DougB exposes "Champagne Rune" SS Decal Fraud and Adds a Coffin Nail to XRFacts

Hicks indicates in his "Footnote" essay, that he observed the celluloid underlay on a C SS lid. Doug B indicates that the C SS lids he's examined lack a celluloid underlay. I think someone needs to produce a C SS lid with an observable celluloid underlay to give these lids a chance to survive in the lid market. If that lid can be found and good pics posted, then I think everyone with a C SS lid will see a celluloid underlay on their lids.

Then, M45s lot number research could be dismissed as a hasty generalization based on the law of small numbers. The C SS lid market could then skyrocket in part due to all the attention and these "once ridiculed" lids could become even more desirable. Kelly Hicks wouldn't incur a financial liability as a result of all his C SS lid COAs and he could publish a new book with expanded XRF chapter extolling the virtues of XRF lid testing over high magnification visual inspection. C SS lid owners could relax and enjoy looking at those C SS "decals" again and rainbows would fill the sky.
 
Last edited:
I'm sure that given the scale of this fraud, if the "decals" are painted on, and those involved, there is much going on behind the scenes to interfere with the reveal. Lots of money and reputation and pseudo-reputation at stake.
 
typical bs

Sounds like typical bs....painted decals...yeah right
Stick with science,,,,xrf
 
Beginning in the 1970s, if these were made for 4 decades even by a small group of 'restorers', there could conceivably be 100s of them out there. It makes you wonder if it is still going on today (after all, how could one kill the 'champagne goose', I mean the golden goose ?)

I suggest that all of these C-SS helmets be used as props in the making of the WWII alternative history movie 'Operation Valhalla', from my novel of the same name :]

http://www.lulu.com/shop/brian-ice/operation-valhalla/paperback/product-21259113.html
 
Last edited:
I was hoping maui would show up, and help us sort through the conflicting C SS lid information and set the facts straight. It must be safe to drop $5k or more on a nice C SS lid, because maui says they're legit.
 
maui said:
Sounds like typical bs....painted decals...yeah right
Stick with science,,,,xrf
Click to expand...

df85j.gif
 
Ss decal chart

This SS decal chart appears on p.273 of SS-Steel.

Out of 30 SS helmets, it shows the frequency of SS decal to shell maker. Notice how prolific C-SS is compared to other decal types. It is the only SS "decal" that is found everywhere.

Each helmet maker (row) listed on the left shows the decals observed to add up to 100%.

As I read this chart, (after removing the C-SS column entirely) I see that

ET used the ET-SS decal for the majority with some factory Pocher-SS application.

Quist only used the Q-SS decal

NS never produced an SS helmet in any model.

EF mostly used their own EF-SS decal with a few Pocher-SS and ET-SS.

SE never produced an SS helmet in any model, but several reissues with Pocher-SS decals are seen.
 

Attachments

  • SS CHART II.jpg
    SS CHART II.jpg
    292.2 KB · Views: 33
Last edited:
M45 said:
This SS decal chart appears on p.273 of SS-Steel.

Out of 30 SS helmets, it shows the frequency of SS decal to shell maker. Notice how prolific C-SS is compared to other decal types.
Click to expand...

What edition of SS-Steel is that page from? The narrative reads like rambling bs and rationalization to me. The table information is confusing and very likely meaningless. It's not clear from the text, but the big assumption is that these C SS lids are legit. The table seems to be waving a big red flag to me that the C SS "decal" is a post-war applied fake with no logical pattern of application.
 
It is from the updated edition, 2010.

It looks like Hicks took 30 random SS combat helmets to make his analysis, but it seems to have backfired, IMO. C-SS sticks out like a sore thumb.
 
M45 said:
It is from the updated edition, 2010.

It looks like Hicks took 30 random SS combat helmets to make his analysis, but it seems to have backfired, IMO. C-SS sticks out like a sore thumb.
Click to expand...

Is that the edition with the XRF chapter?

I thought that "30 random" lids was buffoonish. From the wording, I got the impression he had thirty examples from each maker and there were about five makers listed. But, he may have had only thirty examples that represented each maker. He tries to make it sound like a random sample of SS lids and the implication is that it's a random sample from the total SS lid population, but it's only a random sample of 30 lids from what he had available. Therefore, the statistical analysis is meaningless. It appears that the C SS "decal" dominates, which indicates, based on what we know now due to lot number analysis and high resolution visual inspection, that most of his examples are fakes.
 
Yes, XRF is on the next page.

Yes, it could also read, 30 factory examples of each maker, or 30 X 5 = 150 helmets total.
 
Last edited:
M45 said:
Yes, XRF is on the next page.

It could also read, 30 factory examples of each maker, or 30 X 5 = 150 helmets total.
Click to expand...

Yes, at $5000-7500 a pop. What is that? $750,000 to $1,125,000 in "Champagne rune" helmets? Factor in a huge amount of ego and "expertise" spread about and on the line. If you're the author of "COAs" on say 10 of these, that's a pretty substantial lick. I imagine there is a significant amount of back channel chatter going on. The public silence on this is deafening. I would hope that Doug B is getting all the ducks in a row for the roll out. There's enough genie out of the bottle now that it is not going back in. Who in their right mind would buy one of these for even half of the old retail?
 
M45 said:
Yes, XRF is on the next page.

It could also read, 30 factory examples of each maker, or 30 X 5 = 150 helmets total.
Click to expand...

I couldn't tell if we were talking 30 lids or 150 lids.

What does say about XRF? I'll bet he doesn't understand the "science" any better than maui.
 
IMHO, negligence and monkeyshines on top of negligence and monkeyshines. The marriage of the "Champagne rune" and "XRFacts" is quite the union.
 
The way helmets have been authenticated online for many years:
- comparing one fake with another fake and then come to the conclusion that one fake looks better then the other and declare it original.
:googlie
 
Peter U said:
The way helmets have been authenticated online for many years:
- comparing one fake with another fake and then come to the conclusion that one fake looks better then the other and declare it original.
:googlie
Click to expand...

The helmet collecting community:

6d956067fbad1cc8e277c7e8b15db66d.jpg
 
Peter U said:
The way helmets have been authenticated online for many years:
- comparing one fake with another fake and then come to the conclusion that one fake looks better then the other and declare it original.
:googlie
Click to expand...

My opinions: What makes it worse is that for many years, the formative period on the internet, authentication was governed by Perry Floid and other assorted WAFmod and waftarded megalomaniacal klowns who systematically censored and banned those who disagreed with their blessings and pronouncements. We had their toady pals dumping large numbers of ridiculous fakes on the waftard lid forum koolaid drinkers at incredibly high, ridiculous prices. The waftarded were getting stuck with $2500-3500 fake "camos" which were no more than modern art vandalized original helmets. Anyone who disputed the originality of this rubbish was ridiculed, censored, and banned by Floid and Zahn and others like them.

The results? The least problem is the arrogant buffoons who got ripped off, paying $2500 for $250 modern art. Most of them earned it. However, that reign of buffoonery and toadyism, which continues (but thankfully there is at least one other decent venue in GHW) wrecked havoc on the information base and drove many really good and knowledgeable people off the internet. The result is also the perpetuation of the "Champagne Rune" fraud and the rise of the XRFacts light show hoax. Had WAF been in sole control of lid info, XRFacts would still be deemed the "Savior of the Hobby" as the un-vetted buffoons and morons over there proclaimed it. New collectors don't know what they don't know and they certainly don't know what the alternative opinions are because WAF censors them.

I believe there is a significant contrast between what has (and is) happening here, the healthy evolution of the K98k collecting community, and the toady driven dystopia which is German helmet collecting. If the reveal over XRFacts wasn't sufficient to show that German helmet collecting needs a cleaning, then the Great Champagne Rune Hoax should be. The criminal negligence is not so much that it happened, but that it wasn't discovered and revealed sooner, like 30 years ago.
 
I received this link and quotes for updates on the The Great Champagne Rune Hoax reveal:

http://www.ghw2.com/topic/49458-update-on-pending-ch-decal-thread/

I've been EM/PMd a few times by members wondering when the thread is coming up as I had said late Oct early Nov. I am currently awaiting one more helmet to arrive from overseas before I write what will be a very extensive thread proving conclusively that these are all reproduction decals and they never have existed.

Until then food for thought:
http://www.ghw2.com/topic/48941-coas/

and this is the original thread on the CH decal that got the ball rolling so to speak:
http://www.ghw2.com/topic/49110-champagne-decals/
 
It's a good indication that he's taking care to ensure that his report is as complete and thorough as possible. If there are any visible cracks or flaws, then they will be exploited by those with an interest in perpetuating the C SS hoax.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top