GeneralCheese Posted February 20, 2017 Share #1 Posted February 20, 2017 I just bought this, but the more I look at it the more weary I get of the insignia. If it turns out to be fake its no big deal, but I'd like to see what you all think. This is the only picture for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartyMcPouch Posted February 20, 2017 Share #2 Posted February 20, 2017 Hi General! I think paint which is not based on water should show some signs of aging after 70+ years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aef1917 Posted February 20, 2017 Share #3 Posted February 20, 2017 The size of the insignia is pretty consistent with other interwar examples I've seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgtdorango Posted February 20, 2017 Share #4 Posted February 20, 2017 Hows that painted insignia look under magnification?.....mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
everforward Posted February 20, 2017 Share #5 Posted February 20, 2017 My .02: Some of the M1917-ish helmets you see with the 29th emblem painted on them hail from the time of the armistice up to and during the trip home from France in 1919, and these were true M1917 or Brodie helmets issued for the war....hand-done by the individual soldier. Having said this, there is a great deal of photographic evidence from the early 1920s where some units in the 29th Division (Virginia NG) painted their M1917 helmets in this manner and in a uniform fashion, probably under an order or regulation of some kind. It's possible that many of the WW1 M1917s with painted emblems on them were/are post-WW1 examples used in 1920s NG units. As far as M1917A1 helmets go, the 29th used these up into 1940-41 and all of the evidence from period photos so far shows that they had no emblem painted on them. If some units did this, it wasn't very widespread and period pics would be great to support the claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David D Posted February 20, 2017 Share #6 Posted February 20, 2017 The paint scheme looks like the type I have seen post WWII painted. Which wouldn't make much sense being that this helmet would be obsolete by the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manchu Warrior Posted February 20, 2017 Share #7 Posted February 20, 2017 If it helps you can compare your helmet to a WWI 29th helmet that I have in my collection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manchu Warrior Posted February 20, 2017 Share #8 Posted February 20, 2017 Whoops, my apologies I didn't read the entire title and therefore didn't realize that it was an M1917A1 helmet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCheese Posted February 21, 2017 Author Share #9 Posted February 21, 2017 Thanks for all your opinions. I will get closeup pictures of it when I have it in hand. I liked the interaction where the blue paint overlaps the white, as it seemed "right" to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryM3 Posted February 21, 2017 Share #10 Posted February 21, 2017 The gray on the insignia looks awfully white in the photo, does it appear white to everyone else or is it just my computer? If it is indeed white then that is not a good sign. Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
everforward Posted February 21, 2017 Share #11 Posted February 21, 2017 Here are a couple more bits of info to go with this thread.... here is a pic of some soldiers from A Co., 183rd Infantry, Virginia N.G. circa 1922. These soldiers are more or less decked out in the same fashion with painted M1917 helmets. Also included is a pic of a helmet from my own collection which I believe to be a helmet from this era. Not WW1, but post-war National Guard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugme Posted February 21, 2017 Share #12 Posted February 21, 2017 The size of the insignia is pretty consistent with other interwar examples I've seen.Agreed, the larger size was seen between WWI and WWII. Also the examples detailed by everforwards photo also show this bigger size. Can't see why anyone would fake an interwar helmet. I'm thinking it is good but, it's based on only the one photo we have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
everforward Posted February 21, 2017 Share #13 Posted February 21, 2017 Agreed, the larger size was seen between WWI and WWII. Also the examples detailed by everforwards photo also show this bigger size. Can't see why anyone would fake an interwar helmet. I'm thinking it is good but, it's based on only the one photo we have. I think it's important to emphasize the kind of helmet in the OP as well, a M1917A1, which has an emblem painted on it. While we see many M1917s with emblems, not so much with the A1.....not much evidence to suggest they were applying the emblem in the late 1930s up to WW2, although it would be neat to see it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aef1917 Posted February 21, 2017 Share #14 Posted February 21, 2017 If the helmet isn't a McCord m1917a1, it's possible that it was one that was painted in the 1920s, and then fitted with the new liner system c. 1934-1939. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCheese Posted February 22, 2017 Author Share #15 Posted February 22, 2017 If the helmet isn't a McCord m1917a1, it's possible that it was one that was painted in the 1920s, and then fitted with the new liner system c. 1934-1939. It is a McCord Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themick Posted February 22, 2017 Share #16 Posted February 22, 2017 I don't like the insignia on the original post. Note how all the wear is on the white side (approx. 20%) whereas there is not the comparable wear on the blue side. It doesn't make sense. The wear looks contrived. Here is a recent link, http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=attach§ion=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=1192187 which shows some recently discovered 29th div. M1A1 helmets. By the posted picture you can't tell much, but perhaps the poster can include some closeup of the insignia on the helmets. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patches Posted February 22, 2017 Share #17 Posted February 22, 2017 I don't like the insignia on the original post. Note how all the wear is on the white side (approx. 20%) whereas there is not the comparable wear on the blue side. It doesn't make sense. The wear looks contrived. Here is a recent link, http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=attach§ion=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=1192187 which shows some recently discovered 29th div. M1A1 helmets. By the posted picture you can't tell much, but perhaps the poster can include some closeup of the insignia on the helmets. Steve Mick is there a full topic with that link?, when clicked on it just shows a foto of helmets on a desk and on the floor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themick Posted February 22, 2017 Share #18 Posted February 22, 2017 Here you go, Patches. Unfortunately the helmets aren't really discussed in it. http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?/topic/284198-montana-peak-campaign-hats-and-original-packing-material/ Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patches Posted February 22, 2017 Share #19 Posted February 22, 2017 Here you go, Patches. Unfortunately the helmets aren't really discussed in it. http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?/topic/284198-montana-peak-campaign-hats-and-original-packing-material/ Steve Thanks, great topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCheese Posted March 19, 2017 Author Share #20 Posted March 19, 2017 Took me long enough, but here's a closeup. Not a huge fan of it in hand, but I can't say for certain it's bad. The "white" paint is actually gray. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArchangelDM Posted March 19, 2017 Share #21 Posted March 19, 2017 I really am not a fan, the blue shows no wear at all for 70 plus years , also the actual helmet itself looks just painted. The white or grey also has no patina or age staining whatsoever. Either this was put on 70 plus years ago and literally kept in a dark room with no sunlight , use , or it was painted recently. For me this was painted recently with the purpose to sell the helmet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCheese Posted March 19, 2017 Author Share #22 Posted March 19, 2017 I really am not a fan, the blue shows no wear at all for 70 plus years , also the actual helmet itself looks just painted. The white or grey also has no patina or age staining whatsoever. Either this was put on 70 plus years ago and literally kept in a dark room with no sunlight , use , or it was painted recently. For me this was painted recently with the purpose to sell the helmet. Which is very strange considering I picked it up for $100, the same value as if it had not been painted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArchangelDM Posted March 19, 2017 Share #23 Posted March 19, 2017 Which is very strange considering I picked it up for $100, the same value as if it had not been painted. Quandary indeed Well it seems it was not painted for that reason then, What would a painted original go for ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCheese Posted March 19, 2017 Author Share #24 Posted March 19, 2017 One of my main factors in gauging authenticity is what else the person I bought it from sells. In most cases, I snag helmets from people who list them as "Army helmet", and know nothing more, and they have them listed among dishes and old dresses. However, this one was also listed as "Army helmet", but the seller had several other helmets, including an M1917, all properly listed, with correct terms and descriptions. That was my biggest concern, actually. Not the helmet itself, but the way the seller listed it when they obviously knew better. A real 29th helmet like this would easily be several hundred dollars. I'm guessing the seller knew this was a fake, and listed it with no details to avoid an INAD case. Meanwhile, I'm left with a helmet I can make my money back and no more, so no loss there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap Camouflage Pattern I Posted March 20, 2017 Share #25 Posted March 20, 2017 I agree that does sound sketchy, that's a shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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