Questionable Camos

[M45]

ANOTHER ghosted wire. (GHW2 Ron R. collection)

Which came first, the chicken or the egg ?

Which came first, the chicken wire or the camo ? Wire first and then camo + wire removal ? Or camo first then wire + wire removal ? I'll let the experts debate that one.

Pristine condition material amidst large areas of paint popped off to bare rusted steel (do I have to tell you how bad that looks ?).

A green + red/brown with woodchips ? and ghosted wire ? The amount of stuff going on with that one is the second red flag.

Postwar fake camos tend to be much more elaborate (a variety of colors, an interesting texture, an interesting scheme, +/- wires etc...). Originals tend toward simplicity.

Another work of art/movie prop example. I do have to commend the artists. If these guys had been around in the 60s-70s when they made many war movies, the helmets would have been much more believable.

They are excellent movie props. They are NOT rare originals, IMO. The really sad thing is that collectors are looking at their 2-4K movie props believing them to be real. It will not be until after their passing that the families will receive a severe shock upon finding out how valuable these collections really are; re: their $100,000 rare camo collection is actually worth only about $5,000.

 

[Player11]

Player11 I understand the work you put in but this is a forum. The point is to share knowledge. I think many would appreciate you sharing yours.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Thanks, yes.
But you can see the difference, i aport what i see in camos i elaborate my theory ( can like or dislike) and then, come M45 and post a helmet like who post a flower, no explanation, nothing that can be apported apart from taking pics from another forum

Is funny to see the difference between the people who study and handle camos and helmets in general and those parasit.

 

[mcorioles]

That's what really makes this type of helment collecting so dangerously to get screwed. If you know nothing about collecting helmets expecially camo helmets then you risk losing a lot of money. M45 did bring up a good point there are a lot of original ones out there but in the past it was hard to find them. Why is it all the sudden tons of them are coming out of the woodwork and thats not just because the veterans and collecters are passing away.

I always believe what a wise collector told me when I first started collecting anything. If it sounds too good to be true or if it looks too good to be true most likely it's a fake.

Hes wrong again for 1 simple reason....the proliferation of the Internet.

How could M45 know camos were scarce?

Did he travel door to door in every State and Country?

Also whats perplexing is we have given multiple reasons why he's wrong ,mostly with just common sense like my above statement.

 

[mcorioles]

About time player11. Why was that so hard for you to share your knowledge. Posts like that are much more productive than personal attacks on M45.

Why was his previous post about a camo jumping out at you likely being post war vs a camo that blends in likely original. Wouldn't a camo that jumps out at you as soon as you see it really not be a very good camo. Isn't the point of a camo to blend in? I think that was the point M45 was making. That a bright shiny camo helmet would not make very good camouflage during a war. I am asking for an honest answer from yourself. As I read this thread it is becoming obvious to me that you also possess knowledge of camos. If you and M45 could have civil debates on camos presented this thread would be much more valuable.

McOrioles I'm afraid just relies on the opinions of others and is only here because he is upset his collection is being dissected. He is purely trying to discredit M45 without offering any defense of his items. For instance if someone said my Finnish Bayonets are fake I would certainly be able to defend them and likely prove the person wrong. During the back and forth both parties and other observers would likely learn a thing or two. Why can't the same thing be done here?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Can you read? Just before your post I gave multiple reasons why my net lid is real.

Unbelievable ......

And again, now you and M45 make unsubstantiated comments with ABSOLUTLEY no evidence.

LOL,you know nothing about me yet you've summed up my collecting prowess

If I didn't know better I would think this thread is a parody.

BTW if I was upset I wouldn't be here, people on GHW and WAF were all laughing at this thread so I checked it out.

You think I'm going to post my lids in here to get upset?

No and if you actually read my posts, which you obviously haven't you would see I posted ONE pic if most of them to prove a point, which I did.

That alone should make you pause about those two's "assessments".

 

[mcorioles]

Trust me no collector gets upset by what M45 has to say.

 

[Hambone]

I paid $400 (may have been less like $350) for this helmet no later than 1992. The research came years later:
http://www.k98kforum.com/showthread.php?617-M.40-Helmet-w-net-Normandy-ID-d

I believe that it compares favorably to the Mcorioles net helmet.

 

[M45]

Ghw2 Ron R. camo with painted name.

Pristine condition material (essentially no combat wear at all) yet heavy wear to the rim (see front shot) and crown with a large area of paint popped off to bare steel with hard breaks.

Material applied to inner rim carefully around a nice painted name (a nice touch collectors like to see).

Disparity of wear; heavy rim/vent crown wear amidst pristine conditioned material (red flag).


If you can spot the characteristics of this questionable camo, you will be well ahead of the game. Many, many such camos have these identical characteristics.

Different color combinations, different texture media, different painted names, maybye some wire or ghosted wire or not;

but look for the heavy rim/vent wear amidst pristine condition material with several heavy hits to the crown down to bare steel with hard breaks, typically with recent rust, often with a nice clear bright painted name.

 

[M45]

Ghw2 favorites (John Burnett collection ?).

1. Claude Monet style camo (work of art)

2. White medic with red painted cross.

Re: the medics, someone mentioned that a dealer had acquired a load of postwar white painted helmets. It appears that these had the red cross more recently applied.

 

[mcorioles]

I see wear around the entire rim.

 

[Player11]

Ghw2 favorites (John Burnett collection ?).

1. Claude Monet style camo (work of art)

2. White medic with red painted cross.

Re: the medics, someone mentioned that a dealer had acquired a load of postwar white painted helmets. It appears that these had the red cross more recently applied.

Is very surprising how you can see from this distance that first camo is a " Claude Monet" fake, just for having those colours?, if you want to be have more credit, at least, ask better pics and after studying it, you can see what you want. But in this way, without knowing the wear that it has, the scratches that it has, etc, etc...

I imagine expert on art, wacthing pictures of famous artist ( like Claude monet as you say) using magnyficient glass and being near of them, and you only by pics from this distance?, i know your ego is very high, but its impossible to do what you do from that distance.

The other problem is if you believe your own lies, that following all this time, i think the problem comes for that way

 

[capt14k]

Can you read? Just before your post I gave multiple reasons why my net lid is real.

Unbelievable ......

And again, now you and M45 make unsubstantiated comments with ABSOLUTLEY no evidence.

LOL,you know nothing about me yet you've summed up my collecting prowess

If I didn't know better I would think this thread is a parody.

BTW if I was upset I wouldn't be here, people on GHW and WAF were all laughing at this thread so I checked it out.

You think I'm going to post my lids in here to get upset?

No and if you actually read my posts, which you obviously haven't you would see I posted ONE pic if most of them to prove a point, which I did.

That alone should make you pause about those two's "assessments".

I don't know much about GHW2 but to reference WAF as a good source is comical. I'm sure there are guys there that know their helmets, but they are the forum that supported Champagne Rune and XRFacts. Plus the owner can't even own firearms. He isn't smart enough to not discharge firearms out his bedroom window (in his parents house) where the houses are less than 50' from each other.

It's kind of like saying most of the guys at gunboards said my SS K98k is real. Unless it was the owners here posting on gunboards, or a handful of other members left there that know anything, what the rest say is meaningless.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[Niblet]

I don't know much about GHW2 but to reference WAF as a good source is comical. I'm sure there are guys there that know their helmets, but they are the forum that supported Champagne Rune and XRFacts. Plus the owner can't even own firearms. He isn't smart enough to not discharge firearms out his bedroom window (in his parents house) where the houses are less than 50' from each other.

It's kind of like saying most of the guys at gunboards said my SS K98k is real. Unless it was the owners here posting on gunboards, or a handful of other members left there that know anything, what the rest say is meaningless.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Are we talking Seba? or Dave Suter? Suter is an ex-cop,,,he is well into his 60's, I believe he is the current owner of WAF or so I am told

 

[capt14k]

Are we talking Seba? or Dave Suter? Suter is an ex-cop,,,he is well into his 60's, I believe he is the current owner of WAF or so I am told

Sebastian. If he doesn't own it anymore then I need to change statement to former owner

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[M45]

Is very surprising how you can see from this distance that first camo is a " Claude Monet" fake, just for having those colours?, if you want to be have more credit, at least, ask better pics and after studying it, you can see what you want. But in this way, without knowing the wear that it has, the scratches that it has, etc, etc...

I imagine expert on art, wacthing pictures of famous artist ( like Claude monet as you say) using magnyficient glass and being near of them, and you only by pics from this distance?, i know your ego is very high, but its impossible to do what you do from that distance.

The other problem is if you believe your own lies, that following all this time, i think the problem comes for that way

So I'm egotistical, a liar, a fraud, and a long list of other unsavory things for having differing opinions ? Why not stick to the topic at hand - questionable camos ?

The Claude Monet M42 has numerous red flags that I can see without requiring additional photos, without having an in-hand inspection, and without examining the COA paperwork and ownership history.

A 3 color Normandy scheme brush painted on with texturing no less (red flag) RAL colors off (red flag) in a highly creative splotch pattern (red flag) with near 100% coverage (red flag) with essentially no apparent combat wear with pristine conditioned paint including the crown (red flag) from the esteemed collection of John Burnett (red flag as numbers of his previous camos I've seen were questionable as well).

When adding up the red flags (6) and considering how such a rare work of art could have survived the war in such pristine condition without having been buried in a big hole at the end of the war, reissued for a postwar European government, reworked into a farm or kitchen implement or long ago collected up into a high-end collection,

I have concluded that it is very very unlikely that such a camo (and the many like them) could be authentic.

Also, I would not expect there to be any rock-solid traceable vet provenance on this.

 

[Hambone]

I don't know much about GHW2 but to reference WAF as a good source is comical. I'm sure there are guys there that know their helmets, but they are the forum that supported Champagne Rune and XRFacts. Plus the owner can't even own firearms. He isn't smart enough to not discharge firearms out his bedroom window (in his parents house) where the houses are less than 50' from each other.

It's kind of like saying most of the guys at gunboards said my SS K98k is real. Unless it was the owners here posting on gunboards, or a handful of other members left there that know anything, what the rest say is meaningless.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Some of the same guys here are at Gunboards. Farb mods there. I look at it as more of a "K98k 101" freshman course. If guys don't want to get further into it, that's fine and an excellent place for general discussion. It also encourages interest in the hobby. We aren't a commercial site like Gunboards and WAF.

 

[capt14k]

Some of the same guys here are at Gunboards. Farb mods there. I look at it as more of a "K98k 101" freshman course. If guys don't want to get further into it, that's fine and an excellent place for general discussion. It also encourages interest in the hobby. We aren't a commercial site like Gunboards and WAF.

I know that's why I said other than the owners here and a handful of others. Most of the guys have left gunboards to either come here, because they passed on, or other reasons.

Some of the threads have been decent lately. Mainly because they are areas that interest me the most which is South American Contract Mausers. However there were way too many threads of newer collectors attacking collectors with much more knowledge. This also caused some of them to leave. Granted I only pay attention to threads that someone I follow posts in. I don't go there looking for threads anymore. So maybe it has gotten better again. My statement was based on about 6 months ago.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[capt14k]

Way to address my post,nice how you left out smearing me after I gave you proof that counters your assanine statement .

What I saw was a generalization that another member said you were wrong about. Maybe I missed a post.

I really don't find a need to personally attack you even though you seem to not be able to not launch personal attacks.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[mcorioles]

All I see here is super obvious E Bay lids called out and ones that GHW also say are bad,but for some reason M45 doesn't disclose that.

A novice can identify those.

This is the problem,less knowledgeable posters see this and think he's good at determining fakes, the problem is there are many called fake that simply aren't

This angers us because most of us have put the work in over years.

Then you have a guy,M45 who dismissed all the collective knowledge with generalities and does not focus just on the lid.

Example, "fresh looking camos are bad"

Yeah possibly but not a absolute.

He blurs the line between good assesments and opinions.

And I will say this M45 ABSOLUTLEY has knowledge,I can tell.Its just applied wrong.

And Nibbles just doesn't know what the (I have a small penis) he's talking about.

 

[Player11]

So I'm egotistical, a liar, a fraud, and a long list of other unsavory things for having differing opinions ? Why not stick to the topic at hand - questionable camos ?

The Claude Monet M42 has numerous red flags that I can see without requiring additional photos, without having an in-hand inspection, and without examining the COA paperwork and ownership history.

A 3 color Normandy scheme brush painted on with texturing no less (red flag) RAL colors off (red flag) in a highly creative splotch pattern (red flag) with near 100% coverage (red flag) with essentially no apparent combat wear with pristine conditioned paint including the crown (red flag) from the esteemed collection of John Burnett (red flag as numbers of his previous camos I've seen were questionable as well).

When adding up the red flags (6) and considering how such a rare work of art could have survived the war in such pristine condition without having been buried in a big hole at the end of the war, reissued for a postwar European government, reworked into a farm or kitchen implement or long ago collected up into a high-end collection,

I have concluded that it is very very unlikely that such a camo (and the many like them) could be authentic.

Also, I would not expect there to be any rock-solid traceable vet provenance on this.

Yes, you are a liar and inventing many of the things you post here, with such a far pics is imposible to say what you say, for somebody who has handled camo helmets, there can be minor damage that pics can´t show you. Many all the things you are proving here are based in your fantasy of being a camo expert, you are expecting to win the lottery and be the heroe of finding all the camo fakes out there, just bad judging all what you can see and all what you cant guarantee because with those pics and without handling them is almost impossible.
You can have a doubt, for example, with helmets like the one posted the other day as semi- relic, but with those camo, that you havent handled in your lfe, its impossible to have a 100% idea , and much less with so far pics, if helmet is good of bad.

Basically, you have a paranoid with camos and you bad judge them. In my boof you dont have not fucking idea of what you are talking about.
Minty camos not equal to fakes
Normandy camos not equal to fakes
RAL colours exist, of cource, but the theory ussing them here is a pure invention that gives stupid sense to you arguements.

Before speaking, you must handle helmets and in you collection i have only seen four sad non decaled helmets. So your reasons for beeing fakes camos are so stupid than even a child wouldnt follow you.

Now it seens that famous collectors are full of fakes camos and just because you have seen it??!!!

C`mon please, be more serious and dont stop taking your medicine

 

[Niblet]

All I see here is super obvious E Bay lids called out and ones that GHW also say are bad,but for some reason M45 doesn't disclose that.

A novice can identify those.

This is the problem,less knowledgeable posters see this and think he's good at determining fakes, the problem is there are many called fake that simply aren't

This angers us because most of us have put the work in over years.

Then you have a guy,M45 who dismissed all the collective knowledge with generalities and does not focus just on the lid.

Example, "fresh looking camos are bad"

Yeah possibly but not a absolute.

He blurs the line between good assesments and opinions.

And I will say this M45 ABSOLUTLEY has knowledge,I can tell.Its just applied wrong.

And Nibbles just doesn't know what the (I have a small penis) he's talking about.

Then perhaps you can tell us simpletons why you think M-45 is wrong,,,you talk about generalizations???