Tiger Stripe M-65 question

[Peter Graham]

Last week I saw a photo on Facebook of a tiger stripe M-65 with what looked like a proper government contract 1981 dated label. My understanding is that M-65's were never officially made in tiger stripe. Can anyone clarify ? Jim ?

 

[Monsoon]

I've never seen one. All I've seen were ones that were OD, Woodland Camo and desert (3 color) camo.

I have seen repros that had some sort of mock government issue tag in them, tho.

 

[a2jacketpatches]

I've never seen one. All I've seen were ones that were OD, Woodland Camo and desert (3 color) camo.

I have seen repros that had some sort of mock government issue tag in them, tho.

plus one

 

[watchmanjimg]

Not GI issue.

 

[Peter Graham]

Thanks guys. I thought as much.

 

[watchmanjimg]

No problem, Peter. The ERDL M-65s are commercial as well.

 

[a2jacketpatches]

I do think there were limited #'s of Mitchell pattern M65's

 

[watchmanjimg]

I do think there were limited #'s of Mitchell pattern M65's

There is such a claim and I believe at least one photo of a Mitchell-pattern M65 being worn during the Vietnam era, but at best they may have been produced experimentally. I've never gotten too riled up over the notion that they're genuine GI. Cool jackets though!

 

[a2jacketpatches]

Yes limited #'s, or experimental, but GI none the less.

 

[unclegrumpy]

I once had a Thai pattern tiger stripe M-65 that was made locally, and very close to an issue one in construction. It had subdued USAF name and enlisted rank insignia on it. Always wondered who wore it, but suspected it was Security Police or possibly Pararescue sometime in the mid to late 1970's, probably in Thailand.

 

[watchmanjimg]

Yes limited #'s, or experimental, but GI none the less.

The following observations are in no way intended as a personal attack, criticism, or attempt to advance any particular argument other than a need for further support and/or clarification of the theory that the Mitchell M-65s were GI:

1.) The Mitchell-pattern fabric was a Korean War-era creation that predated the new nylon/cotton, Quarpel-treated fabric specified for use in the M-65 and presumably lacked its durability, water repellency, and colorfastness (at least from my observations of the wear patterns).

2.) The ERDL pattern was a 1948 design that was well on its way to being the standardized US-issue camouflage across the services as of the introduction of the M-65.

3.) The standardized ERDL uniforms (both in the slant-pocket Vietnam-era and later "RDF" configurations) were worn with the OG-107 M-65, as were BDUs prior to widespread issue of the woodland M-65.

Here's a discussion where certain assertions are made, but no conclusive photographic evidence of the one jacket purported to be GI is provided:

http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/ ... 65-jacket/

I have a tough time understanding the logic behind such an experiment, if in fact that's what it was. However, photographs or other documentation would be helpful.

 

[Peter Graham]

I managed to find the photos again and pulled them off facebook. Here's the jacket in question. I assume the label is a copy of a government contract label.

 

[watchmanjimg]

Agreed, Peter.

 

[a2jacketpatches]

If by some stretch they were made, it wouldn't have the early white tag. There's some issued tiger stripe stuff from the 80's I think, but they have the green spec tags. I can't see it clearly but the date looks yo be 89? If so, the white tags were long gone.

 

[a2jacketpatches]

Yes limited #'s, or experimental, but GI none the less.

The following observations are in no way intended as a personal attack, criticism, or attempt to advance any particular argument other than a need for further support and/or clarification of the theory that the Mitchell M-65s were GI:

1.) The Mitchell-pattern fabric was a Korean War-era creation that predated the new nylon/cotton, Quarpel-treated fabric specified for use in the M-65 and presumably lacked its durability, water repellency, and colorfastness (at least from my observations of the wear patterns).

2.) The ERDL pattern was a 1948 design that was well on its way to being the standardized US-issue camouflage across the services as of the introduction of the M-65.

3.) The standardized ERDL uniforms (both in the slant-pocket Vietnam-era and later "RDF" configurations) were worn with the OG-107 M-65, as were BDUs prior to widespread issue of the woodland M-65.

Here's a discussion where certain assertions are made, but no conclusive photographic evidence of the one jacket purported to be GI is provided:

http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/ ... 65-jacket/

I have a tough time understanding the logic behind such an experiment, if in fact that's what it was. However, photographs or other documentation would be helpful.

I read this some time back and agree with Vintage Productions, most likely experimental. I've seen period photos or at least a period photo of this jacket that fount it's way into the civilian market so I don't think it's a fantasy item. This being said, I'll retract the I from GI and replace with an X for experimental. So not issued but most likely the idea was tossed around by the Government.

 

[Andreart]

I have one, i have to check the tag in it when i get home. I got it in a surplus store on canal street NYC in the late 80's. was a hell of a hard time to find one.

 

[a2jacketpatches]

I have one, i have to check the tag in it when i get home. I got it in a surplus store on canal street NYC in the late 80's. was a hell of a hard time to find one.

Tiger or Mitchell?

 

[Andreart]

Tiger, same as the pants and boonie hats. i have to find it, it's in with my hunting stuff i havn't used in 15 yrs.

 

[asiamiles]

https://www.realmccoys.co.jp/catalog/products/detail.php?product_id=3393