"From an old motel buy, here is a near mint choice Waffen SS NCO Visor forsale Price is $6995.00 plus shipping. No PayPal stateside and arrangements on payment from overseas.
Ron Weinand,
[email protected] 217-223-2322"
I must say I am very concerned at the way this thread has been played. Patrick seems to have put very convincing arguments on this piece that it should be discused. Others seem to flock round and muddle the position. As a person who would like to learn about such pieces, probably go into this sphere of collecting, what is the considered out come? As a fellow chemist, I wonder were Ron is coming from? We were taught to be very thorough in our evaluations. Just to be more muddeled, one has to aske the question, is this real?
CAN ANY ONE HELP ME?
Mr. Ailsby,
You seem to want to generate a negative discussion but without actually saying anything yourself or stating any facts, much as Patrice has done in the original thread.
I am not going to put up with insinuations of this type. Our code of conduct reads "Be friendly, polite, positive, and helpful. If you think someone�s artifact is not correct or your opinion differs from theirs, be sure to explain why"
If you have doubts on authenticity, then state them and exactly why you hold that opinion. If not, fold your tent.
Dave
Mr. Illsby, if I didn't think it was good, I wouldn't have listed it. I have more than enough good items to list, believe me.
Also, I believe the term stateside is Pharmacist.
Chemist are those who test for contaminates in the US, not dispense tested medications.
JMO,
Ron Weinand
I find Mr. Ailsby's comments reasonable and polite. He notes he is thinking about collecting headgear, therefore, he apparently wants to learn. I can understand and appreciate why he is a bit mystified over comments that have been made, right or wrong. I find the replies to Mr. Ailsby a bit curt and more than a bit offensive, unnecessarily so. I could understand why he might now seek another hobby.
Dave, seriously, I don't see any anything in Mr Ailsby's post that suggests he wants to generate a negative discussion. It would appear that he is in the same situation as me - not knowing much about these but wanting to learn. Why can't this thread be used as an opportunity to point out the areas which may hold some concern for some people, and have those areas evaluated and explained by those, perhaps with more knowledge of the item? All the slanging does nothing except cause grief where it is not needed. The point of difference between a pharmacist and a chemist is irrelevant and reads like Ron is 'having a go'.
Regards
Russ
Jeeeeeeeeeeeez, Dave, you're getting pretty touchy here ! I think you should also read the "Code of Conduct".
Greetings Mr. Ailsby-
Edited for insults. DD, check your email
Dave
Dave asked that I discuss this topic here rather than in the "Community" section. Here is what I posted there:
There is a fairly intense discussion going on in the "For Sale" section. Having let my paid membership lapse for a number of reasons, I'd like to add my support for Pat. I think the question he asked was fair and the email he sent to Dave was private. Dave decided to put it on the site and I think that was chikens**t on Dave's part. It lends credence to some of the thinking around here that there are members of GDC and then
Why don't we get down to the hat?
Here's the thread from WAF which offers some concerns. I've copied these directly into this thread. The concerns go un-answered by Ron.
http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=319537So let's have the concerns answered here by knowledgable collectors so we can learn something.
"My new SS NCO Visor: Comments please as I am no hat expert!" (Ron)
"I'm not to fond of the eagle...." (Anders S)
"Since the cap appears to be mint, why is the lining behind the insignias so shredded? Notice the long piece of black thread that holds it in place. Was it really sewn like that originally? How about more pics of the sweatband exterior, the crown of the lining, and the visor underside, etc? I also noticed that the white piping is of very uneven thickness. Does the black finish on the visor have any crazing like you normally see? I'm not trying to pick apart the cap, and it may just be totally mint, but closeups make it look like it was made yesterday." (sgstandard)
"The lining pleats look less that desirable too me. Not something I want to see on a visor with a mint exterior with perfect form and good rear pleating. The pasteboard looks very, odd to me. The sweatband also looks replaced. I can see areas of over stitching and shadowing. It is far from a one looker in my opinion. It certainly needs a hands on." (NTZ)
"As others have indicated, the skull looks like it could be a good Overhoff, but the eagle is an obvious fake. I will leave discussion regarding the originality of the cap, itself, to those more expert than I. However, I will, at least, say that the skull does not appear to be original to the cap." (bwanek1)
"without seeing the lining, it looks good. nice M1/24 tk" (SSgentleman)
Here's Bob Colemans comment from the For Sale thread.
"THERE ARE CONSTRUCTION ASPECTS TO THIS CAP THAT HAVE NEVER BEEN PROPERLY REPLICATED IN MODERN TIMES. THE LINING IS TYPICAL TO THAT FOUND ALSO IN MID TO LATE WAR OFFICER CAPS OBTAINED THROUGH THE OFFICIAL SS SUPPLY CHAIN. IT IS AMAZING HOW SOMETIMES, THE NEW ON LINE GURUS FAIL TO RECOGNIZE SOME OF THE MOST BASIC TRAITS THAT DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN THE WORK OF PERIOD MASTER HAT MAKERS AND THE JUNK PRODUCED IN THE LAST TWENTY YEARS. I GUESS THE OLD GUARD LIKE RON AND MYSELF HAVE LEARNED NOTHING OVER THE 100+ YEARS COMBINED WE HAVE IN COLLECTING. SO WE OLD GUYS MUST NOW DEFER TO THOSE WHO HAVE NOT HANDLED 1/100TH THE MATERIAL WE HAVE OVER THE YEARS. THE REAL BECOMES FAKE AND THE FAKE BECOMES REAL."
Regards
Russ
Not knowing a lot about this type of headgear I was hoping the discussion would open up a little. Instead I continually read "you said...he said"......just a bunch of bickering back and forth like a bunch of old wash women! Same old crap from grown men! This is just another reason I find less and less interest in this hobby and don't post much in this forum anymore.
Keep an eye on the "other forum" as I'm slowly selling off my collection. You can read my posts in the Mustang forum where you'll find much more friendly civilized discussions!
My knowledge of headgear is very limited and I know it. I would point out that the master hatmakers were around quite a while after the war ended. Because the hat of discussion has at least some original appearing aspects and because the hat is not blatantly of recent manufacture is not necessarily convincing information to indicate it was made during the Third Reich period, not to me, at least. I don't know if it's authentic or not, but I think anyone laying out the kind of money asked should be 100% certain it is authentic. If they don't know that from personal knowledge and experience, they should seek learned information elsewhere, including here. If practically all, if not all, posts here are subject to discussion and criticism, where's the beef?
quote:
Originally posted by Christopher J Ailsby:
I must say I am very concerned at the way this thread has been played. Patrick seems to have put very convincing arguments on this piece that it should be discused. Others seem to flock round and muddle the position. As a person who would like to learn about such pieces, probably go into this sphere of collecting, what is the considered out come? As a fellow chemist, I wonder were Ron is coming from? We were taught to be very thorough in our evaluations. Just to be more muddeled, one has to aske the question, is this real?
CAN ANY ONE HELP ME?
A polite sincere question. By a veteran collector and author of note. One who has helped me and many others regading 3rd reich medals and orders and had a world class collection.
The only insinuations would be applied if the thread had run it's course and there actually
wassome. Saying it doesn't make it so.
The late Waffen-SS NCO Visor.
I'm no hat guy but since there are experts here and this item is being watched by members from other forums who are knowledgeable with membership here I encourange them to enlighten Christopher, myself and all others and dispell facts from fiction on this item.
My question is regarding the lining. Is that the standard color used in the liners or was that a particular maker. The light yellow color. If so, what maker/makers would have been known for that particular color?
Also I noticed that it did not have the "diamond". Was the diamond just not applied to some late NCO visors? And if it was a maker late war short cut, about what time period would you say this first started?
Do you recall any of the veteran provenance on this visor Ron?
Regards,
-serge-
IF YOU READ MY POST ON THIS CAP, IT DEALS WITH THE LINING. THE OFFICER'S CAP I HAVE IN MY COLLECTION IS ALSO WITHOUT A SWEAT DIAMOND. IT IS PART OF A GROUPING OF MATERIAL PRIVATELY PURCHASED FROM THE FAMILY OF AN AUSTRIAN SS OFFICER IN TOTENKOPF. THE GROUPING INCLUDED A SECOND IDENTICAL VISOR CAP THAT STILL RETAINED IT'S PRICE TAG, A TUNIC, BREECHES, MANTEL, BELT AND BOOTS. ONE CAP AND THE MANTEL WERE SOLD OFF AND TODAY RESIDE IN MY COLLECTION. THE BALANCE OF MATERIAL STILL RESIDES IN THE SAME COLLECTION IT HS BEEN IN SINCE FOUND IN THE 1980'S. STONEMINT LIKES THIS CAP AND SO DO I. WE BOTH BELIEVE IT IS A LATER WAR PEKURO DUE TO THE SHAPE.
PICTURES ARE NO SUBSTITUTE FOR IN HANDS STUDY. HOWEVER, I DO NOT SEE THE RED FLAGS THAT A FEW AT WA HAVE HAD CONCERNS OVER.
I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE HAS BEEN MUCH OVER REACTION ON PAT'S INITIAL AND WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE REASONBLE REQUEST. LET'S DISCUSS THE ITEM AND NOT EACH OTHER. ISN'T THAT WHAT ALL OF THIS IS ABOUT?
BOB
Yes, I agree.
There has been an over reaction on Pat's request and I suggest also on Christophers request.
Thank you Bob for your quick reply. So the coloring is OK and the sweat diamond is known and seen on some late war private purchase SS hat makers.
Would it be fair to call this item a non-textbook? or perhaps just a variation? OR?
And if it's not too much trouble, would it be possible to see the interior of your hat for comparison? I think that would help a lot.
Regards,
-serge-
Just making a 1st post and read this with great enthusiasm......
If it was purchased at a motel buy then why would it need to be shown to experts for their opinion.Is it common for veterans to have questionable items?
J
quote:
Originally posted by josepf:
Just making a 1st post and read this with great enthusiasm......
If it was purchased at a motel buy then why would it need to be shown to experts for their opinion.Is it common for veterans to have questionable items?
J
There are several reasons vets sometimes have fakes. Among them are:
some vets gave away or lost their souvenirs and replaced them with items they picked up post-war
some vets bought items post-war, which they simply wished they had brought back as souvenirs
some vets bought items post-war to back up "war stories" which are not accurate
some vets...aren't vets at all!
HOW QUICK THE TWO MEMBERS WERE TO ATTACK THIS FELLOW COLLECTOR AND AS MENTIONED HIS BOOK "COMBAT MEDALS OF THE THIRD REICH"IS AS FINE A BOOK AS THEY COULD WRITE AND I THINK WE COULD TREAT AN ENGLISH COLLECTOR AND AUTHOR GUY WITH MORE RESPECT THAN THAT.HE ASKED QUESTIONS WE ALL WOULD ASK,WHATS WRONG WITH THAT,WHY THE HOSTIITY RON WEINAND AND TO BAD HE MADE YOU UPSET!!FORGIVE US MR.AILSBY,WE SEEM TO HAVE BAD MANNERS TO THE REST OF THE WORLD AND WE ARE NOT ALL LIKE THE TWO ILL MANNERED PERSONS.CARL
Firstly I would like to thank those who said kind words. Secondly, I would like to point out, as I initally said I was enquiring about the originallity of the cap, because doubts had been expressed. I have 3 caps, and am not sure about them. Items that I find interesting and an ajunct to my main interest.Like wise cloth is a total bewilderment to me. I thought the purpouse of this or other forums was to enlighten. I started the thread away from the sales, so that it would not be seen as a contensious enquiry. I would like to point out to Dave that his obsevations were posibly a little corrosive. So the question is begged, is the cap original, or not? What are the pionters simpletons like myself, looking for?
I think the fact that the visor was bought into question on WAF would be enough for most members to want to see it discussed on here, right or wrong!. The trouble being most of the members with the skill to appraise such a piece have left for pastures new, because of exactly this type of thread.
I still rate this forum as the best on the net but the way some of its members are treated makes me wonder how long that will continue.
quote:
Originally posted by Serge (aka Wagner):
Yes, I agree.
There has been an over reaction on Pat's request and I suggest also on Christophers request.
Thank you Bob for your quick reply. So the coloring is OK and the sweat diamond is known and seen on some late war private purchase SS hat makers.
Would it be fair to call this item a non-textbook? or perhaps just a variation? OR?
And if it's not too much trouble, would it be possible to see the interior of your hat for comparison? I think that would help a lot.
Regards,
-serge-
SERGE-
THE WORD "TEXTBOOK" IS SOMETHING OVER USED IN COLLECTING. IT IS NOT UNCOMMON TO FIND VISOR CAPS WITHOUT A SWEAT DIAMOND IN THE MID TO LATE WAR PERIOD. THE MAJORITY OF SS MATERIAL WAS SOURCED THROUGH THE SS SUPPLY STORES. PRIVATE PURCHASE WOULD BE THE EXCEPTION INSTEAD OF THE NORM. I HAVE SEEN FEWER GRAY OR BLACK SS VISOR CAPS WITH PRIVATE TAILORING OR HAT MAKER'S LOGOS IN THE TOP. THAT IS NOT TO SAY THAT THEY DO NOT EXIST BUT ARE ENCOUNTERED LESS THAN THE NORMAL HATS FOUND THROUGH SS SUPPLY. TO ME, TEXTBOOK IN ANY CAP IS THE MANNER IN WHICH IT IS PUT TOGETHER. I WOULD SUGGEST STUDYING THE WAY PIPING IS INSTALLED IN BOTH GENUINE AND KNOWN FRAUDULENT EXAMPLES IN VISOR CAPS. IN THAT STUDY, ALL WILL BE ANSWERED.
BOB
quote:
Originally posted by bwanek1:
quote:
Originally posted by josepf:
Just making a 1st post and read this with great enthusiasm......
If it was purchased at a motel buy then why would it need to be shown to experts for their opinion.Is it common for veterans to have questionable items?
J
There are several reasons vets sometimes have fakes. Among them are:
some vets gave away or lost their souvenirs and replaced them with items they picked up post-war
some vets bought items post-war, which they simply wished they had brought back as souvenirs
some vets bought items post-war to back up "war stories" which are not accurate
some vets...aren't vets at all!
I AGREE TO AN EXTENT. HOWEVER, I DID MOTEL BUYS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS AND ALSO BOUGHT FROM A LOT OF VETS THROUGH LOCAL ADVERTISING STARTING IN THE EARLY 60'S. I CAN ONLY SAY THAT DURING THOSE FOURTY PLUS YEARS, I ONLY ENCOUNTERED A HANDFUL OF POLLUTED MATERIAL AMONG THE SOUVENIRS BROUGHT BACK BY FORMER SERVICEMEN.
BOB
A very interesting thread and more to the purpose than the previous. Perhaps it will turn out to be most beneficial to all concerned...as long as we "gentlemen" can keep it civil. cheers and regards, Ryan
Perhaps someone with Premium status could put in a link to this thread as there is still discussion going on in the For Sale thread - members may not be aware that this thread is underway?
Regards
Russ
quote:
Originally posted by Ruski:
.....The point of difference between a pharmacist and a chemist is irrelevant and reads like Ron is 'having a go'.
Regards
Russ
There IS no difference between a chemist and a pharmacist in Mr. Ailsby's post.
The "correction" made was petty and demeaning, and I was honestly surprised that Mr. Weiland chose to play border semantics, considering that this is supposed to be an international forum, rather than an American one.
There was nothing in Mr. Ailsby's post that showed anything but curiosity and courtesy.
Perhaps the pressure of a discussion that has degenerated into all-around disrespect and meritless bantering is simply taking it's toll on the participants.....
I see that that the topic returned to concerning itself with the visor in question.....Bravo.
Hi All,
I'm on my way out of town but before I leave I just got an email that stated the there is opinion from knowledgeable scources on another forum that the eagle on this visor is perhaps a repro.
I would normally check into this myself but my lack of time and experience in visors I will humbly leave to my more experienced colleagues for their views and observations regarding the eagle and totenkopf insignia.
Regards,
-serge-
Hi just read the WAF post...so please let me ask, Ron and Bob can you tell whether the eagle is good or bad? It has been stated, as opposed to suggested on the WAF that the eagle is an outright fake. We all know authorities on this very forum (if they are still members) that are able to identify a reproduction eagle and skull.I am not amongst them and to me the hat appears fine(said without a hands on inspection)Fake insignia does not automatically mean fake cap. Reproduction SS insignia is far easier to recognize than a made up cap...what is the consensus regarding this insignia, and not to cast dispersions or "stir the pot" but reproductions are supposed to be listed as per this forum's rules pertaining to the classifieds. Also does not 80+ years of collective experience and hotel buys allow someone to discern between an authentic,period adler and a reproduction? These are important questions that now deserve answers. regards, Ryan
P.S. am important question as an authentic replacement eagle will cost between $300 to $600 and it needs to be near mint. Also you then will have a mis matched set of insignia and replaced insignia as well.If the skull is noot good a decent replacement set of full insignia will be closer to $1000.00++
I was going to suggest Tony Scanlon or Grant Bias but I see that some other notable experts on this forum have pronounced the eagle to be an obvious fake as well. Again was this obviously fake insignia not apparent to those with so many years of "experience" and should not the For Sale ad reflect this? I believe that Forum rules do state that all items that are reproduction must be listed appropriately.I could say so much more but again I am just angry!!!
I stated this on the other forum--it is my belief, based on pics, that the hat is good (visors are my specialty--not insignia, so I leave that to the SS insginia experts.) Ron sent me pics before it was listed on either forum, and I told him then I thought it was good, but with the standard caveat that it needs a hands-on (which I believe will just confirm my initial thoughts.)I also believe I know the maker, even if unlabeled, based on construction techniques. I have seen many more pics than the ones posted, and I know Ron will be happy to provide them to anyone who asks (and btw, I have never met or spoken to Ron, just corresponded by email a few times.)
I was asked why I won't buy the cap, and that is because my focus is Officer's visors, primarily Political/Civil. As I stated on the other forum, I will be happy to inspect the hat (for free) for anyone who buys it. I'm sure any other visor specialist would be willing to do the same.
I am at a loss to explain all this paranoia--no one has yet to point out a thing wrong with it (other than the eagle), and I have seen plenty of stripped SS visors over the years, and ones with replaced insignia (which I see more often than not.)
Just my .02 cents.
It is great to get some opinion on the cap itself and the insignia, so those of us who are in-experienced with this type of headwear can learn something amongst the positive and negative thoughts that have been posted.
To answer your question, the paranoia has clearly been generated by Dave who seems to have a problem with Pat. Take a re-read of the 'For Sale' thread if you're so inclined and it will become very clear. Dave is the one who should 'fold his tent'.
Regards
Russ
My 2 cents worth is everyone missing the point here....I also feel that the cap is good, at least based on the pics provided and I have stated such...the eagle might be bad, consensus of opinion yet it was not divulged, second the cap was solicited on another forum openly for opinions and received mostly negative (don't know why or care) then the hat was next found on this forum, not for discussion but for sale and nothing mentioned about the comments or opinions or repro eagle just "at a reduced price" Why is it so difficult to see that this might cause controversy and the only person at fault, sorry to say is the person who offerred it and also who solicited for opinions. Why can't people just say I messed up sorry fellas. NO BIG DEAL Have our egos become so big?
I offered the hat forsale on the forum WHERE I HAVE THE BEST SALES AND WANTED TO LIST IT. If I had wanted to sell it on WA.com, I would have listed it there, but sales on that forum are NOT AS GOOD AS SALES ON GD.COM. I have listed items on both forums and this is what I have found to be the facts.
Next, Stonemint is well respected on the forum and, after I received his blessing, I felt that the hat was correct HAVING SEEN HIS OPINION RESPECTED IN OTHER INSTANCES.
Next, concerning price: Evidently you all think that the price has to be set at the top of the last nickel on every item. I don't. If someone was going to get a break in your opinion, then so be it. I marked it at the price where I thought the sale was most likely to occur, especially in these times of distress.
If this price is such a buy, someone can buy it and make the difference by reselling it themselves. More power to them if they have a hat client.
Anyway, its my property and I will price it where it needs to be in my opinion. I don't have much in the hat, so its mostly all profit for me to start with in this case.
Lastly, no one has shown me any pictures, side by side comparisons, known fake comparisons with this hat or insignias that substantiate stated opinions or comments.
Therefore, it is evident to me that hats are much more of a minefield than daggers or medals, so opinions are just that: opinions.
Patrice DID finally offer to buy the hat, but wanted a six month evaluation period. For that amount of time I will either take it to the SOS or give it to an auction house, either way a much easier method of sale without all the drama.
Ron,,,why not list it with the new auction service,Empire Auctions,,,there you may well indeed find a buyer for it,,Robert
Drama??? I thought that it was merely a guarantee of authenticity? You refer to it as a "six month examination period?" Most reputable big name dealers, Max certified or not will offer an extensive guarantee or will warranty an item for their lifetime in regards to authenticity. I personally do not feel that six months is too long for a $7000 hat. Once more no mention of the "possibly reproduction eagle" I guess that we will all assume that no one has commented on the eagle who has held or seen the hat in person. I would want to determine for my own satisfaction whether the eagle is good or bad before leaving it on my cap....It wouldn't even hurt to mention that the skull is good but the eagle is a copy replacement. Not saying anything or stating "I haven't been told conclusively one way or another" just leaves one with a bad tatse in one's mouth. Considering the solicited controversy around this cap I think Pat's offer/request was reasonnable but alas it is not my hat...cheers
Could I possibly return to the original discription, again dear Ron, we can have different views on the word Chemist, but it dose neeen the presion of perscription reading, you describe as, ""From an old motel buy, here is a near mint choice Waffen SS NCO Visor forsale Price is $6995.00 plus shipping. No PayPal stateside and arrangements on payment from overseas.
Ron Weinand,
[email protected] 217-223-2322"". Using your description, "From an old motel buy," here is were I become confsed. Again for clarity and to show no negativity, how has the eagle come into disrapte. Has it been replaced, if so when and by who. The vet? But Vet buys are scacrastant. If the eagle is fake, then if the cap is original, then it has been manipulated at some time. Again back to my very first question, how do we know what to look for? A forum such as this should be here to enlighten soles such as I who know bog all about these things.
So I ask the assembled folk, what is the considered possition on the cap?
Christopher, the original description was:
"My new SS NCO Visor: Comments please as I am no hat expert!" (WAF)
The For Sale description is:
"From an old motel buy, ..." (GDC)
Regards
Russ
If one goes back to an earlier WAF comment, perhaps this cap having a fake eagle explains the damage to the lining behind the insignia, whereas the rest looks well intact.
"Since the cap appears to be mint, why is the lining behind the insignias so shredded? ..." (sgstandard)
Being in-experienced with this type of headwear, I would assume this is one very good indicator that suggests closer scrutiny of the insignia should be undertaken?
Also, if the eagle is a fake, and it is known as a "fake 360", does anyone know when these first started to appear?
Perhaps Ron could carefully remove the eagle and show the reverse, which will either confirm or eliminate the eagle as being a fake.
Regards
Russ
You are correct removed or altered insignia would explain the damage to the lining. Easier to replace the eagle and remove it then the deathshead.Good cap with what appears to be a good original skull that also appears original to the cap offerred at a good price. This is what I am certain anyone examining this cap will determine. Shame that it had to come to this.....one should divulge everything known about an item that is impactual upon a potential sale. cheers
quote:
Originally posted by
[email protected]:
Drama??? I thought that it was merely a guarantee of authenticity? You refer to it as a "six month examination period?" Most reputable big name dealers, Max certified or not will offer an extensive guarantee or will warranty an item for their lifetime in regards to authenticity.
This is the key thought in the entire controversy - if such a guarantee did exist, do you think anyone serious enough about dropping $7G would even second-guess authenticity of the aforementioned cap? This is the real "Catch-22" in collecting - it all comes down to a matter of opinion in the end. Who really believes that a "Lifetime Guarantee" really does mean anything when you purchase something?
My guess would be that if Pat really did have faith in such a guarantee that Ron might have offered, he would have never had reason to ask Hohaus to bring about question of the cap in the first place . . . something to chew on for all of us about "Lifetime Guarantees" - this is a mess that really needs complete eradication before collecting militaria can ever gain it's due respect in my opinion . . .
Someone should just buy this cap, pass it around for all of the "opinions" that we all place so much faith in, and see where the chips fall . . . testing reputations could be a good thing when it comes to a "Lifetime Guarantee" for all collectors . . .
Brad
P.S. I would never discount this cap until it is personally inspected - although it has potential to not be what is represented as, it still could very well be - NOBODY can absolutely say that it is completely inaccurate until such examination is completed. Give Ron and the cap a chance, and see what happens - we all deserve this courtesy to be passed onto each other until rightfully justified otherwise . . .
THE ANSWER TO ALL QUESTIONS ON THIS HAT CAN BE SEEN IN THE INSTALLATION OF THE PIPING.
So still confused. Is the general view this cap is original? Or in better terms played with? As to Rons descriptions, that on WAF and THIS ON GDC, my old Grandfather, plus Papa, both teachers in "proper Chemists" would be horrified with the perscription writing. could this be, "BDH, or TDH".THE MESEARMENTS, FROM OR OLD SET OF WEIGHTS, WE USE SCRUPLES, could leed us into a vertial mine field. But back to the main chase, "an old motel buy".
Who love it should love it how doesn't like it should't like it. I just wonder and wonder more about this hobby even about "new collectors" and even about "expert collectors" of these days.
I believe one has to take notice of the respected opinions from Stonemint and Bob Coleman, who are experienced with this type of item, and who seem very confident that this is a period example based on the pics provided, and a hands-on would likely confirm that opinion.
It appears the eagle is a fake from respected insignia collectors. At the least, the insignia area seems to have been tampered with based on the messy lining around that area only, with the rest of the lining being in top condition. If Ron could provide a pic of the eagle reverse, perhaps the opinions could be confirmed. Ron is clearly convinced the whole item is good - "Mr. Illsby, if I didn't think it was good, I wouldn't have listed it. I have more than enough good items to list, believe me."
Still a bit of confusion over whether this a new item, or an old motel buy item, as Ron's descriptions changed over the course of a few days on the different forums - only he can explain that.
Regards
Russ
All that I know is some "expert" SS insignia individuals have pronounced the eagle at least to be an obvious fake. None of the so called "old guard experts" caught this detail with all of their collective knowledge. Second, since the eagle has been pronounced to be a fake on this very forum the owner has not posted. Also the Forum administrator who was once so active on this thread has done nothing to address this apparent breach of Forum rules regarding fakes and reproductions...gents this is what it is and it has always been apparent. This is why this Forum is dying a slow but certain death...pity...
Dave Hohaus was very quick to condemn me with its so called "conspiracy" theory
, but feel reassured that he won't be as vindictive with the big boys.
Excuse my French but is this what you call......"double standard" ?
We then wonder why people get upset, jeeeeeeeeeeez.
has the eagle been absolutely,positively identified as a reproduction?..Robert
I guess it is a matter of what you call "definately" Kevin has deemed it a fake on another thread and he knows his stuff....enough for me along with the others that have pronounced it bad.cheers
quote:
Originally posted by Ronald Weinand:
Lastly, no one has shown me any pictures, side by side comparisons, known fake comparisons with this hat or insignias that substantiate stated opinions or comments.
Therefore, it is evident to me that hats are much more of a minefield than daggers or medals, so opinions are just that: opinions.
So, what exactly do you want to see Ron? Examples of the fake 360 have been shown as comparison, including the reverse. So why don't you show the reverse of the eagle on the cap? Perhaps the opinions could be wrong? Or maybe, you've already checked and they are correct?
http://daggers.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/7480909271/m/1920009185It seems you've already decided that it is ok, and opinions don't count. If that's the case, why did you post it for comments in the first place??
Regards
Russ
Apologies - double post for some reason...
Here is what I see and what I know...Max certified member and lifetime OVMS posts an often copied visor on another site for opinions and states that he is "no expert" He receives mostly negative comments and then explains them off just as "newbie collectors" often do wishing their item to be authentic, only in this instance his 40 plus years of "motel" buys assures him that the cap is good. The cap is then offerred on our site at a very good price without any explanation or hint of the solicited comments.The seller explains these off and then an interested, respected and longtime member of this forum offers to purchase the cap but wants a 6 month authenticity guarantee. This is not given and is explained away as "tying up monetary funds" Finally the eagle is proposed to be a known fake and not a great one. I see no comments anywhere that the eagle posted is authentic. The seller explains this away as well with the words "no side by side comparisons given" SS headgear is a controversial field at the best of times. The seller at no time sates his responsibility for creating this mess yet rather places blame upon everyone else to even include the one potential buyer who came forward. Now the seller will not even post on this thread any longer. As stated previously I have lost a great deal of respect, not only for the seller but for one or two others as well. I feel strongly that more than one apology is owed. Lets see if anyone is man enough to step to the plate. Sadly I have my doubts.
May I very humbly creep back and repeat the question, what is the concidered view on this cap? I am sure Ron wants to give his evaluation on the piece. The eagle is sending me "nuts" is it a 300, 400, or what. The scull, its OK. Behind the lines it has also been considered questionable.
I want to be up front, the knoledge that the forum has is way outside my abilities. But I would like to find a resolve. Dear Rone has given two varrient descriptions of the hat on two forums. Please explain why you would do that?
Well, Ron has left the building again without answering any of the valid questions posed.
I guess, now that the attack by Dave and Ron on Pat has concluded, and the discussion now revolves around the cap, they find themselves backed into a very small corner...
Regards
Russ
quote:
Originally posted by Bob Coleman:
THE ANSWER TO ALL QUESTIONS ON THIS HAT CAN BE SEEN IN THE INSTALLATION OF THE PIPING.
That is for the the cloth constuction of the vizor.
However Kevin who is a known insignia specialist has deemed the eagle a known fake type. If that is true then if this was a dagger I would be called a parts dagger.
Here is a new thread on an SS Algemeine Vizor. Note the photo of the liner. The area behind the insignia is snug and appears untouched. And that is on a vizor that was worn for some time by the owner.
http://daggers.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/7480909271/m/6610030385 Now look at the same area on the subject visor.
What do you see? And this is on an apparently unworn/mint hat.
Of course all this is just supposition until Ron pulls that eagle off (shouldn't be too hard since the liner is already loose), and takes a shot of the back of the eagle.
And if it's bad, no big deal. The rest of the hat is good. And he can call someone like JR and get a real eagle and BINGO! Problem solved!
Regards,
-serge-
Just a few observations about ss head gear. It would not be unlikely that this cap is real, was little worn, but also stripped of it's eagle and skull at the end of the war. It's value will be determined by how many people feel it is pre 1945. Many people like it such as the black nco, and the price goes up or it sells quick. No one likes it and it sells slow and the price goes down. Bad enough economy and nothing sells. This is true for all of us. One thing that seems to be the case is real insignia are never on fake caps. They are too valuable in their own right. If I see real insignia on a cap I am excited! You can always tell fake insignia sooner or later. Someone better than I am can ALWAYS tell. It doesn't mean that this cap is not real because of fake skull or eagle, but it will ALWAYS be called into question because mint stuff should have mint insignia still on it. That is just a seed of doubt that is hanging over it. I personally like the piping and the mismatch in the size of it in different locations but I cannot say much more from photos. My main point is that regardless of what was the case in years past you just don't see today real insignia on fake caps. david
I BELIEVE CALLING A VISOR CAP WITH REPLACED INSIGNIA A PARTS PIECE IS STRETCHING THINGS A LITTLE. I HAVE SEEN NUMEROUS PERIOD PICTURES OF SS OFFICERS AND NCO'S WEARING A CAP WITH DANGLING OR MISSING INSIGNIA. THE FIRST GRAY NCO CAP I PURCHASED FROM A VET IN THE MID 60'S WAS MISSING THE EAGLE. INSIGNIA BECAME DAMAGED AND WAS REPLACED IN PERIOD. BACK IN THE MID 80'S, I BOUGHT TEN SETS OF VISOR CAP SS EAGLE AND SKULL SETS FROM A VETERAN WHO OBTAINED THEM OUT OF MAX SIMON'S HOUSE IN WHICH HE WAS BILLITED. HE ALSO HAD A BOX FULL OF MOUNTED PHOTOGRAPHS OF TOTENKOPF IN BATTLE IN FRANCE WITH A CHRISTMAS DEDICATION TO HIM FROM EICKE AND SIMON'S FACTORY REFINISHED ROHM DAGGER, WHICH I STILL HAVE. I AM SURE THE EXTRA SETS WERE THERE TO REPLACE INSIGNIA WHENEVER HE FOUND IT NECESSARY TO DO SO. THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS YEARS AGO PERIOD CAPS WERE FOUND DIRECTLY FROM VETS WITH INSIGNIA PRONGS THROUGH THE LINING. THE GERMAN OWNERS DID NOT CARE AND NEITHER DID THE VETS. POSSIBLY RON BOUGHT THIS HAT SANS EAGLE AND REPLACED IT AT SOME TIME. THE CAP IS GOOD. I WILL LEAVE THE DISCUSSION OF THE INSIGNIA TO THOSE MORE VERSED IN THIS SUBJECT MATTER.
Parts Piece:
If the visors eagle had been replaced with a period insignia then yes I agree that perhaps calling it a parts piece is a bit of a stretch. However if the insignia is a postwar fake then it is NOT considered original in the collector sense of the word. There can be nothing fake on a period piece and it still be called correct.
But what is really the problem here? We all know it. And thanks Bob for bringing it up: "POSSIBLY RON BOUGHT THIS HAT SANS EAGLE AND REPLACED IT AT SOME TIME".
Well perhaps it is so. Either way the real issue is just that ethical issue...DISCLOSURE OF A KNOWN MATERIAL FACT.
Regards,
-serge-
quote:
Originally posted by Serge (aka Wagner):
Parts Piece:
If the visors eagle had been replaced with a period insignia then yes I agree that perhaps calling it a parts piece is a bit of a stretch. However if the insignia is a postwar fake then it is NOT considered original in the collector sense of the word. There can be nothing fake on a period piece and it still be called correct.
But what is really the problem here? We all know it. And thanks Bob for bringing it up: "POSSIBLY RON BOUGHT THIS HAT SANS EAGLE AND REPLACED IT AT SOME TIME".
Well perhaps it is so. Either way the real issue is just that ethical issue...DISCLOSURE OF A KNOWN MATERIAL FACT.
Regards,
-serge-
I AGREE.
Ron's reluctance to show the eagle reverse and his lack of comment appear to be leading us to an assumed conclusion.
From the For Sale thread, by Ron:
"The piece needs to be moved. It is guaranteed out of the woodwork, so, in this economy, someone gets a buy."
Hopefully, Ron will address this and set us straight.
Regards
Russ
quote:
Originally posted by militarymania:
has the eagle been absolutely,positively identified as a reproduction?..Robert
Yes. There is no question. I have no need to see the reverse, as this style of eagle has telltale features on the front, which differ from all known originals. The style was first used on the bogus 360/42 aluminum eagles, but has since been duplicated on other fakes of various materials with assorted backs using different maker marks. This one apears to be one of the early 360 fakes, but, regardless of which version of the fake it is, it is unquestionably a FAKE!
Brad
The silence on this thread is very telling and that is very unfortunate...at least we can all, for the most part agree on the "real" issue at hand..I agree the cap looks fine and is still a decent price even with a replaced eagle. Unfortunately the chances of matching an eagle with the skull to match the condition of the visor is going to prove to be a most difficult undertaking..cheers, Ryan What say you Ron?
I would say the silence is defening. The thing that is most dissapointing is the lack of responce. A what was concidered honorable dealer, has not explained. A good reputation lost in a heart beat.
I have never heard anything said in a negative light about Ron and do not think that this incident will hurt his reputation in any sense. I do feel that he owes an explanation to this forum and perhaps an apology to someone and he is not the only one...unfortunately both gentlemen are uncharactoristically mute...Is this so much to ask? cheers
quote:
Originally posted by Christopher J Ailsby:
I would say the silence is defening. The thing that is most dissapointing is the lack of responce. A what was concidered honorable dealer, has not explained. A good reputation lost in a heart beat.
Unfortunately, this certainly appears to be correct. Ron has again exited without any response. I would like to read Dave's opinion on this because this episode could be in breach of the CoC in terms of how this item was described for sale. Very sad to see.
Regards
Russ
maybe he should has offered one of those "Max Certified Dealer" guarantees, with the purchase of the hat..
Just a followup note. You would expect this cap to come from the veteran either with its original insignia on it because it is mint, or as I stated before with them removed which could be understandable post war. If as it appears now the insignia are reproduction then THEY HAVE BEEN ADDED AFTER THE FACT BY SOMEONE!!!!! WHO????? David
thats is why there is nothing to expect
I don't have a dog in this fight because I know nothing about SS visors but I just concluded a deal with Ron and found him very professional and would do more business in a heart beat. No one's perfect but he's one of the good guys in this hobby IMO.
I ALSO CONCUR WITH ERICH AND ROBERT. RON SPECIALIZES IN EDGED WEAPONS AND THE NPEA. HE WAS VERY FORTHCOMING WITH HIS INITIAL STATEMENTS WITH REGARDS TO THIS HAT.
RON, YOU CERTAINLY DO NOT OWE ME OR ANYONE ELSE AN APOLOGY. WHAT A PATHETIC REMARK.
Ron is a big boy and he can defend himself..I did not like the assertions and insinuations that were made towards Patrice by two members of this forum and it is my opinion, and I retain my right to it that an apology would perhaps be the decent thing to do, and the gentlemanly thing to do. I have done so to Ron and have defended his cap and his reputation. I have received private emails from Ron and others through this entire post and I am sorry to say that the architect of this mess is the person that originally posted it.It was mishandled and I think that is the consensus of opinion here. I know your opinion of me Bob as the email in which you expressed it was made known to me. It would be interesting to see if the owner of the cap was a "newbie" how many people would jump to his defence under similiar and identical circumstances..this thread has become redundant and should be put out of its misery.
If I bought the cap and found out the eagle was bad,I know Ron would make good on it.That is my experience in dealing with him for several years.
quote:
Originally posted by
[email protected]:
..this thread has become redundant and should be put out of its misery.
AMEN!!!!!!!!!!
Beaten to death..........
Seiler
Sorry, but there are un-answered questions here.
So, is it now okay to sell an item as original, have it found to contain fake part(s), and allow the seller to offer no explanation?
Is it also okay now for the administrator and the seller to harass a prospective buyer who wanted the item reviewed for authenticity, have the item found to be not 100% original, and accept no further comment from the administrator or the seller?
I may be missing something here, but it seems the For Sale rule is now saying Buyer Beware, with no guarantee of anything. Surely, someone needs to address this or offer an explanation?
Regards
Russ
Russ man what are you doing...don't you know that you will incur the wrath...just let it go man....safer that way...and then everything can get back to normal and in a month or so no one will remember a thing or even care..trust me best this way for everyone. That is what this forum is all about...
all is right with the world once again..the establishment and the ruling class are safe
cheers
seems to me much of this "stimulating" chatter, no matter how justified on the merits, can be conducted by PM.
that wd. free up more bandwidth for discussing militaria as such, and not accusations. as the bartenders say when tempers flare, "take it outside guys - I don't wanna have to grab my baseball bat!"
quote:
Originally posted by SEEKING3945:
gentlemen:I am new to the site,but i am in my 39 year of collecting.I have seen much in those years.please let it go,their are many things in life that are important ,but is this one of them?A simple apoligy to Mr.AILSBY for bad manners shown him in the attacks on him.None of this is right and remember that young collectors who are on the site must wonder what the devil is going on,remember "peace on earth"
With respect, this is not about apologies for childish attacks on members - go back and read the thread, and the For Sale thread.
This goes to the heart of the Code of Conduct here - if we are openly permitted to sell fakes stated as originals, with apparent condonement from the administrators in this instance, what hope is there for new members and collectors to trust the information and items offered at this site?
Ryan, I'll take my chances - maybe I'm pushing it up-hill here, but this won't go away until an explanation is offered. And if I am wrong, and have mis-interpreted this situation, I will make an apology to those concerned.
Regards
Russ
Russ,,Ryan has been around here long enough to know the status quo.. Please just read his post again,,then,,read one more time
..
That's how it is here,period, end of sentence,,no need for
you to make an apology.
Just click your heels 3 times and chant,,lets see another dagger, lets see another dagger, lets see,,
Russ, another truth seeker here.
Yes, unfortunatly in this changing world some things
don't change that should change. It has been demonstrated here many a time for those that refused to believe.
Instead of questions being answered the questionare gets attacked. Instead of answered how that fake eagle landed on the Vets SS visor...you get warned not to anger "OZ". Instead of apoligies to our esteemed collectors and authors Christopher and Patrice they get silence. Anything new here? Anyone learning here?
Does repeating help anything here? I don't think so. So why even bother my friend. Because in about a couple of months this thread will be gone also.
I do commend you on asking the right questions. Regards,
-serge-
Thanks Gaspare I have talked to Russ...he is on the same page and he "got" it
cheers to all and to all a good nite, Ryan
Pat,
Don't know if you got this one but wow! Now there is a one looker, rare early Allgemeine crusher..and IMO very reasonably priced.
http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=326462 And you get
two sets of insignias... and uh...they are..uh..original.
Regards,
-serge-
Call me crazy, but I'd put the OLD insignia back on that lovely early cap in a heartbeat. Maybe it's original, but it doesn't look right on such an early cap. Yummy cap!!
so what is the status of this hat now???..
,,,Robert
This hat has been shipped to the west coast and, as with all my transactions, I will have no further comments on this item with respect to the current owner.
Ron Weinand
Weinand Militaria
No further comments??
Where are your comments??
No-one is asking for comments with respect to the current owner. We are waiting for your comments on how this veteran-bought visor has a fake eagle on it, and also whether it is an 'old motel buy' or a 'new visor', based on the two different descriptions you gave this thing on two different forums.
You were very quick to comment on militarymania's question - how about answering these questions with the same rapidity?
Regards
Russ
Reminds me of the Teflon Don thread.
The interjection here clears up nothing and the fact the cap is or isn't sold clears up nothing either. The fact that an item sells does not have anything to do with its authenticity. The visor's originality was never a question for me, just the manner in which it was presented to this forum..It remains a shame that this has never been cleared up. I think someone's reputation has been hurt more than they either know or unfortunately care by this entire episode. cheers
sellick,,,i could'nt agree with you more,,,'tis a dirty rotten shame,and did'nt need to happen..
Having stared the thread, I think I must make a comment. The question is not of the origanality of the cap. This as I have stated, I do not have the knolege. Infact, I have 3 caps and I was hoping to get knolagable help as to their origanality. But back to the problem, a respected dealear has described the cap in two totaly different manners on two forums. WHY? Also as a Chemist, and I use this with strength of conviction,why would he have done ths? Motel buy, are the Holy Grail of collections. TJ has been on these jollys, who dose this boad for the material gained in this manner?
OK - back to the cap, the insignia has been proved to be fake. OK when was this applied? By who was it applied? Taking all this into account we are left with the two statements about the cap on two different forums. I do not think the reader of this have to be Einstien to come to a conclusion. But Ron is a reputable man, please come forward and explain. We all can make a mistake.
I still find it rather alarming that the apparent breach of the COC has not been addressed in this case, but has been continuously and rigorously applied in threads concerning gun control, politics and religion more recently. Afterall, as the Administrator says, this is a site to discuss militaria collecting, yet when we find a breach, as in this topic, it is ignored - why is that?
Regards
Russell
from the coc,,,"We are dedicated to expanding knowledge of genuine historical relics and, by default, exposing faked, reworked, and enhanced items that deceive collectors. To avoid confusion, we require that members posting images disclose anything that is not 100% original in any image that they post. Violators may be suspended for 30 days. Repeat violators will be expelled."..guess this part was overlooked,,,
I don't know if we really want to open up this topic again as it really serves no purpose...good cap with questionable insignia...made known to the seller prior to listing and yet not disclosed when posted here for sale in clear violation of COC yet no explanation nor apology...that is what has left a bad taste in some members' mouths = privately owned and operated site....no one in my opinion was looking to tar and feather anyone as mistakes are made...people just wanted some form of reply to what took place, minus the arrogance and selective prejudice for big names.
beware the inner circle.it will swallow you up and spit you out.
..."will it go 'round in circles"
cheers, RYan