Forums Latest Members
  1. raider44 Jun 27, 2017

    Posts
    78
    Likes
    45
    i recently purchased my first vintage watch a 2639-1 cal 265... was wondering if you guys could take a look at the pics and let me know if you think i did OK on it. Thanks.

    IMG_0054.JPG IMG_0047.JPG IMG_0042.JPG IMG_0056.JPG IMG_0057.JPG IMG_0059.JPG IMG_0055.JPG
     
    ConElPueblo likes this.
  2. BenBagbag Jun 27, 2017

    Posts
    2,820
    Likes
    8,983
    It's strange to see the minute track on the inner ring and then the minute hand extends way past them. May mean redial may mean hands not original to the watch. Also sub-seconds hand doesn't line up and probably isn't original to the watch. Long story short things don't line up IMO.
     
  3. raider44 Jun 28, 2017

    Posts
    78
    Likes
    45
    I am not saying the dial is for sure original but I have seen a few other examples with the inside minute track and the minute hand extending past... I'll see if I can find a photo.

    What do you mean by the sub second hand not 'lining up'?
     
  4. Kwijibo Jun 28, 2017

    Posts
    1,858
    Likes
    2,244
    If you're looking for one, I have one for sale. 100% original, automatic, nice price. PM.
     
  5. westmtn Jun 28, 2017

    Posts
    385
    Likes
    421
    Looks original to me except for the seconds hand. Hour and minute hands are correct for this reference.
     
  6. ConElPueblo Jun 28, 2017

    Posts
    9,587
    Likes
    26,978
    Be careful of giving advice when you're not too sure of what you're talking about ;)

    Minute hand extending the minute track is a well-known characteric of these 30mm-equipped watches. What do you mean by "sub-seconds hand doesn't line up and probably isn't original to the watch"?
     
  7. chipsotoole Jun 28, 2017

    Posts
    1,061
    Likes
    1,924
    Here's one from 1939. Numerals look similar and mine has the train tracks round the outside and a slightly different shaped sub second hand. It is a different cal but I thought there were enough similarities for it to be of interest. IMG_2454.jpg
     
  8. fjf Jun 28, 2017

    Posts
    766
    Likes
    743
    The blued seconds hand is not likely original (not aged and different from the other two hands, not blue but silver); the other two are consistent with the era. Anyway, the dial (from the distance) does not look wrong, and in toto is a nice watch. The hands may have been replaced but they are compatible with the model. Enjoy it!. Here is mine, in need of a visit to the watchmaker:

    [​IMG]
     
    Edited Jun 28, 2017
  9. raider44 Jun 28, 2017

    Posts
    78
    Likes
    45
    i have suspected the second hand was not original... does anyone feel that it could be original to the watch?

    in hindsight - i probably significantly overpaid for the piece... is anyone comfortable with providing me a rough estimate of value?
     
  10. BenBagbag Jun 28, 2017

    Posts
    2,820
    Likes
    8,983
    I've learnt to use "may" and "IMO" here. Thought the second hand looked a little longer but could be just angle of the picture. I thought those sub second markings look like classic redial markings like the Ranchero redials - where the hashes don't start or stop on the edge of the second track. Not that familiar and definitely not my look with the extended minute hand past the minute markings.
     
  11. François Pépin Jun 29, 2017

    Posts
    1,531
    Likes
    1,081
    Original dial to my opinion. Second hand may not be original to the watch.