13ZN Chronographs Inquiries and Information.

I'm unsure as well, but wanted to provide a checklist for discussion.
Dialfoot coppered - good.
Complex dial/subdials, no obvious errors at first glance. Different fonts for the numerals (I could recognize at least one open six, some flat three, some round), logical arrangement, size of the LONGINES signature, edges of the subdials, length and style of the hands - everything seems in order (considering the quality of the photos).
Less fitting seems to me that only one color seems to be used, no different silvering, no other optical extras as so often with 13ZN dials.
On the other hand: the design is reasonably appropriate for a 13ZN from the 1930s (i.e. “early”).
But the overall impression, at least in the photos, doesn't really seem coherent to me. I am looking forward to further opinions.

Greetings to all,

I have just bought a wonderful and early 13ZN monopusher ref. 3504 from 1937, sold in 1938 by Stefanovitch in Beograd:

Extract from an article about the serbian military Calatravas:

" Also, on the dial the retailer name ‘Milan T Stefanovich’, which was the most prominent royal retailer (one of three court-appointed retailers) in Belgrade at the time selling both jewellery and watches. We believe that they had 8 shops in the region.

During the 1930’s Stefanovich supplied watches to the military on behalf on the monarchy and previously to the railway companies in the region, many of which have the same coat of arms on the dials and on the case backs. "

Considering also another historical fact:

...Despite the 13ZN being known for its flyback functionality today, there are early transitional models that didn't have this function. “The 13.33Z and the 13ZN were compatible for the cases and dials [that Longines were producing], and since the majority of the 13.33Z cases were mono-pusher cases, we used them,” says Portal. “So, at the very beginning of the 13ZN, we had a few single-pusher non-flyback models. Then, and very quickly, we only made twin-pusher cases. For these models, it is very rare not to have a flyback.”

Is this a causal connection and availability of material as mentioned above, and chronographs from this transitory era ca.1936-1938 (mostly monopushers) with a black dial and steel case could be characterized as military grade watches? Or rather were this watch civilian version of the chronograph?

To specify, my piece ( 1st image ) was made before the first monopushers were delivered to Romanian army.

I saw a similar piece advertised as a military chronograph with a period correct strap that answered this theory.

Thank you for clarifying!

Luke

I may have found the error: two different tachymeter scales on the same dial are a strong indication of an unintelligent restoration...

Dial looks very original to me, very patinated as you have said, but if you like the looks I'm sure it is an amazing watch to enjoy.

It does seem to be missing a subdial hand plus the central counter. May be difficult to source the correct hands.

Not exactly same but similar example sold recently at Antiquorum

https://catalog.antiquorum.swiss/en/lots/longines-ref-21837-lot-377-49?page=1&q=longines

reminded me of this one immediately.

Judging from the font of the outermost track numerals, I'm guessing the one you have is from an earlier period.

movement number 5'457'486 also supports this.

You may have a point, but it still looks so "correct" overall...

Also were redials of this high quality before??

It just looks fine all around, considering everything...

hi all, i have see one piece on market, but it looks redial for me, due to the printing of subdial not full fill, and the hand on 3 o'clock subdial looks not correct. pls letme know what u think. the picture is a screenshot on video, the best i can get

I think you're right.

100% redial, can spot it from a mile away.

More about the 13ZN-12 "sommatore centrale" ref.5161 "gold case"...
Here is a comparison of 2 "silver dials" with blue tachymeter scale, to a "golden dial" with blck tachymeter scale.👍