@LogisBizkit Great watch. Both case and dial design are relatively uncommon. Looks to be around 34 mm in diameter and from circa 1942.

@olivecrona and @minutenrohr It is difficult to tell from the photos but I wonder if either of you think that the dial looks to have been lightly cleaned?

 

@DirtyDozen12 you are right this watch was sold in 1942 in Milano!

 

You have the papers? A wonderful heirloom.

 

Unfortunately not, I asked Longines for information about the serial number and they told me, that it was sold in Milano 1942

 

Franken?



https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https://www.ebay.de/ulk/itm/323641818574

 

Case-back is from a 30CH so yes, a franken. The printed winged-hourglass on the dial is also atypical for a 13ZN, especially given the approximate production date of 1943. Of course, a 30CH dial would not fit on a 13ZN without extensive modification. It would be nice to see the back of the dial but alas. Additionally, the crown is more indicative of a 1950's waterproof Longines (e.g. 6474 or 6075). The ends of the hour and minute hands look shorter than usual too (especially evident in the hour hand).

Maybe @divetime can shed some light on this one?

 

P.S. I will add that the backs of the lugs appear to have been polished. This conveniently prevents comparing the case number on the back (3) with the one on the mid-case to confirm their originality.

 

Many thanks for the insights! My point was that I never saw a genuine 13ZN dial with hourglass logo. I didn't noticed the issue with the case back or the polished backs of the lugs. I have a kind of feeling that the seller might be well aware of all this

 

In my Opinion it is a 13ZN dial (though I haven´t seen one with printed hourglass - usually transitional 13ZN dials have applied hourglasses) because of the asymmetry of the counters. But the 6,4xx xxx movement number does not match a transitional dial. The case is for sure from a 30CH. Furthermore the minute hand is too long.
So we have a movement from 1943/44, a dial (if it is legit) from 1947 and a case from the early fifties (3rd revision of ref. 6075)
Edit: or a caseback from the early fifties, if the case is earlier. But (imo) this case style does not match a 6,4 mio movement...

 

But but the owner had it for thirty years

 

Game over. Congratulations to all who didn´t buy this one.

 

https://www.ebay.de/itm/323645104352?ul_noapp=truePurchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network

Back on the scene - someone tried to hack sellers account (!)

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/RARE-LONGI...1-941-/352565316689?nordt=true&orig_cvip=truePurchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network
The auction itself looked fishy (lack of vendor rating, bank transfer only, no eBay protection...), I stayed out.

But what about the watch itself? I'm no expert, but this doesn't look authentic, right?
Dial seems much too clean compared to the movement (which has some corroded parts, whilst also looking like having been aggressively cleansed - shouldn't the plated be either frosted gold gilt, or rhodium Geneva stripes?), the shape of the hour markings is somewhat weird (in particular the 6, also the 5 and 7), I'd also have expected 2, 4, 8, 10 (cut) hour markings, chronograph hands look wrong to me too...
Am I correct, or completely off and wrong?

On the other side, even with wrong elements, at €1300 this would have been quite a steal... if the watch ever arrives to the happy buyer, does work (or is repairable), and wasn't a stolen one. Well, if not, it was indeed also a steal!

 

Dial has been refinished. Photography can affect the visibility of Geneva stripes. Crown is incorrect and case has been polished. Chronograph second hand is incorrect.

 

+ broken parts in the movement.....

 

https://www.ebay.de/itm/323649374698?ul_noapp=truePurchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network

Third try. Strange seller...

 

Maybe he doesn't understand why bids are so low and he starts again and again - well just this fact let me know how correct this seller could be.

 

Not an original dial, IMO.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bs5HV9Rnfol/

 

I didn’t see the movement picture and I think you are rigth. Not sure if this is an original dial.

 

Even so . The dial looks very nice