Is this an original dial?

kyle L
Posts
4,449
Likes
11,332
Couldn't resist putting in a bid and I ended up getting it. This always happens when I'm trying to save for something else...馃槣

$T2eC16hHJF8E9nnC9dFyBQI-rCt-hQ~~60f_57.jpg


$T2eC16hHJF8E9nnC9dFyBQI-rCt-hQ~~60_57.JPG
 
dsio
Posts
33,159
Likes
37,888
I know what you mean, I'm about to become a Speedmaster owner when I was saving for a new apartment to live in 馃槣
 
adam78
Posts
3,849
Likes
27,363
I favor original, Kyle. Nice one! Perhaps Dennis will pipe in.

What's the case size?

Reminds me of this 35mm of mine:

IMG_6929.jpg

IMG_4857_2.jpg
 
kyle L
Posts
4,449
Likes
11,332
It should be a little smaller than the Seamasters, I think it measures about 32/33mm. That's a really nice one, do you still have it?
 
adam78
Posts
3,849
Likes
27,363
kyle L kyle L
It should be a little smaller than the Seamasters, I think it measures about 32/33mm. That's a really nice one, do you still have it?

Yes, one of two triple dates I own (the other is a 14K cal. 72C Benrus Sky Chief).
 
U
Posts
25,980
Likes
27,689
Kyle, I'm not sure if it's original or not. The spot to study is the tips of the C. Yours is plain while the originals usually have a little barb on at least the top tip. Adam's watch has it on both ends.
 
gatorcpa
Posts
13,095
Likes
17,950
There are several different iterations of the JLC logo. Not sure if all had barbs on the "C" or not. Here's one of mine with very small barbs. Sorry that I lack focus! 馃榾

DSC00415.jpg

However, that particular watch seems to be a little too "busy" at the bottom above the 6. I would need to examine up close and personal to determine if dial was original.

Take care,
gatorcpa

t2ec16hhjf8e9nnc9dfybqi-rct-hq-60f_57-jpg.4531

Edit - After putting the two pics next to each other, there are some things that concern me about that dial.

1. The line under the logo has sharp angles under the J and second R, that the other dials shown here don't have.
2. The "U" seems to be a tiny bit off-line.
3. The middle serif of the E's are not eccentric like in the other dials.

I'd pass on this one.
 
kyle L
Posts
4,449
Likes
11,332
Hmm...just took a look at the minute track and at some points it seems uneven. It could be the crystal that is distorting them, but Ill take some better pictures when I get it.
 
gatorcpa
Posts
13,095
Likes
17,950
If the listing says "original dial", and you paid premium money, I'd consider asking for a refund. If you got it at a good price, no one is going to know the difference.

Except us, of course. 馃槣

Enjoy,
gatorcpa
 
U
Posts
25,980
Likes
27,689
gatorcpa gatorcpa
If the listing says "original dial", and you paid premium money, I'd consider asking for a refund. If you got it at a good price, no one is going to know the difference.

Are you kidding? It's Kyle - of COURSE he got a great price!
 
kyle L
Posts
4,449
Likes
11,332
gatorcpa gatorcpa
If the listing says "original dial", and you paid premium money, I'd consider asking for a refund. If you got it at a good price, no one is going to know the difference.

Except us, of course. 馃槣

Enjoy,
gatorcpa

Unfortunately there are no returns, and the seller didn't say it was original. I think I got it for a fair price though. Even if it is a redial, I might keep this one!
 
kyle L
Posts
4,449
Likes
11,332
U ulackfocus
Are you kidding? It's Kyle - of COURSE he got a great price!

I don't know about this time...馃槣
 
gatorcpa
Posts
13,095
Likes
17,950
D -

Can you post a pic of one of your JLC factory redos here? I wonder how they stack-up against the logo on Kyle's watch. It's that good.

Take care,
gatorcpa
 
cicindela
Posts
15,048
Likes
24,051
We're sorry the Dennis is busy at the moment 馃榿

IMG_1858-2.jpg

jlccal428-jpg.3183
 
U
Posts
25,980
Likes
27,689
gatorcpa gatorcpa
D -

Can you post a pic of one of your JLC factory redos here? I wonder how they stack-up against the logo on Kyle's watch. It's that good.

You got it. Let's start with the '66 Memovox, which was confirmed original by Le Sentier.

IMG_3790-1.jpg

The barb is very crisp at the top of the C.

Here's the '65 caliber 800C.

IMG_1858-2.jpg

A little less crisp, but there nonetheless.

Now here's the '46 caliber 428 - a very close relative to Kyle's watch - that just came back from restoration.

IMG_5385-1.jpg

I don't see the barbs. Weird, huh?
 
gatorcpa
Posts
13,095
Likes
17,950
I blew-up your picture a little bit:

IMG_1678C.jpg


Still no sharp angle to the underline, the bars on the E's are closer to the top and the U is on line with the other letters.
gatorcpa
 
kyle L
Posts
4,449
Likes
11,332
Well...the markers are actually yellow gold. I thought it might be a bumper but it actually has a manual movement. Printing and minute track aren't that crisp under a loupe, so I'm thinking it's an older redial?

7827143428_d75c2955fc_b.jpg

7827129446_449426f06e_b.jpg

7827140396_4024807460_b.jpg

7827108182_c670688d75_b.jpg

Some other iffy areas:

7827118480_48709ec39f_b.jpg

7827098180_ca8655be50_b.jpg

7827089936_ff2ba61ae5_b.jpg

Also wondering, what year is it from?

7827073692_6bbbaa145d_b.jpg

7827056160_2414c0a9e2_b.jpg

7827025546_197008a694_b.jpg
 
U
Posts
25,980
Likes
27,689
That looks like my caliber 428.

JLC-move.jpg


Is the serial number 417747? I'll look it up for you in my book but it's really close to the serial of mine as you can see. That puts it around 1946.
 
kyle L
Posts
4,449
Likes
11,332
U ulackfocus
That looks like my caliber 428.

JLC-move.jpg


Is the serial number 417747? I'll look it up for you in my book but it's really close to the serial of mine as you can see. That puts it around 1946.

Yep. Does your watch take a 17mm strap?
 
3 More Posts...
Sign up or log in to reply...