I do not like this...
- Thread starter Scratch
- Start date
poniatowski
Well-known member
I was waiting for Tony or one of the others who have one of these in their collection to comment. To me, the scales and cockade look new and the metalwork shows scratches from emery cloth or similar. So, I guess I'm of no help.
Ron
RonThanks Ron. I have a genuine one of these in my collection, and I don't know! To be fair this period is not my area of expertise, and I think there is more variation in the earlier ones, but my thoughts were, yes chinscales and cockade brand new, but spike and spine possibly correct although with horrible fixings and transplanted from another helmet. I don't know wappens at all well but suspect this one may be correct. Liner is obviously brand new and the front peak is an odd shape, but the helmet body and rear peak have a "right" look about them to me.
My thoughts after having viewed this helme a couple of times. For what its worth...I believe the scales to be original although, perhaps not original to this piece. The thin part of the chin strap is a natural colour on the underside as it should be. I also see typical evidence of scuffing on the inside of the straps ( if bidding, I would want extra fotos of the back side of the scales) I have seen that oval buckle on original scales as well. Most times they are square but there are many oval ones as well. Old scales are always thicker as they were stapled to a leather backing rather than card board. The front visor and trim are fine. The leather part of the visor has typically bulged outward due to having to support the weight of the helme for years ie. sitting on the visors
I also like the cut of the rear visor and the gauge of the leather which suggest to me that they are original to the helme. I also see the typical 1860's bell shaped nuts on the inside of the fittings especially the wappen post which is really visable. Nobody makes those today and if they did they would not fit a modern screw post. So from what I can see, there are 2 screw posts and nuts which are original to this helme. It would be nice to have a shot where the liner is pulled out and we could see all of the nuts etc on the inside. Again if bidding I would want that pic added.
Regarding the liner, I do not think that it is new....there is creasing and a fold at the back where the 2 ends would have been stitched together. I also have never seen liner tounges cut into this shape before. However, the liner is only dyed black on the one side which is correct and the sort of herringbone pattern (cross hatching) on the black side that we see is also typical of this era. I make repro liners for hauben and trust me, I would never go for this shape. I have to cut them carefully by hand, a rounded tounge is tough enough. Besides, with this era you could go for square cut ends. So, I would not "write off" this liner so easily. The liner is also sucked tight onto the rim of the helme as it should be. I see no difference in the shape of the liner tounges....this was done by machine and in my opinion is period manufacturing. My 2 cents.
I also like the cut of the rear visor and the gauge of the leather which suggest to me that they are original to the helme. I also see the typical 1860's bell shaped nuts on the inside of the fittings especially the wappen post which is really visable. Nobody makes those today and if they did they would not fit a modern screw post. So from what I can see, there are 2 screw posts and nuts which are original to this helme. It would be nice to have a shot where the liner is pulled out and we could see all of the nuts etc on the inside. Again if bidding I would want that pic added.
Regarding the liner, I do not think that it is new....there is creasing and a fold at the back where the 2 ends would have been stitched together. I also have never seen liner tounges cut into this shape before. However, the liner is only dyed black on the one side which is correct and the sort of herringbone pattern (cross hatching) on the black side that we see is also typical of this era. I make repro liners for hauben and trust me, I would never go for this shape. I have to cut them carefully by hand, a rounded tounge is tough enough. Besides, with this era you could go for square cut ends. So, I would not "write off" this liner so easily. The liner is also sucked tight onto the rim of the helme as it should be. I see no difference in the shape of the liner tounges....this was done by machine and in my opinion is period manufacturing. My 2 cents.
I have four M1860s. The shell, rear visor, crucifix and spike all look OK. The things that don't look quite right on this one are:
-I am not sure about the front visor, it should have squared corners but this one has rounded corners.
-replaced chinscales - if an infantry helmet they should be flat and wide, much wider than later helmet patterns
-studs on the crucifix have been replaced - the domes should be flatter, not round like these ones
-I agree with Brian on the liner - the shape of the tongues is non standard, but the fit and the condition of the leather look good.
Mike
-I am not sure about the front visor, it should have squared corners but this one has rounded corners.
-replaced chinscales - if an infantry helmet they should be flat and wide, much wider than later helmet patterns
-studs on the crucifix have been replaced - the domes should be flatter, not round like these ones
-I agree with Brian on the liner - the shape of the tongues is non standard, but the fit and the condition of the leather look good.
Mike