Ek1 L/15

[ben bijker]

Yes, like that one.

I don't like it a bit.
(guilty until proven innocent)
To me the only original is the one Franki posted.

Regards,
Ben

[LuckyLuudje]

There have been some interesting discussions on the Forum.
But the opinions differ on the "Floch version".

The only L/15's I have seen with provenance is the rare version like Franki's cross.
For me with the information current available, Franki's version is the only version I want in my collection.

Regards,
Luud

[deejay]

Hi all,

great discussion. But definately unclear .... look at this picture: top the copy L/15 also know as the "Floch" type. The one below also a L/15 which has been declared as original by some.
Notice the Souval or also L/58 front? I somehow don't like these Souvals...

Please give your opinions as I also prefer the Franki's type L/15.

Dirk J.

[George Stimson]

And here's yet another. What say ye?

[George Stimson]

Reverse.

[deejay]

And yet another mystery example "rounder" L/15:

[ben bijker]

I'm still voting for the type that was on the begin of this thread.
Too much Floch influences in the other crosses.

MAYBE I'm completely wrong, but for me that type is the only original L/15

Regards,
Ben

[franki]

Hello,

maybe I am wrong but the cross what George did show looks IMO good.
I would have no problems it to keep it in my collection.

Why?
Completly different pin setup and catch in compare with the FLOCH cross and completly abstain from the obverse.

Deejay's depicted cross I consider as a copy.
It has for me the typical FLOCH pin set up. Core and frame are does not justice a genuine IC as well.

Best Franki

[LuckyLuudje]

And yet another mystery example "rounder" L/15:

Dirk, You pulled out your complete database
Maybe there has to be a discussion again like with the Rounder RK's to solve this.

For me the most plausible theory I have read was the theory by Frank H in this thread:
http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...ght=l%2F15+ek1

Till that time I will keep avoiding the crosses with Floch influence.
Just too many different variations whitout provenance to feel comfortable with.

Luud

[deejay]

Dirk, You pulled out your complete database
Maybe there has to be a discussion again like with the Rounder RK's to solve this.

For me the most plausible theory I have read was the theory by Frank H in this thread:
http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...ght=l%2F15+ek1

Till that time I will keep avoiding the crosses with Floch influence.
Just too many different variations whitout provenance to feel comfortable with.

Luud

Hi Luud,

nice to read your comment and yes I agree with you. Interesting thread you linked by the way, it also confirms my feelings on Souvals I somehow don't like.
Like Frank H. stated, what we need is actual provenance on these.

Also take a look at Peter Wiking's this thread on these at:
http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=143349

For your information, among others, I have in my collection the following EK's with Souval frames:

Screwback (Marked L58 only on the screw (without the slash) large HK and no dipped 3)
Pinback (stamed L/58 on the pin) small HK with dipped 3
Pinback (unmarked) small HK with dipped 3

Another Souval I had was this one. Many people say it is okay. I actually felt bad about it, also HW from Hamburg did not want it even though he was selling them in the 80's and 90's ... They simply don't have natural justified features (vanzelfsprekende kenmerken) as for example the Deschlers or S&L have and that bothers me.

[meriksson]

just to comment on that last Souval EK, i got my one whit the orginal case and outer cartong. And the case and cartong is not made after the 50´s, my feeling is that they are made late war as the case dont have a hinge but it´s like a normal ek case. Even markt 621kb! and it´s not a LDO case.
Mikael