Prussian Uhlan m15
- Thread starter r-ungern
- Start date
RON
Well-known member
Actually, I see a few red flags with this Dahl Tschapka:
> The Feldzeichen: From the partial photo, I can see some 'fuzziness' in the white fabric which would be a good indication that it's a recent copy; also the black dot looks too 'protruding'?
> The Liner: One tongue is missing and so is the drawstring but more importantly, its leather looks like it could be 'sick' with red/dry rot...
> The Wappen: Are its leather tabs there?
> More importantly the Front Visor: I see no stitching between the 2 split brads on its upper rim (?). It actually looks like the latter was trimmed right where the stitches were--these probably broke from improper display--and the rest of the part glued to the shell?
> The Feldzeichen: From the partial photo, I can see some 'fuzziness' in the white fabric which would be a good indication that it's a recent copy; also the black dot looks too 'protruding'?
> The Liner: One tongue is missing and so is the drawstring but more importantly, its leather looks like it could be 'sick' with red/dry rot...
> The Wappen: Are its leather tabs there?
> More importantly the Front Visor: I see no stitching between the 2 split brads on its upper rim (?). It actually looks like the latter was trimmed right where the stitches were--these probably broke from improper display--and the rest of the part glued to the shell?
The Tschapka looks perfectly real, it has its obvious flaws of course but most can be addressed with minor repair.
Sorry Ron, I do not believe there is a missing stitch line from the top of the visor between the two split brads. The three Tschapkas in my pile (collection) all have hidden stitch lines with a rolled top edge, the stitching cannot be seen from the front as on other pickelhauben. Ron you may be correct on the field badge, without more detailed photos, or better, holding it in ones hand, it's tough to tell. R-Ungern you might place the feldzeichen under an ultra violet light to see if it fluoresces (glows).
The missing liner tongue and evidence of red-rot on the liner, well, it's nearly 100 years old and it is what it is. Good Score r-ungern :thumb up: Have fun bringing it back to life..
Larry
Sorry Ron, I do not believe there is a missing stitch line from the top of the visor between the two split brads. The three Tschapkas in my pile (collection) all have hidden stitch lines with a rolled top edge, the stitching cannot be seen from the front as on other pickelhauben. Ron you may be correct on the field badge, without more detailed photos, or better, holding it in ones hand, it's tough to tell. R-Ungern you might place the feldzeichen under an ultra violet light to see if it fluoresces (glows).
The missing liner tongue and evidence of red-rot on the liner, well, it's nearly 100 years old and it is what it is. Good Score r-ungern :thumb up: Have fun bringing it back to life..
Larry
pointystuff
Active member
"More importantly the Front Visor: I see no stitching between the 2 split brads on its upper rim (?). It actually looks like the latter was trimmed right where the stitches were--these probably broke from improper display--and the rest of the part glued to the shell?"
For some reason, as Larmo pointed out, the Tchapkas didn't have exposed stitching on the visors. However, there's a 13th Ulan officer Tschapka that belonged to Kaiser Wilhelm II that does have the exposed stitch line. It's on page 181 of volume 2 of Deutsche Offiziershelme aus der Kaiserzeit 1870-1918.
I wonder if it was a feature of a certain manufacturer, or just something the Kaiser wanted.
For some reason, as Larmo pointed out, the Tchapkas didn't have exposed stitching on the visors. However, there's a 13th Ulan officer Tschapka that belonged to Kaiser Wilhelm II that does have the exposed stitch line. It's on page 181 of volume 2 of Deutsche Offiziershelme aus der Kaiserzeit 1870-1918.
I wonder if it was a feature of a certain manufacturer, or just something the Kaiser wanted.
RON
Well-known member
Larry, Ron,
It is an authentic Tschapka shell no doubt however the Feldzeichen by itself would be very very hard (and expensive) to upgrade into an original if it was actually fake... and it does look fake to me as you can clearly see the 'fuzziness'.
As for the visor stitches, and after checking my photos again, it does look like some models did have exposed stitches but maybe I'm wrong? Besides, I thought the trim here looked rather uneven/cut not to mention the numerous scratches... :-k
As you'll see in my ref. pics, it's one nice wartime specimen--also made by Alexander Dahl--that sold on eBay a few months back. Although missing its drawstring too, its 96-year old liner is almost pristine isn't it?
Liners that disintegrate right in front of your eyes--I have a Bav. M15 haube with red rot that litterally sheds leather--really bother me but I guess it's a question of personal taste.
It is an authentic Tschapka shell no doubt however the Feldzeichen by itself would be very very hard (and expensive) to upgrade into an original if it was actually fake... and it does look fake to me as you can clearly see the 'fuzziness'.
As for the visor stitches, and after checking my photos again, it does look like some models did have exposed stitches but maybe I'm wrong? Besides, I thought the trim here looked rather uneven/cut not to mention the numerous scratches... :-k
As you'll see in my ref. pics, it's one nice wartime specimen--also made by Alexander Dahl--that sold on eBay a few months back. Although missing its drawstring too, its 96-year old liner is almost pristine isn't it?
Liners that disintegrate right in front of your eyes--I have a Bav. M15 haube with red rot that litterally sheds leather--really bother me but I guess it's a question of personal taste.
Hey Ron
One thing I have learned, but obviously have great difficulty in remembering, is, never say it never happened, or, they are always this way. As soon as I do, someone else comes up with a perfectly fine example of something exhibiting a feature I previously thought, or stated to be incorrect, then I have a case of foot-in-mouthitis. ](*,) A perfect example is in the case with your stitched visor tschapka shown in your posting, my apologies. I still feel that the visor r-ungern shows is the rounded type with a hidden stitch behind the fold and has not been trimmed. Guess the only way we'll know is to see the reverse.
I believe original fittings can be found, either from a beyond-hope restoration project, or, dead stock parts that do appear from time to time, it happens. It is just a matter of the amount of time one is willing to spend looking and of course, the money willing to be spent. Replica parts fill a need and complete headgear that would otherwise look a bit odd without that proper bit. I have two pieces of headgear in my own collection, a Wurttemberg Tschapka and 1st Garde Mitre hat that have a replica feldzeichen and puchsel respectively. I would very much like to replace them with original examples but for the time being they will do.
As far as red-rot to the leather and an incomplete liner, well the best condition one can buy is always a good policy. However, the flaws with this tschapka are pretty obvious and he was likely well aware of them when he purchased the helmet. The difficulty of finding any original piece of headgear today is a daunting task, and perhaps this helmet was the first example that came his way, the stars were in perfect alignment and he was able to purchase it. Perhaps he was posting here on Pickelhaubes.com to merely find out if his helmet is original or not and that he had'nt been taken advantage of. Don't know..only r-ungern can tell \/
Larry
One thing I have learned, but obviously have great difficulty in remembering, is, never say it never happened, or, they are always this way. As soon as I do, someone else comes up with a perfectly fine example of something exhibiting a feature I previously thought, or stated to be incorrect, then I have a case of foot-in-mouthitis. ](*,) A perfect example is in the case with your stitched visor tschapka shown in your posting, my apologies. I still feel that the visor r-ungern shows is the rounded type with a hidden stitch behind the fold and has not been trimmed. Guess the only way we'll know is to see the reverse.
I believe original fittings can be found, either from a beyond-hope restoration project, or, dead stock parts that do appear from time to time, it happens. It is just a matter of the amount of time one is willing to spend looking and of course, the money willing to be spent. Replica parts fill a need and complete headgear that would otherwise look a bit odd without that proper bit. I have two pieces of headgear in my own collection, a Wurttemberg Tschapka and 1st Garde Mitre hat that have a replica feldzeichen and puchsel respectively. I would very much like to replace them with original examples but for the time being they will do.
As far as red-rot to the leather and an incomplete liner, well the best condition one can buy is always a good policy. However, the flaws with this tschapka are pretty obvious and he was likely well aware of them when he purchased the helmet. The difficulty of finding any original piece of headgear today is a daunting task, and perhaps this helmet was the first example that came his way, the stars were in perfect alignment and he was able to purchase it. Perhaps he was posting here on Pickelhaubes.com to merely find out if his helmet is original or not and that he had'nt been taken advantage of. Don't know..only r-ungern can tell \
/ Larry
Larmo said:
Thanks for comments. I`d like to know more about "the ultra-violet test". Liner in bad condition, skin shabby. The previous owner pasted (gum) it to an internal part of a helmet, unfortunately. The peak was never restored. Threads are old, but not visible. Such feature of the producer. It is interesting, it is possible to learn regiment number to what this helmet belonged.
RON
Well-known member
This has turned into a very interesting post!
Larry, no need to apologize, the fact that I was able to come-up with my observations herewith is because of patient collectors like you always willing to share some of their knowledge and experience with the newbies! (I also love the items I buy from you :wink: )
I guess now the question is: Why would the same manufacturer--Alexander Dahl--have M1915 Tschapka visors with obvious stitch lines and others hiding these? :-k
Larry, no need to apologize, the fact that I was able to come-up with my observations herewith is because of patient collectors like you always willing to share some of their knowledge and experience with the newbies! (I also love the items I buy from you :wink: )
I guess now the question is: Why would the same manufacturer--Alexander Dahl--have M1915 Tschapka visors with obvious stitch lines and others hiding these? :-k
RON
Well-known member
Oh well, here I stand corrected once more!
Larry, I guess you ](*,) for nothing but one has to admit that (reflection?) line in all of the seller's original pics did fool us!
Maxime, I was watching this auction (Battlefield Store) and I remember it sold for a good price; congratulations! At least it went to someone from the forum. I also see you upgraded it with the correct M15 chinstrap :bravo:
Larry, I guess you ](*,) for nothing but one has to admit that (reflection?) line in all of the seller's original pics did fool us!
Maxime, I was watching this auction (Battlefield Store) and I remember it sold for a good price; congratulations! At least it went to someone from the forum. I also see you upgraded it with the correct M15 chinstrap :bravo:
Hey Ron
We'll leave that head-bump in place, no doubt I'll be needing another one before too long...
R-ungern, I will try and describe the theory behind the U-V business as best I can. It is not a perfect test but I have found it does help.
As I understand this, prior to the late 1940's manufacturers of white thread and cloth did not induce phosphates or artificially brighteners to material. After that time they began to do so. So, if we place an item made at a later time which contains this white cloth or thread under an ultra-violet light it will fluoresce, where an older item will not.
Now, some confusion can happen when some people first try this test. We forget that ultra-violet is still a light and an item placed beneath it will acqure a light glow or reflection regardless of when it was manufactured. So, what I do when I test something is to take a piece of clean white paper, like from your computer printer, modern paper glows like crazy, I place the article to be tested upon the printer paper and turn the light upon it. If it is an old item, the difference between the paper and the item will be quite distinct. If new, it will also glow or fluoresce. Mind you, this test is not 100% but is a good help, especially with WWII era items.
We live in the Western part of the USA in the desert and we have little neighbors called Scorpions which live all around us. At night during the summer its great fun to take a U-V light out in the backyard and look for these little critters. When you find one they glow bright blue, really remarkable
Cheers Larmo
We'll leave that head-bump in place, no doubt I'll be needing another one before too long...
R-ungern, I will try and describe the theory behind the U-V business as best I can. It is not a perfect test but I have found it does help.
As I understand this, prior to the late 1940's manufacturers of white thread and cloth did not induce phosphates or artificially brighteners to material. After that time they began to do so. So, if we place an item made at a later time which contains this white cloth or thread under an ultra-violet light it will fluoresce, where an older item will not.
Now, some confusion can happen when some people first try this test. We forget that ultra-violet is still a light and an item placed beneath it will acqure a light glow or reflection regardless of when it was manufactured. So, what I do when I test something is to take a piece of clean white paper, like from your computer printer, modern paper glows like crazy, I place the article to be tested upon the printer paper and turn the light upon it. If it is an old item, the difference between the paper and the item will be quite distinct. If new, it will also glow or fluoresce. Mind you, this test is not 100% but is a good help, especially with WWII era items.
We live in the Western part of the USA in the desert and we have little neighbors called Scorpions which live all around us. At night during the summer its great fun to take a U-V light out in the backyard and look for these little critters. When you find one they glow bright blue, really remarkable
Cheers Larmo