[davidmanze]

Thx, Tony. But the 44 is already on the way.

FWIW, this guy here seems to be the (western) Helios guru - and according to him there's no real difference between the versions in terms of swirl:
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=al_HnZKXtXw&t=900s

He suggests that there may subtle differences in the bokeh due to the more or less recessed front element but in the real world, he didn't find it to be of relevance.

I settled on a 44m-4 because of the build quality and condition.

I'm not a huge fan of filthy lenses ... which will probably be my investment doom in this vintage adventure. lol

FWIW, at the moment I'm more interested in mild tele lenses. I'm addicted to corner sharpness with wider lenses and I think I couldn't stand wide vintage lenses. ;-)

After having spent hours on ebay, I'm amazed by the price levels of some lenses. IMHO no degree of lens character can explain price tags near new lenses but then it's not just about users but also collectors.

    I watched that video before and questioned his findings  (inwardly) .... he seems to only look at "glowing bokeh balls" from a perspective of their roundness/ovality uniquely ....... and we know from OL's recent tests that all/most/some lenses do that anyway especially when they are wide open.
  swirly bokeh lenses do more than that ......... they also swirl standard backgrounds like bushes and busy stuff that my not have much in the way of highlights ...... it's not all just about highlights !!

 ......... so I would recommend doing test shots with and without highlights in the background ........... 
 
  just my thoughts .........

Here's a couple of images from the reversed front element Helios 44M 4 lens:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/

"I'm not a huge fan of filthy lenses" ........ looks like spellcheck got the better of you there ...........