Hello again!

This time about a M1936 pistol belt, legit marked S. Froelich Co. 1942 and virtually mint, but with a very suspect U.S. stencil. I was wondering if this could be a Russian lend-lease belt with bogus U.S. added, but I can't remember if S. Froelich made belts to be sent to Russia. If memory serves well weren't they all R.M.CO. ? Two other chances: a faded U.S. badly enlighted with a magic-marker or simply a legit U.S. badly inprinted (but I don't think so...). The U could be fairly good but the S looks like upside down. What do you think about?

Thanks. Fausto

pic 2

pic 3

Hi Fausto, this belt as all minties around is 99.99% from former sovietic countries. In the pics there are my minties from the same source and you can see different makers and different big USs. The one with the filled web alloy buckle and the square bottom US is a YALE 1943.

These are three Froelichs. The one without the big US is 1944dtd and shows early style brass buckle.

A little trivia: my minties WWI M1916 holsters are most from Ukraina.

Back side

And this is a 1941 RM.CO. without the big US.

In my opinion, as regards M1936s, the lack of the big US on some belt is an human error and today unscrupolous sellers can easily add a big USMC inside but a big US it's a non sense. It' dont bring money. Au contraire most lend leased tommygun 5 cells pouch are completely unmarked or with only manufacturer markings. Too bad mine shows a fake US on the back.

Thanks Arturo!

Nice pics, nice stuff and nice explanation (about the total non sense of a bogus big US). But what do you think of the font, the style and the general appearance of the U.S. stencil in my pictures?

Thanks Arturo!

Nice pics, nice stuff and nice explanation (about the total non sense of a bogus big US). But what do you think of the font, the style and the general appearance of the U.S. stencil in my pictures?

 

 

It is fine. 100% original, nothing to worry about...

 

 

 

Justin

pic 3

Actually I believe your US is hand drawn thus added to the belt...it doesn't make sense because I think the belt is more desirable without the US.

If the photo is enlarged you can see the lines on the outside of the letters where they were drawn e filled in.

It could be good. Fonts are very same the first aid pouch. I dont think fakers are so scrooge to handwrite the US saving the cost of a rubber stamp. Anyway try to compare the ink used with ink of the period, they cannot duplicate it exactly.

It could be good. Fonts are very same the first aid pouch. I dont think fakers are so scrooge to handwrite the US saving the cost of a rubber stamp. Anyway try to compare the ink used with ink of the period, they cannot duplicate it exactly.

Yes you can duplicate it exactly!

Yes you can duplicate it exactly!

 

Oh my God!!!!

I have examined this against my 20-30?mint and near mint belts. I see nothing to be concerned about here.

I have examined this against my 20-30?mint and near mint belts. I see nothing to be concerned about here.

Delta I don't know if you can enlarge your pictures but if you can you can clearly see where someone either traced a

template then colored in...if you will the letters. An original stamp doesn't leave an outline. Someone has taken a felt tip pen and dotted the interior of the letters. Trust me...I've done this too many times trying to make my stuff better looking. After much trying I have figured out how to do it. I had to go to an Art Store but I did it. Someone has done it to this belt but that person was a rookie.

Oh my God!!!!

Mine too artu d2.

This was a useful thread. I just bought a m1936 belt from my local Army & Navy store. It is marked 1942, I think.

Delta I don't know if you can enlarge your pictures but if you can you can clearly see where someone either traced a

template then colored in...if you will the letters. An original stamp doesn't leave an outline. Someone has taken a felt tip pen and dotted the interior of the letters. Trust me...I've done this too many times trying to make my stuff better looking. After much trying I have figured out how to do it. I had to go to an Art Store but I did it. Someone has done it to this belt but that person was a rookie.

 

Wait, when you say, "better looking", what do you mean exactly? Do you do this with your original gear? Reproductions???

Wait, when you say, "better looking", what do you mean exactly? Do you do this with your original gear? Reproductions???

I have done it on belts and pouches that the stamp was so faded you couldn't see it. As a young collector I wanted a mint belt and when I got a belt I would go in there and re-do the stamp with a simple felt tip pen. Oh yes I ruined many belts. I know how to do it know and can make a stamp "fit" the wear and tear of the belt. However I only do this know if the belt needs a little dressing up.

You do realize that real soldiers were made to re-stencil/make look good any and all their gear upon wear-out and fading? In my service time even the US on my blankets were re-stenciled by me,with a stencil I made. For inspection we had to make everything look as 'new' and good as we could,I repainted my steel pot with Testors Olive Drab about four times,it was a lot lighter colored than all the dark green ones,but everyone who inspected me loved the "old timey helmet". What I'm getting at is sometimes it's not 'faked' redone or something for greed,but because that's what the soldier did to it and I think that makes it a tiny bit more special.....

 

Sparrow

When the importers / exporters started learning that marked Thompson pouches brought nearly twice the amount fake makings started popping up left and right. Fortunately the majority of pouch makers marked their pouches on the inside of the belt loop and so far the fakers have not started taking the pouches apart to mark them there. Based on the Thompson pouches I avoid any US web items imported from the former Soviet Union now, most if not all with US markings are suspect.

You do realize that real soldiers were made to re-stencil/make look good any and all their gear upon wear-out and fading? In my service time even the US on my blankets were re-stenciled by me,with a stencil I made. For inspection we had to make everything look as 'new' and good as we could,I repainted my steel pot with Testors Olive Drab about four times,it was a lot lighter colored than all the dark green ones,but everyone who inspected me loved the "old timey helmet". What I'm getting at is sometimes it's not 'faked' redone or something for greed,but because that's what the soldier did to it and I think that makes it a tiny bit more special.....

 

Sparrow

 

This is not about soldiers doing this. If a soldier did it, it's still original. But if someone did it after the war, then its a problem. There is no way to tell if someone did re mark it after the war or during. But what the guy on this thread is doing, re-doing markings, is terrible. He is ruining the original field gear because he is not a soldier making his gear look like new. And I seriously doubt men in the field were made to re-do their field gear stencils. I think that would be the last thing on their minds. Do you have any proof that soldiers did this, other than yourself? Any documentation that they were made to do rthis in inspections?

 

Sam

This is not about soldiers doing this. If a soldier did it, it's still original. But if someone did it after the war, then its a problem. There is no way to tell if someone did re mark it after the war or during. But what the guy on this thread is doing, re-doing markings, is terrible. He is ruining the original field gear because he is not a soldier making his gear look like new. And I seriously doubt men in the field were made to re-do their field gear stencils. I think that would be the last thing on their minds. Do you have any proof that soldiers did this, other than yourself? Any documentation that they were made to do rthis in inspections?

 

Sam

Sam the fact that he did it is proof!

As for what I did with regards to remarking some of my web gear...when I was a young collector I did a lot of STUPID things with stuff I found. I would bet that there are many, many collectors out there that have remarked stamps on some of ther gear to "make it pretty." I wanted my stuff to look new!

If you are suggesting that I remarked stuff to screw someone then you need to back off. Anytime I sell anything that I have modified in any way the buyer is notified of what I did. I'm not a dealer but do go to some shows and trade/sell some items in an effort to add something else to my collection.

Sam the fact that he did it is proof!

As for what I did with regards to remarking some of my web gear...when I was a young collector I did a lot of STUPID things with stuff I found. I would bet that there are many, many collectors out there that have remarked stamps on some of ther gear to "make it pretty." I wanted my stuff to look new!

If you are suggesting that I remarked stuff to screw someone then you need to back off. Anytime I sell anything that I have modified in any way the buyer is notified of what I did. I'm not a dealer but do go to some shows and trade/sell some items in an effort to add something else to my collection.

 

I guess I just cannot understand remarking web gear. And sir, no. I never said, suggested, implied, or even made a hint that I thought you were remarking your gear for re-sale. All I said was that I thought it was a bad idea that you re-marked your web gear. Nothing more. This is my opinion, and I do realize that its your opinion that that is o.k. to do as well. So lets leave it here without anymore hostility. Have a good day!

 

Sam

I guess I just cannot understand remarking web gear. And sir, no. I never said, suggested, implied, or even made a hint that I thought you were remarking your gear for re-sale. All I said was that I thought it was a bad idea that you re-marked your web gear. Nothing more. This is my opinion, and I do realize that its your opinion that that is o.k. to do as well. So lets leave it here without anymore hostility. Have a good day!

 

Sam

 

Just checking.