UBB.threads Forums Uniform & Accessories Helmet Forum Navy Decal

I was wondering if I could get feedback on this helmet decal. Thanks in advance for a candid and informed discussion.

Craig
The decal is not a correct original.

I have to disagree, this decal is a late war reissue decal. There are copies of this decal out there, but this is an original example found on reissue helmets around 1943 and later. The repro decals head are a little different shaped and the eyes on the copies do not have an iris. There are also some differences in the body to the chest feathers on the eagle's left side. The copies do not show the metallic content that this decal has either.

I think the decal is good also.

Its not the early layered decal you see on the early ET M35's.

As Larry mentioned its one I have seen this on re-issued helmets as well as the thin winged decal.

I have owned about 25-30 Navy Helmets and
I have never seen a Navy repro decal that I thought was close or would fool an experienced collector

Fake decal , never seen that kind of decal before or branded as a genuine KM.

Here's a thread on the WAF , helmet with the same decal.

http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=189243&highlight=dd+km

Craig, was this one that sold at the SOS ?

I have not held this helmet, so I have to base my opinion on the photo alone. I question the iris, it looks to be a victim of a well placed ding. I also don't like the shape of the L in front of the eye. Notice the shape of the far right claw...not quite right to me. It also has a well placed ding. The vertical lines in the wings seem a bit wavy...once again they look to have well placed dings..maybe to mask just how wavy? I know the decal Matt and Larry are talking of, but judging from the photo, I'm not convinced this is it. A tough one for sure!...Tom.

The shell it is on is a M35 made by SE. It's a double decal, why would a late war re-issue decal be on an early helmet? Unless that was the way it was reissued?

Just going on a gut feeling, I don't like the decal at all. My vote.................fake decal.

There were older repro Navy decal sets (tri-color and Adler)however , they had "left" and "right" written in German right on the bottom of the decal. They were oversize so if you looked at the side of the Helmet , they stuck out. Craigs does not match this one Here's an example --

It's a very interesting decal as it displays traits of several different originals. Metallic content seems good. (At least in pictures.) If I recall there is an army version of this decal also.

In my opinion this decal is a reproduction.

Best regards.

Jim

So, to summarize, we have an item here which some informed people like, and some informed people don't like. I would like to encourage further discussion here, to try to get to the bottom of this. The helmet is mine, and if it's deemed to be seriously questionable, it is not something I would want to sell without compensation to the buyer for the controversy. If on the other hand the controversy is unwarranted, I'd like to clear the air so the helmet can eventually find a good home. If it were an outright fake, it'd be pulled and thrown into my mistake drawer for sure. So, can we keep going on this one?

I think Matt and Larry should take a better look at this decal

They are the only ones who gave a positive.

I don't really need to take a closer look.
I think its a good decal.
I saw the helmet at the SOS.

All the repro Navy decals I have seen were very flat and did not have the gold metallic content.

Here is its Heer brother.

So Matt you are fine with a so-called 1943 reissue decal on a DD KM ?

This decal while not often seen is alway universally condemned. Do you own many helmets with such a decal ?

Schwerpunkt,
I had the helmet in my hands and actually did look at it. It is an original decal with very heavy gold metallic content. There are features on the decal that the repros do not have. The decal also matches the wear of the helmet and is properly constructed. You need to look at the Heer decal you posted and do a complete comparison to the decal on Craig's helmet. You will see the differences if you look.

Hi Larry , I'm not doubting that they have the correct metallic content but the graphics are quite off to any original KM or Heer I've seen.

So far you and Matt are the only two people that give this decal an A+.

Here another one :

http://www.overlord1944.com/FichaProducto.aspx?producto...riegsmarine%20Helmet

It seems both these helmets had a decal over another IMO. Both are extremely rare KM helmets that go for beaucoup dollars. Yet neither have the expected correct decal. ET and SE helmets respectively.

Hi Schwerpunkt (how about your name, makes conversation easier.

I don't think that decal in the above thread is a Navy decal, looks like a toned Army from those photos and definately not the Navy decal you would expect to see on an ET helmet.

I guess we can just agree to disagree, not a big deal to me.
It's just my opinion from actually handling the helmet and seeing this type of decal on other Navy helmets.

I am glad this discussion has been kept civil, sometimes they don't thats a good thing about this forum.

I think everyone expects to see the ET type 'layered' decal. I would suppose that there has to be other possible variants out there. Everyone has studied Army, SS and Luft decals, has anyone studied early KM decals that are on doubles?

I probably had 12-15 Navy helmets in my collection and beside the "textbook" ET outlined decal I know of three other Navy decals. Navy helmets are more scarce than SS and not many people have even handled a real Navy helmet. The decal on Craig's helmet was used on reissued helmets and M40s and M42s.

I've handled my share of Kriegsmarine helmets too sir. And my conclusion together with several other collectors I talked with is that it surely is not a good decal.

I rest my case as I don't think it will evolve towards any concensus.

quote:

I have owned about 25-30 Navy Helmets and
I have never seen a Navy repro decal that I thought was close or would fool an experienced collector

Well my self i have owned a bunch to but with respect from what you all say's this decal is a fake one.

Thomas

Well I guess we will agree to disagree on this particular decal.

Not a problem with me, I respect your opinion.
Its not my helmet and I really don't have a machine gun in this fight.

I would like to add in my opinion there are several different types of original Navy decals out there. (some feel this is not one of them, I disagree)i have heard a lot of collectors, some pretty experienced say if its not a gold double layer decal (early ET)its not a real Navy.
Well thats simply not true.

I also would like to thank everyone for keeping this thread civil.
It seems anymore this kind of discussion can take a turn for the worse and next thing you know someone is going to kill your Mom and burn your house down.

I will update this thread.
This particular helmet has been sold/sent to another collector and has been examined "in hand" by several others.

I will see if they will give their take on this decal.

Matt

After a brief visit to WAF, I must say it was refreshing indeed to see such a civil discussion. I am really looking forward to your update Matt.

Here's my take since I have been able to see this helmet in the 'flesh'.

My take is that it is 100% original. I think what the problem was is that it was marketed as a true DD KM, which it is not. What this helmet has going for it is that it has a 'rack' number painted in the dome of the helmet, also it has shell and liner size painted in the skirt. Indicitive of a shipboard helmet that was issued to a 'section' and not an individual. Also, there is a layer of darker green paint which is a repaint, which at one time covered the national colors. So in essance this helmet is a later reissued and redecaled helmet. The question is wether it was factory done or shipboard done, but in the end I don't think it matters, for it is what it is. That explains why there is a 'later' war KM eagle on a M35.

And just as a little note: on the tip of the chinstrap there is a eagle M, making me think that with the M35 liner (I would hunch that both are orginal to the helmet) that the repaint probably happened on ship either in 1940 or a little later when the regulations on DD helmets changed.

has anyone ever seen an army decal that has turned gold from the lacquer that was applied? if the decal matches the condition of the helmet more than likely original. to me the army decal that was shown looks more fake than the navy decal. just my opinon

please show me a late war helmet with this decal ?

Doesn't exist , never saw it. The graphics of this decal are bogus.

There's a good thread about KM's on the German Helmet Walhalla. Not one had a helmet with this decal. I've discussed this decal with a lot of collectors , all say fake.

You clearly state the helmet was covered with another kind of paint that has been removed. (which makes it not a very collectible helmet anymore) , it would seem to me that after this restoration at least one perhaps two fake decals were added. For the decal no hands on is needed ask any decent collector.

Schwerpunkt,
You actually think that a reissue paint makes a helmet not collectable? I think you misunderstand...the paint was more than likely removed around the National Colors as collectors did back in the day. And I don't know where you are getting that TWO fake decals were added....you seem to be making conclusions without knowing what you are looking at.

I should add....under close inspection the KM eagle is on top of another decal, probably happened when they repainted the helmet. You can kind of see it in the decal close-up, but you can really see it in-hand.

I'll leave the subject alone now, as you have my opinion and you are free to make your own.

Folk,

Interesting debate. I have no concerns about this piece, a genuine article.

Regards,

Billy

Good for you William , I remember you liking the NS DD KM posted on WAF too. Another bad one that turned up around the same time as this one.

Funny that all the DD KM's for sale in recent months all had "special/reissue" decals that no other collectors have ever seen on a KM before.

There was a good KM thread on GHW , it didn't produce any of these decals , it did produce quite a few nice DD KM's all which featured the correct decals. Oh and no KM NS as well. Never seen one except the one with the strange decal on WAF that you gave thumbs up to.

So it appears that Craig called in some 'collectors' to give this the old thumbs up so that he could get rid of it in peace and not in pieces. I pity the buyer.

Scherpunkt,

All I can present is an independent opinion, which I do without trying to cause offence.

Regards,

Billy

So, what is the retail value of this helmet in the hands of a full-retail dealer, taking into consideration the discussion we've had about it? See my other thread (the one I just started) about Navy Double Decal Prices. This is the helmet I'm asking about, and I would like to get a consenus (especially from Matt and Larry) on the retail value of this helmet.

This is 100% repro!!!

Ross

This is a ridiculous scenario...the "dealer" buys stuff, has the forum argue about it's authenticity (or lack of) and can disclaim all responsibility as it is patently obvious he had NO clue and wanted to say "Jimmy said it was good".

Have we not seen this movie several times before? Is this not the very same scenario being concurrently presented with tunics, daggers and other items. I, for one, am (as lawyers say) shocked and appalled by the tolerance of the forum for this type of presentation. Now he wants everyone else to price it! I cannot believe what I just read, having read it from start to this post.

Mark

Mark: You can play politics all you want, but you'll be playing without me.

Craig, there is not a hint of politics in my statement. First, you want to know if something is "good". Then, you want to know how much to charge for it if anyone else says it is?

What kind of a dealer would do that? Jeez, read a book or something. That is purely embarrassing for you to do that and then (if it blows up later) claim you didn't know if it was right or not and blame it on the people who gave you the opinions.

Rather 'Clintinesque' I would think...define "is" like "IS it a good one"?

Mark

No dog in this fight, but I feel it's very unfair to criticize Craig for requesting input on items he may sell. This doesn't automatically mean his motive is a wish to be absolved in the event the item isn't authentic. A militaria dealer is expected to be knowledgable, but no one knows everything, as evidenced by this decal that even experts disagree on. If he had just sold the helmet, there'd be someone who would say, "Well, why didn't he post it on the forum if he wasn't sure?"