Third Party Press

Simson & Co SUHL 1915

Yes the 1915 is far rarer. The biggest downfall with this rifle is the bolt is a mismatched. If it was renumbered too match by the depot it would help in the value department.
 
I agree, a matching bolt, even depot applied, would have dramatically increased the rifles value. It is a big distraction because it effectively cuts the value in half (depot matching would have lessened this devaluation, but would have been a negative influence...)

What is important is the original stock, it would be good to see the rifle in more detail, especially the stock as that is really a big plus.

Yes, a 1915 is far more rare than a 1916 or 1917, only a 1918 would be comparable, - to some a 1918 would be more valuable as they survived in such low number. I do not think a really nice 1918 is known, though Simson made a lot more in 1918 than 1915. Any 1918 is rare in original factory condition, - other than Amberg and Mauser most facilities had curtailed production considerably and few survived the chaos of 1919 or the IAMCC supervised disarmament activities 1920-1924.

Yes the 1915 is far rarer. The biggest downfall with this rifle is the bolt is a mismatched. If it was renumbered too match by the depot it would help in the value department.
 
I rarely get angry over a debate on the internet, this is all pretty meaningless when compared to the personal problems and challenges we all encounter every day... I certainly do not hold grudges long unless it is something personal (like some assbag moderator censoring me or suppressing dissent, which is common on Gunboards, which is why I have curtailed my presence there - and why the forum is suffering the flight of all their best collectors, some have died and others are sick of their out of control moderation).

Our little disagreement would hardly rise to an annoyance, needless to say a grudge, I just thought you were nitpicking and wasting my time in response, - mostly I was wondering if it was intentional. Once you said it wasn't I let it go. I only wanted to be sure I didn't offend you unnecessarily in response as I tend to rely on mockery and ridicule when I deal with debate adversaries.

Anyway, glad to have you here to help.

:laugh: I appreciate reading his stories. I thought he was mad at me at one point earlier though not sure why exactly.
 
Thank you Paul. I truly respect your insight and opinions. Your research regarding trends and long reach when it comes to a pieces history has been invaluable in both my own studies and the vetting of rifles that have been altered over their lifetime. If I ever appear untoward you can trust it's not coming from a position of authority. I think both tone and subterfuge are often misconstrued in a text based forum. I can assure you in person that is not the case. I do however enjoy challenging theories when I feel I have a compelling argument. The nature of spirited debate here is precisely the reason I stick around. Let the learning resume.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Could not have found a better first rifle! It’s all up from here you got the toughest one out of the way. Nice find!
 

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top