ANT-Z/ Pirschen- Heer tunics

[Stigroadie]

No, what you are attempting A.Weiss is a pathetic excuse for reasoning.
Because I dont own original Pea Dot, Chens must be right?
How does that follow? It is the subject of so many fallacies in one short post? It's a non sequitur, an irrelevant conclusion.
I have seen and held real dot, not that that counts for anything. I dont own any, I'm not that rich, but I know people who do. I have a reasonable library to fall back on and I'm a reasonably regular visitor to military museums around UK, Europe and the world.
None of my books or museum visits, memories of the original hose I got to examine, images from the web or posts on forums have produced a print that resembles Chens current pea dot. There are variations in the size of the dots, not every set of rollers was exactly the same but not to the magnitude of Chens. That is the state of my research and that is what I base my opinion on. Non of this affects the accuracy or not of any reproduction. The best bit is;
It is not actually my problem, the burden of proof lies with Chen.
He makes the stuff, he makes the claims for accuracy and authenticity, he is required to show what he makes is correct.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
So far the lack of defense from Chen for the accuracy of his print speaks more words than I can be arsed to type. He knows it is wrong. He knows he copied the pattern from a Czech repro that was also wrong, he has said as much. In doing so he messed the colours up too.
I suggest you shut up A.Weiss, before you make yourself look any more like a foolish fan boy than you have already?
You are promoting rubbish with rubbish.
Let us see some evidence for the accuracy of this rubbish, get your originals out A.Weiss and show us them next to Chens?
Let Chen, who is so good at asking me if I own originals, show us his dot next to originals to prove it's accuracy? That is what is needed to resolve this clash.
Prove me wrong and I'll shut up and say sorry[not in that order obviously].

This whole 'if you dont own original cloth you cannot comment' is also another fallacy. It is possible to learn about a subject and become knowledgeable without direct exposure to the subject. We as a species have never been to the sun but people can tell you a great amount about it. Observation, study, use of the scientific method.
It is also a fallacy to assume that because you do own originals you are an expert.

[pirschen]

No, what you are attempting A.Weiss is a pathetic excuse for reasoning.
Because I dont own original Pea Dot, Chens must be right?
How does that follow? It is the subject of so many fallacies in one short post? It's a non sequitur, an irrelevant conclusion.
I have seen and held real dot, not that that counts for anything. I dont own any, I'm not that rich, but I know people who do. I have a reasonable library to fall back on and I'm a reasonably regular visitor to military museums around UK, Europe and the world.
None of my books or museum visits, memories of the original hose I got to examine, images from the web or posts on forums have produced a print that resembles Chens current pea dot. There are variations in the size of the dots, not every set of rollers was exactly the same but not to the magnitude of Chens. That is the state of my research and that is what I base my opinion on. Non of this affects the accuracy or not of any reproduction. The best bit is;
It is not actually my problem, the burden of proof lies with Chen.
He makes the stuff, he makes the claims for accuracy and authenticity, he is required to show what he makes is correct.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
So far the lack of defense from Chen for the accuracy of his print speaks more words than I can be arsed to type. He knows it is wrong. He knows he copied the pattern from a Czech repro that was also wrong, he has said as much. In doing so he messed the colours up too.
I suggest you shut up A.Weiss, before you make yourself look any more like a foolish fan boy than you have already?
You are promoting rubbish with rubbish.
Let us see some evidence for the accuracy of this rubbish, get your originals out A.Weiss and show us them next to Chens?
Let Chen, who is so good at asking me if I own originals, show us his dot next to originals to prove it's accuracy? That is what is needed to resolve this clash.
Prove me wrong and I'll shut up and say sorry[not in that order obviously].

This whole 'if you dont own original cloth you cannot comment' is also another fallacy. It is possible to learn about a subject and become knowledgeable without direct exposure to the subject. We as a species have never been to the sun but people can tell you a great amount about it. Observation, study, use of the scientific method.
It is also a fallacy to assume that because you do own originals you are an expert.

OK,I am say sorry,so don't be more quarrel

[Gott Mit Uns]

Sorry to drag this up but here is an album where I am wearing a mixture of I guess what is considered to be the correct colour RAU trousers, with what is considered the incorrect colour chen M40 tunic...

http://www.grossdeutschland.org/album12.html

Forgive me, but theres not really alot of difference is there really? Not so much of a difference at least that if the photos were in black and white, that you could tell Chens is wrong. Thats if we're saying it is wrong at all....bearing in mind this tunic has not been washed at all...and bearing in mind that soldiers washed their clothes and wore them day in and day out. Is there the distinct possibility that Chens stuff will blend in eventually? It seemed good enough for a while for some top vendors to stock his kit...all food for thought really.

[Heini]

Hi Chen,

do you have sizes with long sleeves actually? I´m looking for tunic, but must be your size with long sleeve.

Thanks.

[pirschen]

Hi Chen,

do you have sizes with long sleeves actually? I´m looking for tunic, but must be your size with long sleeve.

Thanks.

what tunic do you want? and what size? and sleeve length pls
have a nice day
Chen