Please advise whether this triple is a Compax

I have this Universal triple chronograph with cal. 285 movement. All the other triples I can see on Ebay have dials identifying them as a variant of the Compax ; but mine has no words on the dial other than "Universal Geneve". The dial's patina suggests that it is original.

The case has steel sidewalls and back but solid gold bezel and lugs. The numbers engraved on the back are 8-61351 and 22464. I know from reading information here that the latter number correctly indicates a steel cased chronograph with cal. 285 movement, case style 64.

I would estimate that it was made around late 40s or early 50s, so it doesn't seem to pre-date Universal's use of the Compax name. Could someone please advise whether it is in fact a variant Compax, or any other designation which I can use when selling? I don't want to misdescribe it. Any info about relative rarity would also be useful.

Sorry for the poor image - it has a dark copper dial which is quite hard to photograph.

Thanks for any help,
ROB

What you have here is a redialed UG Compax.

Regarding when it was made, that can be derived from the serial number on the case back (the longer number).

No sentimental value ; I'm an occasional trader and this was an auction purchase as a non-runner. My local watch guy has just finished overhauling it so everything now works well.

If all parts are original other than the dial, I would have appreciated some suggestion about whether I could restore / improve it by replacing the dial with an original one, and which type ; rather than such negativity as "just nothing good to say about this watch" which doesn't help at all.

ROB

Hello @Frontfloater ,
Your original post asked for an affirmation that your watch was a rarity with “dial’s patina that suggests that it is original”.
This style of descriptions in offers from some traders and sellers causes inexperienced beginners to lose their money.
You got the answers to all questions that you asked in your original post so no need to write things like “would have appreciated some suggestion” etc. - well, you didn’t ask for any such suggestions.


Anyway, the forum is here to discuss watches, so here is what you might be looking for regarding an original dial…
These “double metal” cases, from what I have so far seen were usually fitted with a similar style of dials - with either applied or printed “12” and gold dots instead of numbers.
Here is an image from the archive:

(Source: https://universalgeneve.info/chronographs/271-12201.html )

Here is an image of an example sold at Christie’s, serial 861338

(Source: https://onlineonly.christies.com/s/...tone-chronograph-two-tone-bracelet-185/165658 )

And here is an image of a very similar watch and also a close serial number (86115), but it is a smaller caliber (cal. 283, reference 22232). This dial style (but with a cal. 285 diameter) is what you should be ideally looking for:


(Source: https://www.ebay.com/itm/1262107156...xzxeK-tS-C&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY )


Regarding the “rarity”.
As @bgrisso has suggested above these mixed metal cases are “pretty cool” and relatively rare. But it can also be a matter of personal taste (me personally, I don’t like the combination of steel and gold on the case and would not by a watch like this to wear it).

That hammer price was for a faulty watch with (as clearly visible) a non-functioning chronograph - it had two movement screws missing (a photo you did not copy), a non-running hour register, and a defective start-stop lever. So yes, perhaps parts value at that point - but now professionally overhauled and fully functional, as I said before.

Thank you MartinC for the dial photos. My request for those was not in my original enquiry simply because I did not know that my dial is a replacement. My follow-up comment about suggestions was triggered by a post which was only criticism, rather than constructive criticism - which is what I would hope for in a forum of like-minded people. It is an important distinction. For someone to suggest that any vintage watch (even a modified one) is fit for nothing except being melted down is not only rude, but foolish - particularly if the watch only needs a replacement period-correct dial to restore it to originality. I see that Larry has now edited his post to remove that part of his comment, so even he apparently had second thoughts about it.

I accept that my phrase "The dial's patina suggests that it is original." might have been better worded as "The dial's patina suggests that it is old" - but again, I did not know. I would not intentionally mislead anyone in a sale description - that's why I asked a question here before selling, and why I said clearly "I don't want to misdescribe it."

To clarify - my original enquiry did not "ask for an affirmation that your watch was a rarity" : I asked for any information about relative rarity, which is quite different. Relative rarity could include being commonplace, made by the millions ; or worth almost nothing in comparison with a better model.

Thanks to those who offered helpful comments.

ROB

not so rare
not so valuable
not so easy to find a correct dial
potentially not so cheap to buy a period correct dial (but the main issue is to find one of them)

good luck!

Hi Rob,

I think your post may have felt slightly abrasive to some since you're looking to flip a watch. And while there is nothing wrong with that you obviously are hoping to profit from the information gained here. From the very few posts you have on the forum including your other Ed White thread (https://omegaforums.net/threads/newbie-seeking-advice-on-originality-of-an-ed-white-105-003.148411/) it seems that thus far your relationship with the forum and its members has been one sided - take rather than give and take. Regardless, a couple folks here have gone out of their way to give you not only their detailed input but offered some research as well. Considering it is 100% free to sign up, make a thread, ask for advice and receive said advice, isn't that amazing? I'd urge you to consider doing the same for others looking to learn in spaces where you have some knowledge.

Cheers!

Nicely said, @slique12 .

OP has posted for sale on Ebay if anyone wants to watch the last chapter (no shade intended):
https://www.ebay.com/itm/2046524901...sPlCwjPR1O&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY

And this is from the description of the watch in the eBay advert:

“The copper coloured dial is marked "Universal Geneve" and has a tachymeter scale around the outside. It appears to be old, and has several patina spots. Universal's triple chronographs were usually branded as variants of "Compax" but this dial is not. It has been suggested to me that the watch is a Compax but with a non-original dial, due to the absence of any model name, but I do not know for sure.”

Pretty sad when our knowledge and helpfulness is used in this way.

Wow, more rocks being thrown ... how to make a newbie feel welcome. I wonder why I don't feel like being the caring & sharing member you say I should be.

"I'd urge you to consider doing the same for others looking to learn in spaces where you have some knowledge." Why did you assume I don't? In fact I have been doing exactly that for years, under a different username, on philatelic forums - including publicising several Ebay criminal scammers who have been defrauding buyers for many years. The big difference on those forums is that no-one expects members who benefit from our free & expert advice to then keep it to themselves and not use it in any way ; as apparently some here do. The simple & obvious reason why I don't contribute here is that I don't have the required knowledge or expertise. I have asked two questions in two years, and posted one piece of helpful advice. And that's regarded as being "one-sided" and taking too much? Seriously?

"Pretty sad when our knowledge and helpfulness is used in this way." ?? WHY, exactly? Explain that nasty comment, please - if you can. I made it very clear in my original post that I was seeking information in order not to misdescribe the watch when I sell it. I wanted to learn about my watch, and asked those who might know. At the risk of pointing out the obvious, that's what people do on forums all around the world. Why do you apparently think that, having discovered new information here, anyone should then keep it to themself and not benefit from it ? That's an inexplicable and silly attitude, and I doubt whether you put it into practice yourself.

I can see why folks might want to see how the sale goes - perhaps to say "Told you so" if it bombs. But I find it unacceptable for someone to go spying around to find out what I paid for the watch, and then publicise it for all to see, without asking me first. That was discourteous, and again doesn't really match up with the "Hey. we're all helping you here..." claims.

" And it wouldn't hurt to ... express appreciation for the help you're given." ? I did exactly that, right at the start and twice again later in the thread.

Finally, " I do not know for sure" is the truth about the dial. No-one here knows for sure, and I certainly don't.

ROB