Any Info On This Shako ?

pickelhauben

pickelhauben

Well-known member
Hey Guys ,

I had this listed in the Shako post but there was not a lot of response so I will list it here.

The price is daunting but it is a cool shako.

I have not seen this in any of my books.

There is a trim band that hides all of the stitching that is missing . But that can be fixed.

Is this a made up shako ?

Thoughts
https://www.weitze.com/militaria/08/Braunschweig_Tschako_fuer_Mannschaften_im_Infanterie_Regiment_Nr_92_Fuesilier_Bataillon__272308.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
Extra Wappen holes, mixed types of thread on stitching. I'm very careful about anything with a Totenkopf. In 1888 did the first battalion of the 92nd wear a shako? Looks like a Model 1888 Preußen Landsturm Tschako that someone put a Totenkopf on. I do not know, hopefully someone on the board does, but this piece does ask a lot of questions.
 
Ask Tony Schnurr
he is the Braunschweig expert
plus he has made a life study of the Totenkopft

get him to view this helmet
if he has not checked here
email him

Steve
 
Brauschweig Infanterie wore the M1860 Tschako (worn from 25 Nov 1872 until it was to be replaced by Pickelhauben effective 18 March 1886). However, only the Leib Btln worn the Totenkopf. 2. Kompanie would have worn the Braunschweig star in cast tin on the correct matching Kepi or Tschako. 1888 date is fine, as the IR92 was not completely outfitted with Preußen pattern uniforms until 1896.

Here is a sad fact: when Braunschweig switched to Pickelhaubes, they sold 2,162 Tschako to the Preußen War Ministry to be converted for Jäger Battalions :pale: That's probably what this one is.

The cast Zinc Totenkopf appears original but this is certainty a re-built Tschako in my opinion. Not withstanding that, why would anyone want it? The leather center strip is missing, the front visor is missing and replaced with a Pickelhaube visor minus the trim, and the entire thing was very poorly re-sewn with thick waxed thread by trained monkey. Poorly trained. It's awful.
 
Tony without Kaiser said:
Brauschweig Infanterie wore the M1860 Tschako (worn from 25 Nov 1872 until it was to be replaced by Pickelhauben effective 18 March 1886). However, only the Leib Btln worn the Totenkopf. 2. Kompanie would have worn the Braunschweig star in cast tin on the correct matching Kepi or Tschako. 1888 date is fine, as the IR92 was not completely outfitted with Preußen pattern uniforms until 1896.

Here is a sad fact: when Braunschweig switched to Pickelhaubes, they sold 2,162 Tschako to the Preußen War Ministry to be converted for Jäger Battalions :pale: That's probably what this one is.

The cast Zinc Totenkopf appears original but this is certainty a re-built Tschako in my opinion. Not withstanding that, why would anyone want it? The leather center strip is missing, the front visor is missing and replaced with a Pickelhaube visor minus the trim, and the entire thing was very poorly re-sewn with thick waxed thread by trained monkey. Poorly trained. It's awful.
Click to expand...

I will call that a killing...
 
Tony without Kaiser said:
Brauschweig Infanterie wore the M1860 Tschako (worn from 25 Nov 1872 until it was to be replaced by Pickelhauben effective 18 March 1886). However, only the Leib Btln worn the Totenkopf. 2. Kompanie would have worn the Braunschweig star in cast tin on the correct matching Kepi or Tschako. 1888 date is fine, as the IR92 was not completely outfitted with Preußen pattern uniforms until 1896.

Here is a sad fact: when Braunschweig switched to Pickelhaubes, they sold 2,162 Tschako to the Preußen War Ministry to be converted for Jäger Battalions :pale: That's probably what this one is.

The cast Zinc Totenkopf appears original but this is certainty a re-built Tschako in my opinion. Not withstanding that, why would anyone want it? The leather center strip is missing, the front visor is missing and replaced with a Pickelhaube visor minus the trim, and the entire thing was very poorly re-sewn with thick waxed thread by trained monkey. Poorly trained. It's awful.
Click to expand...

Hello ,

Thanks for your input . I have never seen a shako like this so that is why I posted it here. I did notice of course that the front bill does not have the bead on the brim . At first this put a red flag up for me but in my zeal of finding this piece and some other shakos not having a bead I thought that this could be OK .
Not having the cover trim that hides the stitching you are able to see the stitching. This does in fact reveal CORRECT STITCHING . These old shakos had the bills sewn on with HUGE horizontal stitching then the trim piece was sewn on along with the liner. That trim piece is missing as you can see.

After your needed comments I went back and looked at the helmet again and noticed something majorly wrong. There is a slight tracing of a line on the edges of both bills . To me this tracing would be caused by a visor trim . Possibly from a fireman's helmet ( some had visor trim on the front and both visors ). Then looking closer this is not a line but little dots stamped in from a machine just like my 1873 Wurtt shako . But my Wurtt is missing the front bill. So no help there.

So having the same dots on the back bill could it be plausible that some manufactuers included this detail on a non beaded front visor ? I do not know . But if a red flag goes up one needs to pay attention.

I am going to pass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top