I know we have to be a little circumspect with WoK because they can get a little tetchy when we talk about the watches they're offering but this one popped up on my alerts this morning .... and it does look very pretty. Anyone planning to attend one of the viewings, who can get their hands on for an inspection and report back? https://www.the-saleroom.com/en-gb/...0031/lot-5861a3ee-ce79-470b-ba22-a97000f35ef4 Currently only have two images of the watch but I have asked for more:
I might be up that way on the 2nd Nov, pm me nearer the time of you need any photos or specific angles photographed
Simple answer: haven't got a clue. Best guess: I doubt it seeing as the strap looks too small for the lugs so it's likely a cheap replacement. Let's face it, if you're going to nic .... borrow ... ("sorry, Sir, I think I misplaced that particular watch that was issued to me. There's a fine? Two shillings?") .. then the odds are you're not going to spend a lot on a strap. I remember my grandad's was still sitting on its issued NATO style two-piece.
The additional photos came through post haste and I've had an hour and two glasses of wine poring over them. I don't usually do the pixel by pixel examination but this would be a special watch to me so I really am fixating on everything. I am bothered by the font. This is a photo of my ol' grandad's one: And this is the WoK offering: The latter has a much thinner print. A problem or just differences in production? Some of the other photos ... apart from a missing inner cover, I really quite like this. I'm always scared by these since the new dials were released. I have no doubts this one is an original ... but please comment on anything and everything you see. I need some reassurance on this one.
Thanks Jimmy. While a GC would certainly be a great help, I'm betting that this WOK offering is A OK original.
I think that the difference in print is due to difference in camera equipment. The photo of your grandfather's watch looks much more fuzzy than the other one.
I think you should have kept those pictures to yourself if you're hoping to buy it! The case looks like you could shave with it
Those photos are available to anyone who asks. I know what my limit is ... but that may change slightly. If someone wants to pay more for it .... c'est la guerre. But, really ... that case is terrible. The whole thing is awful. People should just give up on it now. Please disperse. Nothing to see here.
I'm not so sure. If you look at mine further up, you'll see the seconds hand was white. That said, I think all three hands on the WoK example have been touched up at some point in the past. That's no big deal to me. They're going to need re-doing anyway.
Oh, you think they're both wrong? I didn't know this watch until after my grandad died but I did know him (he wouldn't pay for a service unless the watch stopped and even then probably would just put it in a drawer) and saw the watch before service: it looked like it had never been opened since it was issued. Pretty sure the white hand was original to the watch.
Researching people who know a lot more about the 2777-1 than I do, they say that the centre of the original second hand was unpainted. You can also research this on MWR - which I recommend if you are thinking about this purchase. Regarding both the above illustrated (by you) watches, make your own judgement.
yes, center was unpainted. the font looks fine to me as well. will be a good example. good luck ! kind regards. achim
Yes - saw that. Again, it's obviously a flaw but not one that's a deal killer .... just a little more on the service bill. @OMTOM and @watchyouwant ... thanks both for the clarification on the seconds hand. I've not seen many examples of the -56 but each one I've seen has had a white hand. I take on board what both of you have said and at some point this week I'll go into depths of working out if the hand is correct and painted white or if they were both replaced at some point.
