My helmets.

They look great to me but as above, I have very limited knowledge of these types of helmets.
 
I have also doubts...
The eagle of the enlisted men‘s helmet is a copy and the chinscale seems to be just 2 layered leather straps.
The cockades of the tombac helmet look like fake too and the Trim of the rear visor is too wide. The clover leaf rosette of the chinscales are missing the details of the original ones…. I would say all 3 helmets are reproductions.
 
Last edited:
This is a good example Amy. It shows clearly shaped half-balls around the crosses, but on the 2 helmets these are somewhat like round half-balls.
 
Not much to add as I have no knowledge of this type of helmets, however the maker's mark and year looks like they were punched letter by letter, number by number, and the resulting marking is improperly aligned, which I would not expect from a professional manufacturer.
 
Thanks for your help. Seriously, all three are 100% replicas? This "tombac" itself seemed suspicious to me, but maybe at least the padding is good? The serial cuirassier was cleaned mechanically, similarly to the eagle and probably straightened, maybe that's why it does not look very good, there is the manufacturer's signature on the fitting. The officer, the one in the middle in the photo, if I identify correctly, is a Model 1905 for Regimenter JzP 8-13, matte finish on the base of the spike. Does anyone have this model in their collection, I'd love to see what the original looks like? I enclose some photos of details, maybe they will shed new light :). Forgive me if I take up Your time unnecessarily.IMG20230328190950.jpgIMG_20230330_194352.jpgIMG_20230328_142530.jpgIMG_20230330_193429.jpgIMG_20230330_192045.jpgIMG_20230330_191056.jpgIMG_20230330_191159.jpgIMG_20230220_174558.jpg
 
What’s the verdict on PawelGPysz’s helmets?

I’ve never purchased any of these types because I have no knowledge and usually a bit scared.
 
This is really a difficult case. I think some parts are original but most are fake.
  • The enlisted men helmet is a complete replica in my opinion. The shell of a M89 enlisted men’s helmet would have no vertical rib on the back and the fluted spike is not correct. The eagle may come from Prussian-Glory.
  • The tombac helmet is also fake. Officer helmets would have a vertical rib on the back and the rear visor would be just 1 sheet with 2 horizontal ribs pressed in to make it look like 3 sheets. Further the trim is too wide. I think the eagle could be an original part (but for enlisted men) and the chinscales need a closer look.
  • The polished shell of the officer’s steel helmet looks good at first glance, but normally it was used only 1 pin in the center to fix the upper trim of the front visor and I think the liner is not of the quality of the old days. The decorative stitches in the center are uneven and the stitches connecting the fabric to the sweatband are far too wide for me. These were almost invisible at the time. The eagle and the chinscales on the detail photo look original. But overall I have a very bad feeling on this helmet, because of the others and there are good replicas on the market.
However you should wait for more analysis from other collectors, because my knowledge about these helmets is just theoretical.
 
I am a bit of a slow learner and only completed analysing the KR2 and am sure that the KR2 enlisted man is a replica.

It shd not have the vertical rib on the back. The brass trim (from the underneath the black curtain tail) is not clamped in properly, missing few inches to both the left and the right.

I think the light reflection makes it look like a fluted spike which it is indeed a smooth spike.

Wappen plate and chinscales are both replica. Do compare my wappen plate and Pawel wappen plate. Pawel wappen plate lack the sharp details. The pointed part of M91 side posts shd be a bit curved instead of being sharp.

I look at the liner closely and found extra holes punched near the washers meaning that the spike base did not line up with the helmet body. Liner maybe original which I am not too sure.

Ok so much for the KR2 enlisted man.

Will be back with the dragoon later
 
Thanks to Amy and Sandy for their time and valuable tips. Of course, in KR2, the posts are from another helmet, the liner was reconstructed, ineptly, the fittings look like someone bent them and tightened them again, but the Clemen signature seems to be good. However, I wonder about the appearance of the sheet, the helmet was aggressively cleaned and despite this, corrosion centers were left, which penetrated the metal structure in the form of black points, this is a process characteristic of old steel. I also have another theory, because in the place of attachment of the spitz and the eagle there are additional holes, maybe it is a canopy from another helmet, and KR2 was only made of it. That's my thoughts, I don't know if it's right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top