biw I might be wrong, but most of the Tri-compaxes I've seen has the number flip between 7 and 9 and 23 and 25. Can someone comment on that? I don't think I've ever seen it flip between 5 and 7.
That is a good observation. The absence of an inscribed circle around the un-turned calendar subdial is also unusual.
Wow. now I see what you mean. Good question. I'll try to look into it further. It is at my watchmaker now to realign the 12h register. I'll ask him what he thinks. I've seen others without the circle around the moon phase / date register before. Plenty of examples on the web after a quick search.
I was afraid of that. The Tri Compax with the upside down 7 was certainly looking that way. So the Aero Compax is a redial as well? Certainly disappointed. But I'll keep wearing them as they do look good. The perils of collecting vintage. I went to UG and other brands because of concern with Vintage Rolex. : (
Correct. (And Relumed) They're still very attractive watches, enjoy them. The Tri-Compax has a poor replacement sub seconds hand too. If it's at the watchmaker you make ask him to clip the tail off at a minimum, as true UG replacements are unavailable.
This one will be on eBay shortly... Circa 1938-1941, I noticed the cases before WW2 were much thicker than during and after the war.
Hello. Nice collection - thanks for sharing. I agree that watches #2, 3 and 4 are sharp pieces with original dials. Watch #1, however, invites a comparison with this one with respect to the originality of the dial. The dials are not of exactly the same design, and there may be a better comparison out there on the web, but the issue for me is the fonts on your COMPUR, e.g. closed-loop 6's and 9's, pointy-topped A, round-top 3's. http://imieiorologiunblog.forumfree.it/?t=64958861
Pretty close, mine matches exacly the photo from U.G. archives (same case ref. 32401 and "30" under "Compur"). The other one is in very bad shape :/
Thanks, that's a better comparison. I agree, pretty close, but not exactly, and I think the devil is in the details I mentioned. The 6 at 6 o'clock, for example - open in the book example, closed on yours. The 3's in the telemetry ring, round-topped on yours, flat-topped in the book. The 4's, pointy on yours and flat-topped in the book. The painter of your watch's dial put everything in its place, and it's a nice piece of work, but there are important stylistic differences. These differences are, to me, classic signs of a re-stamp. I would take the one in bad shape. But opposing viewpoints are welcome and fun.
Gee ! You've got me there ! I'll find an explanation for sure give me some time... Maybe it's a re-stamp or maybe they corrected the error of mixing round topped 3's in the second's dial with the rest ...? U.G. made a lot of different dials ! (Ok there's a bit of bad faith here)