@Seiji See 7:56, though I would not try this at home.

 

You have to unscrew three times. On the pic you can see one of the screw holes.

 

On the Vid DD12 just posted it is at minute 7.55.

 

I have concerns about the varnish cracking more. If it doesn't come off easily. I will leave it alone if the dial is stuck. Already there are lots of fine spyder cracks.

 

Leave it alone @Seiji - don't tempt fate!

 

DD12

Do we know what this is? I see the marks overlaps into the sub dials. So this was not meant for production. Is it a fake dial, a counterfeit of a real dial, registration check dial, a sample design preproduction proof, a concept model, or redial, a process check dial to confirm the assembly instructions are accurate?

In manufacturing, we have design prototype, assembly prototype, instruction prototype, quality prototype, volume prototype. And then we have preproduction sample lots. I see this type of mistakes during the design, process, and instruction prototype phases.

At least it isn't as bizarre as Rolex prototype dials and double print gilt precision swiss dials. I know a lot of non production dials got out into the wild.

I don't know if you're familiar with the Weems prototype stolen from Longines. It's for sale right now for €100k.

 

Hi Seiji,

Unfortunately, I do not know what you are referring to. Did you remove a photo from your post?

Not necessarily about prototypes, but I recall reading an article by AD where he mentions that rumors of early, imperfect dials are unlikely to be true. If the printing was not to the desired standard, the ink could easily be removed in order to print again.

Is Davide Parmegiani selling this "Weems prototype"?

 

Sorry I tried again.

Do you know what this is? What is the background on it?

My point about the prototype is of course that items that were meant to be destroyed or never sold have gotten out of a few manufacturers including Longines.

 

Occam's razor suggests that it is a refinished 13ZN dial. Atypical signature, sub-dials, hour markers, sunburst finish, condition, and silver feet all point towards this conclusion. On the other hand, the markings on the back of the dial are somewhat different than those found on the majority of original 13ZN dials that I have seen. Regardless, I do not think that it is original. And given the resemblance that your dial bears to this one, I am inclined to believe that they come from the same source.

 

Sorry I don't believe in Okcams Razor applies to this kind of a problem. There are no finite probability constraints, there are still unknown number of possible outcomes. A razor must be tested to be a substitute for a model.

Also, the problem with authenticating many Longines is the very low batch numbers. Longines often made only 6 to 10 watches at one time. In some cases, there really is only one batch or one of a kind Longines. My watch has a member number 4 of a batch.

I think there is too much unknown and I would not speculate there is a direct relationship. The age of the dials look different and the design are different. I can guess possibly 50 years difference in age of the dials base entirely on appearances. I really don't know how these dials ages so it's just a unfounded guess.

I have seen genuine Hamilton tank dial plates sold. I would guess there are both genuine Hamilton dials and fake Hamilton dials. Usually the redials are not of the same quality of the originals, but they do look very similar. One reason I hate Hamiltons without applied numbers. It can be really tricky with military Hammys.

I have also seen Dial Manufactures have made the same dial for more than one brand with minor differences between the versions for the brands. The black and red porcelain snail tachometer 22GH dials is a classic example where I got caught buying a fake porcelain dial that someone put pieces of a Longines porcelain dial into a generic 22GH dial and refired it. The warping of dial from the heat gave it away when I saw it in person.

So the problem is that you have to prove to a reasonable degree, what is the eBay dial. And you have to prove the two dials were made by the same source for the intent to fake a Longines dial. It is difficult to judge since the age of the dials could be considerable different as well. I agree that there is a strong resemblance of the minute track and sub-dials. I would like to see a higher resolution to see if the print quality is also just as precise. I can't tell from the posted image.

One could be genuine and the other something else that resembles the first.

 

@Seiji I believe that you are over-complicating the issue. The dial in your 13ZN is exceptional in a number of ways. Just comparing the signature to other 13ZN dials from the 1930s will demonstrate this. Is it more likely that the dial is a rare variant from a small batch or simply a redial? The elephant in the room is that the watch is already in your possession. Ideally, this discussion would have taken place prior to purchasing.

 

I do have a bias. But what bias does John, Adriano, and Bernard have? If we simply went by comparison to known good, many authentic Longines watches would be fakes. James Dowling says just because it hasn't been seen before doesn't make it a fake.

 

Unfortunately, they are not involved in this discussion, though I would be glad if they were.

You have misunderstood me. I am not implying that multiple, identical copies are required to all but confirm authenticity. But it would be foolish to ignore trends, which seems to be your inclination.

 

I agree, but one must realistically consider the probability of such an exception. And the more exceptions present in a single watch or dial, the less likely that it is original. When I am in doubt, I do not proceed. But I understand that others operate differently.

When I assess a dial, I analyze dozens of details and compare each of them to trends that I have noted over time. You have just mentioned a few details and drawn a sweeping conclusion. I caution you to act so hastily. I would need more information to properly assess this watch.

 

Hopefully you do not believe that this is original.

 

DD12 this discussion is in my opinion about methodology. You have a good framework. The only disagreement I have is in the weighting applied to factors in the decision analysis. I weight expert opinion, print quality, material analysis, and patina higher than style trend. I do not ignore print style. But I account for style changes due to transitional periods and different suppliers. The previous dial is authentic in my opinion because it is Albert Wittnaeur. It took 3 months to discover and verify that. A rare exception.

 

I agree, our methodologies differ and so do our collections, as a result. The world would be boring if we all collected the exact same watches. I appreciate the diversity as my objective is to learn.

 

Going off tangent, it seems that Longines may be releasing a 13zn issue sometime this year.

https://watchesbysjx.com/2019/04/baselworld-2019-round-up.html

 

I came by to see if anyone was talking about the $10k case and dial on eBay and how far from realistic the price is and I see that I missed a long discussion with Seiji about how to spot redone dials. As I’ve mentioned before, you have to start with the assumption that it’s a redial and that unless you can clearly disprove that it’s a redial then it is a redial. It’s not the other way around and it’s not a probability issue. This is the exact same type of flawed analysis that was taking place with the Polish Navy FFs and we see it here again on full display.

Anyhow, who thinks that $10k case and dial are significantly overpriced?

 

What a horrid life this poor watch had.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Lo...601324?hash=item546e3ad16c:g:FT4AAOSwDJ9cr994Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network