Pckelhaube Grenadier - opinions

Like the other one, can you get photos of the back of the plate and the helmet with the plate off? Missing a couple of chinscales, but that's no biggie. The reason I'm wondering is that the plate doesn't seem to fit the helmet very well, so it would be good to see the shell with it off.

:D Ron
 
Welcome to the forum S. Your pics unfortunately, are too large to fit the site format and are being stretched like we are viewing through a "fish eye" lens. The last 2 on this post came through nicely so that is the size format needed.
 
Herr_S said:
without eagle ... two extra holes as if the helm is been used for another eagle?

Yes. However, that's not necessarily bad for an officer's / private purchase helmet. He may have changed regiments and used the same helmet. To me, judging from the crazing around the holes and the color of the leather, these may be legitimate since both have the same 'patina'. ON the other hand, if somebody picked this up right after WWI and tossed another eagle on it, then that's not good. You'll really never know which is the case. ON the OTHER other hand, there is no obvious imprint from another plate that I can see, so that's a good thing...

This is why collectors like 'no extra holes'. Less of :-k [-o< and more of \:D/ =D>

Thanks for posting the photos.

:D Ron
 
poniatowski said:
Yes. However, that's not necessarily bad for an officer's / private purchase helmet. He may have changed regiments and used the same helmet. To me, judging from the crazing around the holes and the color of the leather, these may be legitimate since both have the same 'patina'. ON the other hand, if somebody picked this up right after WWI and tossed another eagle on it, then that's not good. You'll really never know which is the case. ON the OTHER other hand, there is no obvious imprint from another plate that I can see, so that's a good thing...

Ron, Grenadier helmets changed Wappens starting in 1888. kaisers bunker lists the dates in the the link below. So the change to the new eagle explain different holes. For EM helmets, the makers tried to make new grenadier eagles to fit the old holes, but they did not always fit. Officers would get what they get. Unless a grenadier officer was made after the date of the eagle change, you will usually see double holes.

http://www.kaisersbunker.com/pe/m1887.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
WWI Collector said:
poniatowski said:
Yes. However, that's not necessarily bad for an officer's / private purchase helmet. He may have changed regiments and used the same helmet. To me, judging from the crazing around the holes and the color of the leather, these may be legitimate since both have the same 'patina'. ON the other hand, if somebody picked this up right after WWI and tossed another eagle on it, then that's not good. You'll really never know which is the case. ON the OTHER other hand, there is no obvious imprint from another plate that I can see, so that's a good thing...

Ron, Grenadier helmets changed Wappens starting in 1888. kaisers bunker lists the dates in the the link below. So the change to the new eagle explain different holes. For EM helmets, the makers tried to make new grenadier eagles to fit the old holes, but they did not always fit. Officers would get what they get. Unless a grenadier officer was made after the date of the eagle change, you will usually see double holes.

http://www.kaisersbunker.com/pe/m1887.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes, you're absolutely right. I have a grenadier E.M. that was converted. For that one, the older holes were covered over (in this case a plus I think). I had completely forgotten about that.

So we are agreed that these look to be contemporary and probably legitimate?

:D Ron
 
Thank you very much for the input.
So i learned that the holes are a good sign with this type of helmets? Does anybody has a picture of the old Wappen?
 
Back
Top