Jump to content

Vietnam 1st Pattern Jungle SF MACV Shirt


m1a2u2
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just picked this up and was pretty happy to find it. An original first pattern Jungle Shirt used by special forces. MACV patch and SF patch. Date is 1963. If anyone knows anything about Sgt. Weeks, let me know. Thanks! 

 

20201114_160204.jpg

20201114_161540.jpg

20201114_161627.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vintageproductions

Again, I get why you are upset with another poster's response, but I am in total agreement with him.

 

It's a real shirt with probably real insignia but they did not come all together like this.

 

But, if you are happy with it that's all that matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, kammo-man said:

Fake


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

3 hours ago, vintageproductions said:

Again, I get why you are upset with another poster's response, but I am in total agreement with him.

 

It's a real shirt with probably real insignia but they did not come all together like this.

 

But, if you are happy with it that's all that matters.

 

I'm not upset with his response, I'm annoyed with his rude, and sarcastic comments with no supporting evidence. It provides nothing of substance. If you think something is fake, explain why. Otherwise it's just obnoxious. I've posted here for years but now I understand why younger members like myself choose to post in different forums. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, kammo-man said:

Fake


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How about explaining to us all WHY you say its fake. that way newer collectors might have an idea what to avoid

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. 100%. Some of the members here are truly experts, but many of us are not. When someone posts an item on here asking about its authenticity and gets a curt reply--like "fake"--all it does is frustrate the original poster and make the respondent appear to be rude and self important. Even some of the slightly more helpful comments--like "original patches but not original to the garment"--don't really help. We "non-experts" want to know things like: "How can one tell that the patches are not original to the shirt?" or "Why is it a fake?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, jim46 said:

Agreed. 100%. Some of the members here are truly experts, but many of us are not. When someone posts an item on here asking about its authenticity and gets a curt reply--like "fake"--all it does is frustrate the original poster and make the respondent appear to be rude and self important. Even some of the slightly more helpful comments--like "original patches but not original to the garment"--don't really help. We "non-experts" want to know things like: "How can one tell that the patches are not original to the shirt?" or "Why is it a fake?"

 

Exactly. Well said. It's hard for me to see how this hobby will live on with younger collectors when these are the types of responses that are given. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well.....it takes time to determine these things from visual inspection. There is something to be said about experience.

 

A curt answer is just that....others may respond differently or with more information, if they care to.

 

The vast majority of times if you get a curt answer, it's most likely because there is something obvious that sets it off. If you look through the archives, you may find it as a repeated defect that you can learn to identify.

 

 

Where did the jacket originate? Where did you buy it?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
Exactly. Well said. It's hard for me to see how this hobby will live on with younger collectors when these are the types of responses that are given. 

You are asking for free information
Have you even payed the forum membership?
Owen


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, River Patrol said:

The vast majority of times if you get a curt answer, it's most likely because there is something obvious that sets it off. If you look through the archives, you may find it as a repeated defect that you can learn to identify.

 

 

I think the point is, if there is something so glaringly obvious that sets it off, collectors who are on this forum to learn would appreciate to know what that obvious thing is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, m1a2u2 said:

 

I think the point is, if there is something so glaringly obvious that sets it off, collectors who are on this forum to learn would appreciate to know what that obvious thing is. 

First: it's from Peterson. While he has great things, he also made a living mocking uniforms up for any paying customer and for museums so that originals wouldn't need to be used. So, he has mastered the mock up.

Second: Stitch lines.....look at them, study them, know the old from the modern

Third: Thread colors....understand what was used and not used and its wear/weathering

Fourth: Wear and weathering in general, the garment insignia is *mint yet the fabric is worn

 

I have said this for years (even decades now), real wear in Vietnam can't be faked....mint uniforms exists, but honest wear can't be reproduced. (It's inverse chaos theory)

 

No pictures of the inside of the jacket?...that's the first place to always look and show pics for verification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vintageproductions
43 minutes ago, m1a2u2 said:

 

I think the point is, if there is something so glaringly obvious that sets it off, collectors who are on this forum to learn would appreciate to know what that obvious thing is. 

What River Patrol is saying is there have been numerous posts over the last 14+ years on how to spot original vs messed with Vietnam uniforms. I think some of the threads are even pinned.

Do a little research and you will see how this thread has been covered over and over and over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to thank the members here who have posted explanations as to why this uniform does not have wartime patches. I will be returning it. Here are the inside pictures:

 

What I've picked up so far from members like spike and others who have pointed out details to look for:

 

-appear to be some ghost stitch lines showing where previous patches were removed. 

-puckering is insufficient on some of the patches (I think?) 

-threads are all the same color. 

 

 

 

20201117_000223.jpg

20201117_000259.jpg

20201117_000335.jpg

20201117_000347.jpg

20201117_000426.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Besides the specifics, I would add this:  Because this stuff is all over the place, a healthy dose of skepticism is necessary if you actually want to collect "the real deal."  

 

What that means is:  If it seems too good to be true, it probably is.  

 

Take the uniform in question.  2nd pattern jungle jackets date to the early part of the VN war.  Ditto for full color patches.  These were FIELD uniforms, worn in dirty and dangerous areas far, far away from laundromats and dry cleaners.  

 

So if the uniform looks like the patches are brand new, unwrinkled, unstained, unfaded (especially the white ones), ask yourself this:  What is the chance that this particular uniform made it unscathed all the way from Vietnam to the present, 55+ years later, in that condition?  Does that seem likely?  Or does it seem more likely that someone got a random set of patches together and sewed them just recently?

 

And BTW I have no problem or issue with someone doing that - as long as they are honest about what it is.  

 

What is deceptive is faking a uniform and then trying to offer it up as "the real deal" with a price to match.  

 

I'm not much of a uniform collector, but I personally would not pay much for a VN or later fatigue or BDU uniform for the simple reason that they are so easy to fake that IMO the "value" of a "genuine" one is really no more (to me) than the value of a fake.  

 

Obviously "value" is a very subjective thing - what has "value" to you might not have value to me and vice versa.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Martinjmpr said:

Besides the specifics, I would add this:  Because this stuff is all over the place, a healthy dose of skepticism is necessary if you actually want to collect "the real deal."  

 

What that means is:  If it seems too good to be true, it probably is.  

 

Take the uniform in question.  2nd pattern jungle jackets date to the early part of the VN war.  Ditto for full color patches.  These were FIELD uniforms, worn in dirty and dangerous areas far, far away from laundromats and dry cleaners.  

 

So if the uniform looks like the patches are brand new, unwrinkled, unstained, unfaded (especially the white ones), ask yourself this:  What is the chance that this particular uniform made it unscathed all the way from Vietnam to the present, 55+ years later, in that condition?  Does that seem likely?  Or does it seem more likely that someone got a random set of patches together and sewed them just recently?

 

And BTW I have no problem or issue with someone doing that - as long as they are honest about what it is.  

 

What is deceptive is faking a uniform and then trying to offer it up as "the real deal" with a price to match.  

 

I'm not much of a uniform collector, but I personally would not pay much for a VN or later fatigue or BDU uniform for the simple reason that they are so easy to fake that IMO the "value" of a "genuine" one is really no more (to me) than the value of a fake.  

 

Obviously "value" is a very subjective thing - what has "value" to you might not have value to me and vice versa.  

 

Martin,

 

That is very helpful and thank you for taking the time to write up that explanation. I agree with you on the patching thing. For the record, the person I bought this from is taking them and back and did not claim they were originals when he sold them me. He has been very fair and helpful with me since I was a kid. It's mainly an issue of him having too many uniforms to keep track of. Regardless, thanks to help members like you provided me, this has been a learning experience getting into Vietnam uniforms. 

 

One question though, isn't this a 1st pattern jungle jacket?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, m1a2u2 said:

 

One question though, isn't this a 1st pattern jungle jacket?

 

Not sure as I'm not an expert on these.  I had thought the first two jungle jacket patterns had the exposed buttons but maybe it was only the first pattern.  

 

Either way, my point is that this design of jacket dates to very early in the VN war, circa 1964 - 66.  So figure the odds that a jacket this old would have survived intact for 55+ years with patches that literally look like they were put on yesterday.  Is it impossible?  No, but it's not likely either.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahhhh it is always good to know what you are buying. These uniforms looks like put together from a 1000 miles away, even for me who stopped collected VN stuff almost 15 years ago... I hope you did't paid for it too much...

 

Cheers,

Jerry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 11/20/2020 at 6:21 PM, m1a2u2 said:

 

One question though, isn't this a 1st pattern jungle jacket?

 

Yes, this is a 1st Pattern Jungle jacket.  What distinguishes the 1st Pattern jackets is the exposed buttons.  These were discontinued because brush and twigs could get entangled in the button holes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/20/2020 at 6:09 PM, Martinjmpr said:

.... These were FIELD uniforms, worn in dirty and dangerous areas far, far away from laundromats and dry cleaners.  

 

So if the uniform looks like the patches are brand new, unwrinkled, unstained, unfaded (especially the white ones), ask yourself this:  What is the chance that this particular uniform made it unscathed all the way from Vietnam to the present, 55+ years later, in that condition?  Does that seem likely?  Or does it seem more likely that someone got a random set of patches together and sewed them just recently?

 

 

 

Martin,

 

I agree with your call for skepticism, but I disagree with you on one point.

 

Many of the surviving Vietnam era jungle jackets that you see, especially the fully badged one, never went to the field. 

 

What veterans have told me is that they kept one, maybe two, jackets at their base camp for formations, award ceremonies and off post time.  These uniforms are typically in fairly good condition.  They may even have been pressed, laundered or starched.

 

There are exceptions.  Some vets may have squirreled away a jacket they wore in a particular battle.  As you have noted, such uniforms show the wear and tear.

 

Most of the uniforms that were actually worn in combat were most likely trashed.  I had one vet tell me they rarely added insignia to them.  After a couple of days on patrol they were often fairly ripped up.  He noted a helicopter would bring in fresh cloths every few days and they would simply discard the worn and beaten ones.

 

However, skepticism is fully justified when the patches on the uniform look bright new and shiny while the uniform is worn and faded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/16/2020 at 11:23 PM, m1a2u2 said:

I want to thank the members here who have posted explanations as to why this uniform does not have wartime patches. I will be returning it. Here are the inside pictures:

 

What I've picked up so far from members like spike and others who have pointed out details to look for:

 

-appear to be some ghost stitch lines showing where previous patches were removed. 

-puckering is insufficient on some of the patches (I think?) 

-threads are all the same color. 

 

 

20201117_000335.jpg

 

20201117_000426.jpg

 

m1a2u2:

 

I am sorry I am late to the conversation.  As you have noted, this uniform shows the classic signs of tampering.

 

 

What I've picked up so far from members like spike and others who have pointed out details to look for:

 

-appear to be some ghost stitch lines showing where previous patches were removed. 

-puckering is insufficient on some of the patches (I think?) 

-threads are all the same color. 

 

The Airborne tab is a good example.  There was one there before, but it has been replaced. 

It looks like there may have been an SF arrowhead as well, but this has also been replaced.

 

The sleeve rank has been replaced.  This is not unusual, but in this case this individual has been advance two grades above E-6, 

rather than just moving up one grade.  (It looks like there was previous rank for SP/4 and E-5, which was probably legit.)

 

The US Army tape has been replaced, but it would be odd that it would be replaced with a color tape.  These uniforms were issued

with a black and gold tape, and if they were replaced, it would have been with a subdued tape.

 

Like the jump in rank, the jump wings have been replaced, going from Basic to Master, while Senior would have been the next

logical progression.  Both the jump wings and CIB barely make an impression on the backside of the cloth inside the shirt.

 

The MACV right shoulder patch also does not look like it has been on the uniform very long, as it also does not leave much of

an impression into the cloth of the jacket.

 

What puzzles me is why someone would go to all this work on a jungle jacket with that nasty stain on the front pocket.  Most

repro artists would have used a clean uniform.  If they intended to age it, they would have aged the entire jacket.  Repeated washings

with bleach would help along with pressing with an iron and sun fading.

 

There is one honorable explanation for this uniform... sometimes when you see them like this they were made for wear by a veteran

at reunions.  There is no way to ascertain that on this one.  Sometimes you will find them with some kind of veteran's pin or association 

patch that will give you a clue.

 

Good luck with your future collecting.  The Vietnam era is very colorful, and can be rewarding to a collector.  But starting out,

you need to maintain a lot of skepticism.  Take some time to page through the threads on this Forum and develop an eye for 

what is real and what is not.  And don't be in a hurry to buy the high dollar stuff.  Walk away unless you are sure of what you are looking at.

 

 

 

 

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...