring an M2 may have just become to severe. Honestly, that's why I stopped taking the risk with TR items a long time ago because it just became too frustrating. You could get an item out of a vets footlocker and still not be able to realize a value due to the variations of opinions rendered by the experts. These type of items truly became your "personal prized" possessions because you could never convince the members of the collecting community what you believed.

 

I hope this can be resolved eventually. BTW this is a great discussion, which reaffirms the USMF value to the Historical/Collectors community.

[Bugme]

I have offered to visually inspect this helmet for the owner and he has stated that he'd like that however, the distance between us is over 1000 miles which makes this difficult. I know he could ship it and insure it but, if you were the owner would you ship it to someone you don't know?... me either.

What I will state is this:
1) I have not made a decision yet one way or the other.

2) Manufacturing anomalies occurred and have not been discounted here concerning the feet.

3) Known M-2's currently in a *database do not go as low as 66-O(which predates known manufacture of M-2's and the O suffix is also not known) and 660 can be eliminated since it is far past the production dates of M-2's. *This database is still being complied and should by no means be considered complete.

4) Period Documentation which has been presented here appears to exclude these from known production dates but,could this helmet have been from a test run by McCord?

5) And then there is the chinstrap photo's which we still need.

In the end, if we can sufficiently answer these questions, we will be much better suited to have "Proof" rather than "Conjecture". This helmet could be a game changer so, we can't rush into anything here. By the way, I am pinning this thread.

[Ronny67]

Thanks for pinning this Scott.

 

It will help teach those who have yet to learn and make it harder for fakers to be successful when people are armed with the right knowledge.

[thorin6]

From a total amateur in this field I have two questions if they are not considered too ignorant.

First, do all McCord helmets have heat lot numbers that are numeric-alpha (35A) or are there some that are just numeric (35)?

Second, are the stamps used to put the heat lot numbers on the helmet individual (i.e. a separate stamp for each number and letter) or are they like a roll stamp where they align with each other before being stamped?

I ask the second question because 99 (two digits) is right before 100 (three digits). If the roll-stamping machinery was being changed to add a third digit, but McCord had not used up the 99 heat lot at the time of the change, could some helmets end up being stamped with a zero before the 99?

[frankie]

I tried taking pics of the back side of the snaps and had a really difficult time. My camera has laser focus and will not work. I tried my iphone which does focus thru the lens and was able to get a few pics but nothing really clear. The markings are UNITED CARR. I'll try for a better pic.

[doyler]

I am very much in support to what doyler has stated. As this discussion started to become provocative it reminded me of the rendered opinions and arguments that arise on the TR side of militaria. I believe that we all become experts when we possess a "no doubt" "one looker" as the characteristics of that item's manufacture and materials become an exemplar of an authentic piece. The trouble sometimes arises when we see another example that has variations to ours and then its off to the races about opinions. I had much experience in the field of numismatics long ago and as with any collectable the experts often rendered their opinion based on what they owned and its particular characteristics then offering little support for an item that did not match the one in their collection.

 

This would be my hope for this discussion, in order for it to become more definitively an addition to our knowledge of the M2 helmet. I acknowledge that some of these points have already been stated by the other participants here.

 

1. The straps: The owner needs to post detailed images of the both sides of the snaps. and all the bar-tacking. I feel that if it can be determined that the straps are authentic U.S. Airborne and original to the bales then we would be moving in the right direction. If the straps are not real the lot number of the helmet will not matter as much anymore.

 

2. If someone has a double digit or otherwise M1 with an "O" prefix letter next to the numbers, we can then say that this may be a 66 numbered M1 shell.

 

3. What is the opinion about the paint on the shell and how does it look around the bail welds on both the inside and outside? If the paint is original and was applied after the welds were finished then it would appear the bales must also be original to the helmet. Perhaps this will nullify the importance of the shape of the feet.

 

4. Do the "dimples" on the rim, where the bales were applied, look as they should? If the helmet is a 66 then there should be pronounced dimples as this helmet seems to have. However, I do believe that by the time a 660 M1 was being produced this feature on the rim was no longer seen. Does anyone have an M1 in the 600 number range with these dimples still evident?

 

What is happening here is the owner has an item that may not be fitting into the norm for M2's. However, if he does have a new authentic exemplar we may be witnessing the creation of a new expert in M2's, who will now begin rendering his opinion to the discussions. I have a good "feeling" about this item (I am not an Expert). Although, if someone has created this helmet as a post war copy and surrounded it in a rather convincing story, the risk one takes in acquiring an M2 may have just become to severe. Honestly, that's why I stopped taking the risk with TR items a long time ago because it just became too frustrating. You could get an item out of a vets footlocker and still not be able to realize a value due to the variations of opinions rendered by the experts. These type of items truly became your "personal prized" possessions because you could never convince the members of the collecting community what you believed.

 

I hope this can be resolved eventually. BTW this is a great discussion, which reaffirms the USMF value to the Historical/Collectors community.

Very well stated.

[Bugme]

I tried taking pics of the back side of the snaps and had a really difficult time. My camera has laser focus and will not work. I tried my iphone which does focus thru the lens and was able to get a few pics but nothing really clear. The markings are UNITED CARR. I'll try for a better pic.

 

Nickle plated United Carr would be what we are looking for on a legit A/B helmet.

[Burning Hazard]

Found this one on eBay, FS SB with heat stamp 9580 where I'm guessing the "0" is stamped incorrectly and should be a "C" as that would fit in the FS SB ranage before the seams change to rear at 1000's

 

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/US-M1-Helmet-shell-WW-2-Original-paint-and-chinstraps-McCord-manufacture-/332029537137?hash=item4d4e80ab71:g:UvsAAOSwKOJYJm-K

 

[doyler]

Pat

 

Thats a great example but it leeds to the question does last number/letter a mistake in this case or is it always a letter and do these really correspond to a date system or a batch or control system that was random

[Bugme]

Frankie sent me some photo's of the straps and snaps. Bartacking concerns me. So, now the peanut gallery gets to speak.

[jkash23686]

Those bar tacks look a bit sloppy to me. Also that thread looks be be green. I just checked my M2s as well as about 20 posted on another forum all have OD3 thread.

[Persian Gulf Command]

I must agree, the bar-tacks does not look as it should for WW2 chinstraps in color of the thread and the weave. The straps may be for an Airborne helmet but they look post period applied. Josh, your initial suspicions would appear to be correct.

 

Any opinions on the snaps now that we can see a back?

[Bugme]

I alluded to this when I posted the photo's, the bartacking looks hand done not machine done but, the snaps look right. This thing is a head spinner.

[doyler]

Any one seen a number thats incomplete on a M2...?

 

It appear as 21○B.

 

The last digit looks like an incomplete number 9 or or small zero thats even with the numeral one.

[Bugme]

I'm kinda surprised by the lack of comments now that the straps and snaps have been posted. Are we really getting anywhere on this helmet or have many just given up trying to determine what this is?

[jkash23686]

To me this has too many things wrong with it for me to consider it legit. The straps aren't factory applied, and don't look like any period repairs I've ever seen, the feet on those loops still look wrong to me, and it feels like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole when trying to explain the heat stamp at this point.

Again all just my opinions but there are just too many doubts.

[Burning Hazard]

I'm guessing it's one of those "arte-fakes" that used to be offered on different sites; you know the one-only for sale at several hundred dollars, which a person put a lot of work into using original parts. While there are easy to spot fakes, I've been seeing some really scary fakes coming out of Europe and they are getting more sophisticated, just look at the TR helmets!

 

I also realized that you can still buy vintage United Carr snaps along with a vintage press, you can still buy original chinstrap webbing and chinstrap hardware etc.

 

If someone did create this, maybe they purposely used a 660 stamped shell as a collector deterrent instead of stamping "repro" or "fake" with a Dremel?

 

Just some thoughts

 

Pat

[doyler]

I was able to hold this helmet in hand this weekend and must say the chinstraps, bar tacking and snaps look correct. If the OP could post the manufacture mark on the back of the snap, that would be a big help in clearing the originality of the straps. The overall age and wear of the helmet looks natural and not forced or contrived. The bails are bent back toward the rim which creates a different photographic effect than some of the original feet photos posted that have the bails bent in towards the liner. If I'm not mistaken, new old stock chinstaps are not long enough to create convincing airborne chinstraps. I also saw the estate sale price tag, so the buyer is not out anything, whatever the final verdict is. If I was at the estate sale, I would have bought it in a heartbeat and not thought twice about it. The elongated foot gives me some heartburn, but the main issue for me is the heat stamp number. That will be a tough obstacle to overcome without some new manufacturing information coming to light.

 

Mike has held this in hand.Hes made some great observations.

 

I still like it and Its hard to discount the story of ownership.The number may be an anomoly but what purpose would someone have in recreating or going to the effort of getting a fake to put it on a sale and sell it for the price of a common liner?If this is a scenario your at least going to sell it for a couple hundred or start higher.The person who sold this was the family member of a KIA.The question is why would they go to the point to even have a helmet or get one as a tribute to the deceased family member?I have known hundreds of vets and many had helmets later in life and non were even concerned the helmet wasnt WW2 era.To them a helmet was a helmet.It make no sense and if this was done it would have been marketed as a rare airborne helmet attributed to an Airborne officer.We see people salting in items to on line sales and estate tag sales all the time and bidding wars erupt.Its a new game.I dont see that in this case.

 

Also people will say that helmets werent brought or sent home.Not true either.I know of an officers helmet that was left in a local house during the war.The people rented out the upstairs open attic as a bording room to this officer and he was there about a month.When he left the helmet was left behinde.The helmet remained in the same home here until the people passed away and the daughter then lived in the home.She got older and then sold the helmet about three years ago.

 

I have an airborne helmet that was personally handed to me by the vet in his attic here locally.He served with the 17th Airborne then later with the 504th or 505th and did demonstration jumps here state side for bond or victory tours.He later served during the Korean war with the 2nd Infantry division.The helmet I have is his from the tours and has the full color 82nd Airborne patches painted on each side of the helmet.

 

I hope Mike will add some more info if he can as he is the only member besides the owner who has held it in hand and I hope the lack of comments from the owner hasnt come from being discouraged.

[frankie]

Unfortunately the pics that I added after processing with Picasa did not accurately show the true color of the helmet or chinstrap. I realized this when reviewing the pics and comparing those pics to the subject. Frank

[doyler]

M2 I mentioned with the odd number.