31 replies to this topic

[Angrybudgie]

I have looked through the forum, and 'think' this helmet maybe the real deal. However before I rashly start bidding, I would like some advice from the experts.  This will be my first foray into equipment so any advice is greatfully recieved.

http://http://www.eb...984.m1423.l2649

  Thank you in advance
  
Elizabeth

[ScottM]

Hi,

the link is no good - can you post the item number?

[Angrybudgie]

Sorry 'bout that...here is the item number - Item number: 300696936372- it is on eBay Australia.

Elizabeth

[CGM]

I am just trying out posting the link this way.

CGM

Yes, that seems to work OK.

Edited by CGM, 22 April 2012 - 06:31 AM.

[Wendy Mac...]

I'm no expert on WW1 equipment but I notice that the sellers feedback is exceptionally good.

Wendy

[THE SHINY SEVENTH]

We have humpytart, now angrybudgie, are any of our lady pals not miserable? On a serious note, the helmet looks fine to me and in nice condition. How rare it actually is, is another matter, and hopefully someone else can answer that one. Worth a bid, but dont get carried away, its e-bay remember. Look for local military fayres in your area, probably find nice examples at reasonable prices and you can bid them down, rather than e-bay which only goes up!! Good luck, Sean

[Angrybudgie]

No not miserable, but some-one once said I was as menacing as an angrybudgie.....and it stuck as a good online name. Wasn't planning on getting carried away. If anyone can give me advice on current prices it would be appreciated. Then I can fix a highest figure in my mind and drop out if it goes past it.  One more question, do you think the paint job has been added post war???

   thanks everyone.

Elizabeth

[THE SHINY SEVENTH]

Considering the condition of the helmet, I would say its original paint, but thats only my opinion. As far as price, if you get it for less than $150, Id consider that a bargain, others may not agree. Once its over that price, it all depends on how much it means to you, but it does look a nice example. Try and e-mail the seller for a photo of the stamped markings on the underside of helmet and post them on here, someone will be able to give you a bit more information on it. Regards Sean

[Grovetown]

Wendy Mac... said:

1335081961[/url]' post='1742687']
I'm no expert on WW1 equipment but I notice that the sellers feedback is exceptionally good.

Wendy

I'm not referring to this seller at all: but one of the most outrageous purveyors of dodgy , fake and bodged-up militaria on eBay has 100% positive feedback - and in the thousands.
The rubber pad - as described - has nothing to do with private purchase or officers' helmets and is a standard feature of post-April 1917 helmets. The helmet is also missing a fibre crown that would have covered this ring.
Other than that, surely only a suicidal lunatic would 'camouflage' a helmet in such a fashion?
Cheers,
GT.

[THE SHINY SEVENTH]

Grovetown, on 22 April 2012 - 11:58 AM, said:

Other than that, surely only a suicidal lunatic would 'camouflage' a helmet in such a fashion?
Cheers,
GT.

you would think so, but Ive seen some German helmets with a similar un-camouflaged camouflage!!

[centurion]

Grovetown, on 22 April 2012 - 11:58 AM, said:

Other than that, surely only a suicidal lunatic would 'camouflage' a helmet in such a fashion?

France used a not dissimilar scheme for tanks and Britain and America for trucks and artillery pieces. It seems that at a distance the human eye/brain depends more on shape than colour for recognition and this makes it difficult to register the otherwise familiar 'coal scuttle' shape.

[GRANVILLE]

For what it’s worth, the liner looks far too good to me, bearing in mind the condition of the outer shell. The portion of the strap which is riveted to the inside of the shell is a distinctly different grain leather to that of the actual chin strap, which admittedly looks like it could be genuine, but for this reason I think the liner could be a well worn repro. I also find it hard to imagine why anyone would paint the shell in colours of red and yellow? If the colours are as apparent as they are 100 yrs later, one can only assume it must have been very striking when freshly painted, which to me seems more like an act of turning it into a target rather than camouflaging it. Where would the Aussies have been when a camo like this might have been helpful?
Dave

[Grovetown]

spconnolly007 said:

1335097930[/url]' post='1742803']
you would think so, but Ive seen some German helmets with a similar un-camouflaged camouflage!!

As maybe: but I still don't believe that this is a wartime scheme. Soon after perhaps, but not worn in theatre.
Cheers,
GT.

[Wainfleet]

Everything looks genuine and unmessed-with to me. Whilst I'd endorse GT's point that 100% feedback is no guarantee of anything, I believe this particular seller is one of Australia's established major dealers, of considerably higher standing than the lowlife trash over here that I believe GT is referring to.

I suspect this British helmet was issued to US troops, who did paint helmets in camo colours, albeit none as bright as this that I've seen before, and whether during or after the war has been the subject of some dispute on another forum. I seem to recall that the consensus leaned towards postwar. The paint finish looks of considerable age and I doubt there is anything fake about it.

[centurion]

Grovetown, on 22 April 2012 - 03:14 PM, said:

As maybe: but I still don't believe that this is a wartime scheme. Soon after perhaps, but not worn in theatre.
Cheers,
GT.

An orderfrom General Staff, dated July 7, 1918, specified that helmets should be painted with a camouflage pattern. This one appears to approximate to the pattern specified. (as most were done in the field there was a certain amount of variation. It did work.

See http://www.worldwar1.com/sfgstal.htm

[Grovetown]

centurion said:

1335109550[/url]' post='1742861']
An orderfrom General Staff, dated July 7, 1918, specified that helmets should be painted with a camouflage pattern. This one appears to approximate to the pattern specified. (as most were done in the field there was a certain amount of variation. It did work.

See http://www.worldwar1.com/sfgstal.htm

Sorry: I meant no allied (esp. US) camouflage helmets were worn in theatre. As Wainfleet says, there's a considerable divergence between our American brethren on the forum over this point; and even those asserting that camo helmets were worn in France accept that it must have been very late in the day.
Cheers,
GT.

[GRANVILLE]

Wainfleet, on 22 April 2012 - 03:28 PM, said:

Everything looks genuine and unmessed-with to me. Whilst I'd endorse GT's point that 100% feedback is no guarantee of anything, I believe this particular seller is one of Australia's established major dealers, of considerably higher standing than the lowlife trash over here that I believe GT is referring to.

I suspect this British helmet was issued to US troops, who did paint helmets in camo colours, albeit none as bright as this that I've seen before, and whether during or after the war has been the subject of some dispute on another forum. I seem to recall that the consensus leaned towards postwar. The paint finish looks of considerable age and I doubt there is anything fake about it.

Are we discussing the same helmet? The eBay listing clearly states its an Australian brodie?

Dave

[Wainfleet]

Correction to my earlier statement about this seller. I'd assumed it was the ebay arm of John Burridge Military Antiques, but on looking at his front page I see he dissociates himself from both JB Militaria and JB Military Antiques. I have no idea what's going on there and wouldn't wish to speculate. It doesn't alter the fact that I see nothing wrong with the helmet, although it's not the one I'd choose as a representative example.

[Wainfleet]

GRANVILLE, on 22 April 2012 - 04:42 PM, said:

Are we discussing the same helmet? The eBay listing clearly states its an Australian brodie?

Dave

Which doesn't actually make it one. It looks to be unmessed with, but what it is is another question.

[Angrybudgie]

Thank you very much everyone for the information.  

Sean - I to was thinking of topping out at about $150. It wont break the bank and seemed a reasonable price (although one went last night in UK for $300+)

GT - Yes the 100% always sends off little bells for me as well. Which is one reason I asked for advice.

Everyone - I have asked for additional photographs, so now we wait and see if any turn up. Then decide.

             - The colour scheme does look mad, but the brain/eyes see what it expects to see (which is why we can miss spelling mistakes when rereading something) and if the out line is wrong, it doesn't recognise it.

             - Did Australia make their own helmets or did Britain supply them as part of the British Army. I would have thought the latter rather than the former, why make them here and ship them all the way to France?


  Elizabeth

[Grovetown]

GRANVILLE, on 22 April 2012 - 04:42 PM, said:

Are we discussing the same helmet? The eBay listing clearly states its an Australian brodie?

Dave

Dave

And the evidence that it is an Australian helmet, other than the seller's assertion, is......?

Just because an eBay listing states something it don't make it necessarily so.

Cheers,

GT.

[CGM]

Grovetown, on 22 April 2012 - 11:58 AM, said:

................. The rubber pad - as described - has nothing to do with private purchase or officers' helmets and is a standard feature of post-April 1917 helmets. .............................................
Cheers,
GT.

Would anyone else like to add to this? I was surprised to see this comment from the seller.

CGM

[Wainfleet]

CGM, on 23 April 2012 - 07:24 AM, said:

Would anyone else like to add to this? I was surprised to see this comment from the seller.

CGM

It's well documented that the rubber "doughnut" was a standard feature, as GT states. The vendor evidently doesn't know a lot about WW1 Brodies and has got the wrong end of the stick from somewhere. This isn't a big surprise as dealers cover a very wide spread of nations and periods, and their specialist knowledge is often remarkably patchy. There is absolutely nothing to indicate that this was used by Australians beyond its present location, and everything to indicate it was used by the US Army.

If the OP simply wants a colourful Allied helmet that is vaguely of the period, nothing wrong with this. If she wants an Australian example, it isn't the one to go for.

[THE SHINY SEVENTH]

Wainfleet, on 23 April 2012 - 10:15 AM, said:

There is absolutely nothing to indicate that this was used by Australians beyond its present location, and everything to indicate it was used by the US Army.

If the OP simply wants a colourful Allied helmet that is vaguely of the period, nothing wrong with this. If she wants an Australian example, it isn't the one to go for.

I would agree 100%, although if Elizabeth wins it inside her budget, I would regard it as a reasonable price and an interesting object. Would you agree? Regards Sean

[Wainfleet]

Hi Sean

I can't argue about the price; it would be cheap enough. Yes it's an interesting object, but I can't help feeling there are plenty more interesting ones out there for not a lot more money. All a matter of what personally appeals!

Rgds,

W.