Gunboards Forums banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 309 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have a M1938 slotted bolt german paratrooper helmet. I have had it for about 30 years. I am not a collector and I have just been hanging on to it because I thought it was interesting. I got it from my grandfather who was in the Navy during WWII. I have no idea where he got it from. The leather inside the helmet is in poor shape as you can see. I reached out to a place to see if they could could advise me on how I could get it appraised and they referred me to a company called XRFACTS. Is this company reputable? Is it worth the $250 they want for an appraisal?

 

Attachments

·
Moderator
Joined
·
1,169 Posts
The hell with that, its a specialized market loaded with fakes. You cannot sell that helmet with some generic expertise from some whore house. You need a couple strong opinions on it from individuals that specialize in that area and will probably look at it for free.

Kris
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,193 Posts
"XRFacts", IMHO, is a dog and pony show where some guys are peddling COAs ("certificates of authenticity") by shooting helmets with their XRF raygun. They haven't addressed any substantive questions concerning the known weaknesses of that technology for their applications, which they are charging alot of money for. Please review the following:

http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?141399-Good-idea-bad-results-Helmet-testing

Then ask yourself why they haven't answered any of the questions concerning what they are doing. I predicted that we would see them setting up at shows selling slick colorful pie charts and COAs. If this is "science" then they should be able to support it with more than the sales pitches from the people that sold them the ray gun. I'm all about science and objective testing for authentication, but not the way this is going down. What Vid said.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
910 Posts
Hello JimArnold,

Although X-ray testing is used by reputable laboratoriums to identify fake art, such as paintings, the 250$ X-ray test isn't the same at all!
These labs usually don't use one test, but a series of different scientific tests, such as X-ray, chemical (paint) testing, carbon dating,...etc.
A wiki page with some basic information on testing fakes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_forgery




A professional and of course independent lab that tests art:

http://www.brussels-art-labo.com/english/accueil.html

If you want to test your helmet or any other item, I would use a professional laboratorium and not the service of some amateurs.

Cheers,
Peter


PS: From what I can see from the pictures, your M38 looks to be an original late war example.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
The hell with that, its a specialized market loaded with fakes. You cannot sell that helmet with some generic expertise from some whore house. You need a couple strong opinions on it from individuals that specialize in that area and will probably look at it for free.

Kris
I agree with Kris 100%, posting detailed pics of the helmet for several experts to see is the way to go. To me an "expertise" doesn't hold much weight at all. My first order of business when buying a combat badge is to post it on at least one forum where there are experts who can give their opinions, even when I feel good about the badge and the seller. And the best part, it's free of charge :)

BR,
James
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
1,169 Posts
All these guys with X-ray guns and flawed tests and they want to charge to boot!!.

I guess I would skip sending it to anyone and take some good photo's of it. Anyone know what a real Para of this type go's for?.

Kris
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
I have a M1938 slotted bolt german paratrooper helmet. I have had it for about 30 years. I am not a collector and I have just been hanging on to it because I thought it was interesting. I got it from my grandfather who was in the Navy during WWII. I have no idea where he got it from. The leather inside the helmet is in poor shape as you can see. I reached out to a place to see if they could could advise me on how I could get it appraised and they referred me to a company called XRFACTS. Is this company reputable? Is it worth the $250 they want for an appraisal?

View attachment 318990 View attachment 318991

Jim, I was also looking for some feedback on XRFacts and found this link. A photo of Ludwig also !
http://germanhelmetsinc.com/ss_steel_authentications.htm
It appears that XRFacts is endorsed and recommended by Kelly Hicks and Ludwig Baer, two of the most respected authorities and authors in the world on the subject. As an important point of distinction, these guys have earned excellent reputations in the community.
TC
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,193 Posts
"Think of the guaranteed value your helmet will hereafter command on the open market, as compared with others that have not gone through XRFacts testing and registration; and never again buy a helmet from a vendor who does not provide you with an Original XRFacts Certificate of Authenticity." "XRFacts" website

Jim, I was also looking for some feedback on XRFacts and found this link. A photo of Ludwig also !
http://germanhelmetsinc.com/ss_steel_authentications.htm
It appears that XRFacts is endorsed and recommended by Kelly Hicks and Ludwig Baer, two of the most respected authorities and authors in the world on the subject. As an important point of distinction, these guys have earned excellent reputations in the community.
TC


Um, a pic of two guys discussing something doesn't make it valid, particularly if they are financially interested in the test, results, and what was tested. Would you not agree? A picture of me with my preacher discussing turning water into wine doesn't give me that ability. The Baer book has a number of errors and Kelly Hicks has probably made some too. I remember Kelly peddling helmets at the shows just like any other dealer. Because I've been at this over 25 years, I'm not awed by the dropping of the Hicks name like some of the "advanced collectors" at WAF who got their expert badges by running up big post counts in the last 5-10 years (which period, incidently, is the time of the fake explosion). What and whose helmets are used as "baselines" by which all others are compared (i.e., ray gun and pie chart "authenticated")? The helmets of the people selling the COAs? In order to test something in the manner they are doing it (which IMHO is flawed particularly as to "camo" helmets) require "baselines" which are automatically deemed "original". Thus, they support this "testing" because all of their helmets are the "baselines"? Did any of these guys have their helmets shown to be fakes by the ray gun? Who makes the profit off the $250+ paid to shoot your helmet with a ray gun and print out a colorful pie chart? Do they authenticate the helmets they may have sold?

Why is it that no one will substantively address the issues censored at WAF, but raised here? It's not "science" without objective, unbiased analysis of the testing methods; it's marketing. Do you trust the "analysis" of this testing set forth at a censored forum? Do you trust Vince to tell you the full objective truth about Shamwow? Here is what Shamwow says about their product:
https://www.shamwow.com/default.aspx?did=&refcode=1002

Here is the unbiased objective analysis of Shamwow (the analysis is different):
Where is the objective analysis and response to the hard questions by "XRFacts"? :?

http://blogs.consumerreports.org/home/2009/05/shamwow-cloth-wipes-consumer-reports-review.html
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,193 Posts
This is "XRF Facts, LLC" :
http://sunbiz.org/scripts/cordet.ex...d=&names_comp_name=XRFACTS&names_filing_type=

This is public information that all LLC's must file so people know with what and with whom they are actually doing business. The official filed address differs from the address on the site and it apparently has only one member/manager.

Address on the "XRFacts" site is in St. Petersburg:
XRFacts, LLC© · 4905 34th Street South Ste. 120 · St. Petersburg, Florida 33711

The address provided to the Florida Secretary of State appears to be a private box at a UPS Store in Jupiter, FL, not an actual "suite" or office:

6671 W. INDIANTOWN RD.
SUITE 56318
JUPITER FL 33458 US

UPS store with private mail boxes:
The UPS Store
6671 Indiantown Rd
Jupiter FL 33458
561-575-5799
URL: http://www.theupsstore.com
http://www.theupsstore.com/products/pages/maiandpos.aspx

The Secretary of State published address in Jupiter, FL (I believe a UPS mail box) is on the other side of Florida from the address on the site in St.Petersburg, FL, so it isn't a simple commute (i.e. the site address is about 4 hours / 215+ miles from the business address/UPS box) and indicates they've moved or there is more than one person involved as reported to the Florida Secretary of State. Also, using a UPS box as the address for their "registered agent" may be an issue because the Florida Secretary of State requires a street address, not a box: "Enter the Florida street address of the Registered Agent. A post office box address or address outside of Florida is not acceptable."


MODEDIT: Link to Secretary of State filed information provided.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,713 Posts
Uh, is Vince appraising artifacts, now?

Seriously, ake some GOOD pics and post here, see what happens.

I read all the WAF stuff and there are some good guys.

There are some whose heads are so inflated they have ti carry bricks around in order to keep from floating away.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,193 Posts
Mike, the Vince / Shamwow comparison shows that if all folks listened to was Vince, everyone would have Shamwow. I'm sure if Vince had a forum he would delete posts of disgruntled Shamwow buyers and wouldn't allow links to the Consumer Reports discussion of Shamwow which didn't find the "wow" part valid. :laugh:

IMHO, the problem at WAF is similar, and with regard to "XRFacts" discussion, i.e., the systematic elimination of any viewpoints and people who disagree with their mods. Many of the guys whose opinions I would seek no longer post there or are banned. An open and intelligent objective discussion of "XRFacts" and the weaknesses and flaws in the technology for the purported uses could never be had there. It has been addressed here and the silence from any XRFacts proponents to legitimate questions is deafening. Does it do the collecting community good to have a few people establishing their opinions as the final word, or is it better for people to see both sides and come to their own conclusions? We believe the latter is best.

Of course, there are always those who would rather be told what to think, who don't want to hear anything other than what their forum mentors tell them. The only good information is that tested by open discussion and debate. A sales pitch is not good information unless you are the seller. Thus far, IMHO, just as Consumer Reports didn't see the "wow" in Shamwow, I haven't seen much in the way of "facts" from XRFacts :?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,261 Posts
If you know where it came from and have owned it all these years than why pay some "expert" to tell you it's real??? It is... But, it's in poor shape.. Most high end collectors wont buy suff that bad off. But, others will...Go to a big gun show or a military show..There is one this weekend at the big-e in Springfield mass..I was there. There were no para helmets for sale..I'd say on a table it might be taged at 2k... Who knows for sure.. If it's not for sale what difference does it make..Guy's also use oxcilic acid
or something like that with good results to remove rust from shells.. I've seen some pretty rusted shells brough back by this process..It works much better than steel wool.. THis must be done by someone who knows what they are doing..But that rust need to be treated or it will grow...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Hambone, sounds like you lost some money buying shamwows from Vince . Hope you get your money back .

TC


"Think of the guaranteed value your helmet will hereafter command on the open market, as compared with others that have not gone through XRFacts testing and registration; and never again buy a helmet from a vendor who does not provide you with an Original XRFacts Certificate of Authenticity." "XRFacts" website





Um, a pic of two guys discussing something doesn't make it valid, particularly if they are financially interested in the test, results, and what was tested. Would you not agree? A picture of me with my preacher discussing turning water into wine doesn't give me that ability. The Baer book has a number of errors and Kelly Hicks has probably made some too. I remember Kelly peddling helmets at the shows just like any other dealer. Because I've been at this over 25 years, I'm not awed by the dropping of the Hicks name like some of the "advanced collectors" at WAF who got their expert badges by running up big post counts in the last 5-10 years (which period, incidently, is the time of the fake explosion). Further, it is my understanding that a number of the helmets used as "baselines" by which all others are compared (i.e., ray gun and pie chart "authenticated") are from Hicks and a small krewe of WAFperts. In order to test something in the manner they are doing it (which is flawed particularly as to "camo" helmets) required them to establish "baselines" which are automatically deemed "original". Thus, they support this "testing" because all of their helmets are the "baselines". Did any of these guys have their helmets shown to be fakes by the ray gun? Who makes the profit off the $250+ paid to shoot your helmet with a ray gun and print out a colorful pie chart?

Why is it that none of these people will substantively address the issues censored at WAF, but raised here? This is not "science" without objective, unbiased analysis of the testing methods which are very flawed for what they claim it does. Do you trust the "analysis" of this testing set forth at a censored forum, by the people earning profits off it, by those whose helmets are the "baseline" originals by which all others are tested? Do you trust Vince to tell you the full objective truth about Shamwow? Their pitch reminds me of this. Here is what Shamwow says about their product:
https://www.shamwow.com/default.aspx?did=&refcode=1002

Here is the unbiased objective analysis of Shamwow:
Where is the objective analysis and response to the hard questions by "XRFacts"? :?

http://blogs.consumerreports.org/home/2009/05/shamwow-cloth-wipes-consumer-reports-review.html
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,193 Posts
Hambone, sounds like you lost some money buying shamwows from Vince . Hope you get your money back .

TC
Nope, I knew better because I actually researched and read unbiased objective assessments of Shamwow before buying into Vince's sales pitch. I'd recommend the same regarding what XRF does and does not do before buying into the "XRFacts" pitch. Limitations notwithstanding, $250 buys alot of Shamwows which could IMHO be ultimately more useful to a helmet and wiping your car than a colorful pie chart and a "COA". ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,762 Posts
I bought a package of Shamwow(s) at a discount store for about half of what Vince wanted. (That hooker really tore him up, huh?) They are square pieces of flannel. They did suck up a bunch of water when my water heater crapped out, but the "wow" part is TV hype.

I don't know jack about paralids, but that one looks real to me, and I would never pay $250 to have somebody shoot it with a raygun.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,193 Posts
Okay, how did this deteriorate into a shamwow discussion?
It's not "deterioration", it's comparison of advertising versus open discussion and analysis. My apologies if this point was missed. Your inquiry about XRFacts was addressed with various opinions and a link provided to detailed discussion of XRF technology, opinions on its limitations as applied to helmets, government and independent lab studies on it concerning weaknesses in paint analysis, and a very substantive discussion that you won't find in advertising, such as for shamwow. You can compare that to "XRFacts" claims, which are conclusory and colorful, but lacking in the substance and objectivity that science and facts require, IMHO. Folks are free to believe advertisers or whatever information they want to believe. Some like to see all sides and substantive disinterested discussion too. Many people do. Point is, here you will get more sides and opinions that those who are selling "XRFacts", IMHO. :thumbsup:
 
1 - 20 of 309 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top