Hello everyone,

I'm in search of my first Tri-Compax and am curious which combination would have been produced in the smallest numbers and or which
combination would be most costly. I assume a full rose gold in 36/37mm but I have heard that the larger gold filled model is the most
scarce.

Thanks in advance!

 

Welcome to the Forums!

Cost is nothing more than a price somebody is willing to pay. But in terms of value from a collector's standpoint, vintage chronographs in steel are generally considered more desirable than gold or gold filled models.

Within a specific brand, there is a certain pecking order for collector desirability--which frequently deviates from absolute rarity! For the Tri-Compax I'd suggest that White Gold >>> Steel = 18k/14k > Chrome plate >> Gold Filled.

The problem with gold cases is an intrinsic property of the metal, that is, it's soft. So finding a gold case in well preserved condition, which hasn't been touched by a polishing wheel is quite difficult. Finding an average gold case is fairly easy, but most collectors aren't interested in average pieces. So aside from the value of the gold itself, that's why many collectors seek out the finest examples in steel. Beyond that though, you're getting into personal preferences.

Before you open your wallet, I'd urge you to review the posts in the Universal section of the forums. There's a lot to learn about Tri-Compaxes--which are wonderful and undervalued complications. Don't be shy about posting pictures or links to specific examples that you're contemplating buying. You'll find that the folks around here are happy to help you in scrutinizing a piece for originality, condition, and yes, scarcity, which are the main drivers of value.

Cheers!

 

I greatly appreciate you so openly sharing your knowledge. I understand fully and agree that condition is the primary factor when searching out a particular specimen and welcome the opportunity to post potential purchases and hopefully avoid a bad one. My preference is for a gold example but I am open. Now the fun begins.....

 

As a follow up, and having noticed some new folks nosing around the Universal / Tri-Compax world lately, I'd like to address the question of size in a vintage piece.

Many new collectors who are, perhaps avid readers of Hodinkee or some of the other watch collecting/journalism sites, set off in search of the largest vintage piece that they can find. That's fine, and generally, larger sizes are valued more highly. Though, I'd also point out that the opposite end of the spectrum, the truly tiny chronographs, such as the "Boy's Sizes" at around 30mm are incredibly collectible (and valuable) precisely because of their relative scarcity and because of the technical expertise that was required to shrink such a complicated watch movement down to that small of a package.

So I'd encourage you to stop and think about this for a minute. If you were writing the article, there's only so many quantitative characteristics of a watch that you could describe. Then you get into the very subjective personal assessments of aesthetics. So it's no wonder that many of these articles seem to place an inordinate amount of emphasis on a watch's size. Whether it's a modern monster that engulfs your wrist at 44mm or a more modest vintage piece at 33mm. The difference on paper, can seem enormous.

Hang out amongst vintage collectors for a little bit, and you'll definitely hear the topic of size come up, but it's not the be-all, end-all of desirability. In fact, it's probably one of the lessor factors that contributes to a piece's value. If you're interested in Universal, try on one of the Compax chronographs in a 33mm example. Try on one of the later, waterproof Tri-Compax pieces in a 35-36mm example. And sure, try on a 37mm Tri-Compax from the 1940s-50s as well. I think what you'll find is that unless you have unusually large or small wrists, the size of the piece sort of evaporates when it's on your wrist. The 33mm chronographs can look downright elegant on a nice strap--pushing the bounds of what would be considered a "dress watch," for example.

Try things on. Figure out what works for you!--and discover what your own preferences are for the size of a watch that goes on your wrist.