- Posts
- 19
- Likes
- 7
Mhurley
·is this the same reference or is there a difference?
145.022 or 145.0022?
- Posts
- 10,533
- Likes
- 16,463
padders
··Oooo subtitles!It’s an age thing. At some point the then current production model added the extra zero to fall in line with the 7 digit case number scheme, from memory in the early to mid 1980s after the 145.022-78 model. They dropped the date code and added a zero to the caseback inscription. Or so is my understanding. They have certainly had the extra zero in the solid caseback version from the 90s onwards.
Edited:
- Posts
- 18,244
- Likes
- 27,564
Foo2rama
··Nowhere near as grumpy as he used to be...Short answer same thing just a different way to say it depending on production year.
long answer....
145.0022 is the case part number and 145.022 was a reference number.
long answer....
145.0022 is the case part number and 145.022 was a reference number.
- Posts
- 19
- Likes
- 7
Mhurley
·I ask as my original purchase invoice is dated july 1980 but the ref number is 145.0022 not 145.022
- Posts
- 10,533
- Likes
- 16,463
padders
··Oooo subtitles!
The internal code for the watch has been 7 digit since around 1970 so that would be fine on the paperwork. What does it say in your caseback? Your watch may be early enough for a 145.022-78 caseback, in fact that would be my guess.
Edited:
- Posts
- 19
- Likes
- 7
Mhurley
·The internal code for the watch has been 7 digit since around 1970 so that would be fine on the paperwork. What does it say in your caseback? Your watch may be early enough for a 145.022-78 caseback, in fact that would be my guess.
