SS M35 Helmet Shell

**chbingle** · 11-25-2018, 12:25 AM

Hello all, I got this M35 SS Helmet from a friend of mine today. We are both not 100% sure of it being a legit SS helmet, but it does appear to be very convincing. The decal appears correct to me and it looks like its been aged as expected being a ground dug example. The markings are difficult to make out but appears like a "3591" with an additional "5" marked above and maker appears to be "ET". Any opinions or information is very appreciated and welcomed as always!

**Espenlaub Militaria** · 11-25-2018 12:25 AM

We also buy and trade your items and full collections!

**chbingle** · 11-25-2018, 12:34 AM

My friend also looked up the codes in the book "German Helmet Lot Numbers" by Brian Ice and it does match as an SS M35 Single Decal helmet. I'm cautiously optimistic but would love to get other's opinions on it

**bsiwula1** · 11-25-2018, 12:44 AM

Hello. The decals match up pretty close to the ET shown in the reference thread. It would be difficult to recreate that level of deterioration imo. But never say never. I'd wait til the helmet guys give it a look and of course price is subjective as well. Best regards.

Brian

**MAP** · 11-25-2018, 01:06 AM

by bsiwula1

Hello. The decals match up pretty close to the ET shown in the reference thread. It would be difficult to recreate that level of deterioration imo. But never say never. I'd wait til the helmet guys give it a look and of course price is subjective as well. Best regards.

Brian

Brian,

Sorry but these two decals are totally different. The one on the left "resembles" a Pocher. Not the ET you are showing on the right.

That is not to say a Pocher could not be on an ET (they were on early ET's as well as re-issues)

There is not enough left for me and my experience level to form an opinion, but I do not see the darker black border you typically see on the runes (Pochers were two layers with the runes being added over the metallic background. The runes were oversized thus giving the appearance of a "blacker" border around the runes). Also, what little I can see of the runes appears to be razor sharp straight edges. Under magnification original decals are not so sharp.

That said, the black border around the whole decal was also added as part of the second step. I see it flaked off. That might be a good sign along with it being thicker than the other makers styles.

Again, I will defer to others....I'm far from a pro on SS decals.

**FALLSCHIRMJAGER** · 11-25-2018, 01:24 AM

Hi, that's not an ET decal to me, the rune sits to high to the break of the shield, also i had a look in the lot reference that as we all know means very little and i could not see an SS in the ET or EF (just to be sure) in that lot range. Leon.

**MAP** · 11-25-2018, 01:28 AM

by FALLSCHIRMJAGER

Hi, that's not an ET decal to me, the rune sits to high to the break of the shield, also i had a look in the lot reference that as we all know means very little and i could not see an SS in the ET or EF (just to be sure) in that lot range. Leon.

Yes....i.e. Brian Ice does not "vet" his Lot #'s (or so I have heard - don't know the man and am not knocking him). I only trust Franks database. Given the key points of this decals are gone, I could not tell if the runes were equal or above the break (definitely not below like a Q).

**FALLSCHIRMJAGER** · 11-25-2018, 01:51 AM

by MAP

Yes....i.e. Brian Ice does not "vet" his Lot #'s (or so I have heard - don't know the man and am not knocking him). I only trust Franks database. Given the key points of this decals are gone, I could not tell if the runes were equal or above the break (definitely not below like a Q).

Hi Michael, i would have no idea how "thorough" Brian's vetting system has been over the years, i have spoken to him on this forum, but it was a long while ago. Personally i can only say that Brian has been "showing" his numbers for much longer than anyone else, but all this lot number business is not really that much of an indicator which ever source it comes from. For sure Frank's is a superb an honest source, but i have never found any "mis-match" as such in Brian's books over the last ten or so more years either, so it's take your pick really. As ever, another "lot number" discussion that really does not need to be had as they were simply steel batch numbers and not indicators of which service the shell went to. Leon.

**MAP** · 11-25-2018, 01:53 AM

by FALLSCHIRMJAGER

Hi Michael, i would have no idea how "thorough" Brian's vetting system has been over the years, i have spoken to him on this forum, but it was a long while ago. Personally i can only say that Brian has been "showing" his numbers for much longer than anyone else, but all this lot number business is not really that much of an indicator which ever source it comes from. For sure Frank's is a superb an honest source, but i have never found any "mis-match" as such in Brian's books over the last ten or so more years either, so it's take your pick really. As ever, another "lot number" discussion that really does not need to be had as they were simply steel batch numbers and not indicators of which service the shell went to. Leon.

I think we are in total agreement

**chbingle** · 11-25-2018, 02:12 AM

Good to know about the lot numbers; I'm definitely not an expert on SS decals but could this one stand a chance of being legit? Sure looks like its been on the helmet for some time but I know they can be falsely aged and beat up to look the part

**real steel** · 11-25-2018, 02:32 AM

I can't tell either what went on here. The condition is too far gone to come to a conclusion. It's all very distracting to look at. Maybe a candidate for a microscopic look.
D.