Originally from post#134 of this thread of DougB's champagne analysis, I want to examine Doug's thinking as he discusses C-SS in relation to the different shell maker/models where it is found. If we can understand how his logic went awry, maybe we can be prepared if such skewed logic should arise in the future.
I believe this post was originally from GHW1 (July 2, 2013). I made some minor edits (spelling, spacing). The reason for this post was IMO to answer the numerous questions Doug had been receiving about the Champagne SS decals.
JULY 2, 2013 (DOUG'S CHAMPAGNE SS DECAL SYNOPSIS) (synopsis in italics, my comments in standard type)
-"Frank asked me via email for information regarding lot numbers on these but nobody can make any sense of these by lot numbers. There are so few you won’t find doubles and it is a vast oversimplification of the subject matter. To discuss this decal on its own and in the general sense forums discuss them (i.e.; It’s real, no its not, yes it is, no its not) without facts is pointless. The conversation on this decal in the past has been vastly oversimplified and been typically driven by those who mainly have never held an SS helmet never mind conducted an intensive in-depth study on SS decals.
Since the Champagne SS, similar to the Ed Strache Heer decal, was applied postwar without regard to maker, model or lot number, then C-SS lot numbers would show no rhyme or reason to them, other than the fact that many show up in no-decal territory, because late ND helmets are the most available (as opposed to reissued ND M35s and M40s with factory style paint which are much less common - Q M40s excepted). Now it is clear why we don't see doubles of these. A vast oversimplification of the matter? I think it is Doug who is making the issue more complex than it really is. Make the issue so "complex" that only the "experts" can figure it out. That's right, the issue has been driven by those who are not even SS helmet "experts", those who have never even held an SS helmet, never mind conducted this "extensive research" like Doug and Kelly have.
-In the interest of not having to revisit this topic which appears about once or twice a year with always the same result here are my thoughts of what I see is a highly complex matter and for what it is worth, you can take or leave them. Pardon the exhaustive post, but I believe it is necessary.
Doug has been promoting C-SS for years. Now that doubts and questions have arisen about their authenticity, collectors naturally have questions about this. But since these questions never receive sufficient answers, the questions continue. Once again, this is a "highly complex matter", and complex matters can only be understood and explained by "experts". Now listen carefully young students, and our teacher will explain to us this very complex issue. Now, Doug is growing tired of having to re-visit this issue twice a year so he is going to lay it all out for us once and for all. Once he has completely explained the matter, that should suffice, in other words, after this, no more questions about C-SS.
-M35 NS; - Champagne decals; I prefer to call them NS decals. Why, because on the NS M35 they are distinct, appear on 1938 marked shells painted exactly the same using NS party decals. There are only a small handful (9 are recorded by Kelly I think, I have recorded 5). They are all identical in every respect primarily D shells in a tight cluster of lot numbers. 3 are named, 2 are fully researched. I own one of the named and researched ones (It was formerly a GHW helmet of the year) and have held in my hands to study 2 others. This decal appears on a transitional reissue I also owned at one time. Magnification shows unique fingerprints matching the NS from the reissue, and these NS decals are the only ones I have seen like this other than on an hkp M42 shell. These also follow the pattern of SS Pochers, which appear on only 2 known prewar SE M35 helmets, and reissues from the formative years of the SS. Historical application patterns like this are very important as we will discuss later.
Why call C-SS the NS-SS decal ? How could they be 'distinct' ? C-SS appears on nearly every maker and model. That C-SS is found on a few D marked shells in a 'tight' lot# cluster with 1938 dates and similar factory paint means only that such helmets were targeted for the treatment. It does not mean they are original. The NS party decals he is referring to may be postwar applied field police party decals or the template spray painted fake party insignia that was produced in conjunction with C-SS. Only a small handful ? That should have raised a red flag right there. 3 named, 2 fully researched ? Completely meaningless considering C-SS has been exposed as a postwar forgery. A former GHW HOY ? Why am I not surprised ? C-SS appears on a transitional 'reissue'. Not surprising as C-SS appears nearly everywhere.
Magnification shows 'unique fingerprints' matching the NS from the reissue. Remember that such fingerprints can be seen on original decals, but here we are not told what such C-SS fingerprints are. Now we know what they are; overspray beyond masked areas, fuzzy lines where spray went underneath templates, inconsistent shield breaks and points showing custom template work, inconsistent borders showing custom template work, inconsistent runic dimensions showing custom template work. flaking paint on runes and borders, C-SS paint rubbed down to factory shell finish, and repetitive pock marks and hack marks showing the faux wear.
-Historical application patterns like this are very important as we will discuss later.
Historical (period) application patterns of C-SS ? A complete myth.
