Rooster, Those are exactly my thoughts. A while back I posted a number of period photo's of damaged helmets where the guy survived the impact along with war damaged helmets that survive today. The impact blowing off a chunk of paint is a common event. That patina is very hard to fake and on and on and on.

I was told that the ordnance marks seem to disappear after Robert McNamara closed down the Springfield Armory.  I don't have any collaborative evidence to go along with that, but the time frames seem close.

I've tried image searching along with online articles/galleries with back mark info.  Haven't gotten my hands on one of the ID books yet.

RIP

Hi Folks:  Recently picked up but I don't know the timeframe when these were worn.  The "MP" brassard is on nylon/rayon material with Velcro.   Thanks for looking 

I like the look of the helmet. I think the helmet at least is definetly legit as that kind damage is hard to do as a civilian as it looks like a massive piece of shrapnel or a solid rifle shot? The wear patterns match up around the destroyed area. If it was damaged post war the area around it wouldn’t show the white outlining of either sea use/sun bleaching Common on with navy helmets. I am fairly skeptical of the liner as like Nooby said it would show more damage, but I think the shell alone it good just with a replaced liner as the OV one would have been trashed beyond belief.

The rust marks on the liner seem to match up to the rust in the steel... ? The entrance hole seems larger than a rifle bullet... Once again, thats just how it looks to me? There is a good amount of space between the dome of the liner  and the inside dome area of the steel....

I could be completely wrong and I might be over thinking this but in my opinion the story is probably bogus as this was probably an old beat up surplus shell that someone shot then added a liner in order to increase the value of what many people would otherwise consider to be a candidate for a restoration project with little value (which kind of depends on whenever this might've been done). Another possibility is that they put the liner in it before shooting it but they shot it while it was sitting on something so the fixed loops lifted the shell up slightly separating the liner and the shell so the liner wasn't actually pressed against the shell separating it just enough for the bullet to slide against the liner without deforming/cracking it. But what are the odds that while someone is presumably wearing it a bullet penetrates the shell then somehow has enough room to slide against the liner and exit out the rear decimating the area yet barely damaging the liner and only in one small area. I would expect deformation or cracks/a hole (maybe not cracks but even some loose threads) around the impact zone on the liner. The addition of a repro headband and neckband is also a red flag in my opinion as the fact that the seller neglected to mention that they are repros indicates to me that they weren't the first to own it since they were added and probably don't know much about helmets so they were probably told a fairy tale by the previous owner or that they do know that they are repros and they added them to increase the value.   I just don't think that a bullet would've had enough room to penetrate the shell without causing more damage to the liner if it was on someone's head. And obviously anyone can buy an old beat up shell that some wouldn't see much value in and shoot it and sand the liner to increase their value.   Alternatively the shell could've already been shot when someone got it and then they got a somewhat cheap liner (for liners from WW2 anyways) from 1944-45 and sanded it to match the damage.

Thank you, it put an end to a dry month of wing hunting. 

Sad news...read of his passing when posted on FB. Prayers and blessing to friend and family