This watch is described in the new book 'Universal Geneva - TEN' by Richard Crosthwaite and Paul Gavin as a ‘New old stock unpolished Compax’. However, I've never seen a (non-evil) Nina as a 885103/01 (v /02), nor do I see this crown on others.
Anyone seen these before?

 

Good spot. I can’t comment on the crown but I agree I’ve never seen an /01 Nina before.

 

Check Dre's UG Info sticky. Compare the Logo and the SN. That will provide you with directional info.

 

The crown is correct. The Clapton also use these. And 01 Nina is of course a red flag.

 

Thanks.
It sounds from your comment that on some pieces they mixed the logos (different on crown and dial, as with this one (early clogo crown, later logo dial) - setting aside the incorrect caseback). I'm guessing this watch correctly would need to be around the mid-60s and manufactured around the time of logo transition.
I have never seen another Nina with this crown and a correct serial number on the back. If anyone has a link, please let me know.

 

Keep in mind the crown is usually changed during service and rarely is the same version used. Rarely will you find a Nina with its original crown

 

On the Ten book, there is at least one picture of the Nina with this crown. Also I have an evil Clapton as well as an evil Nina (2,569,xxx) with this crown.

 

Considering serial number (2.5 mill) the crown is a replacement. That crown style/logo was produced well beyond the nina production dates. I have seem 2.8 mill compax cases with the correct crown and logo.

For reference, nina crowns should look like image.



What I would be concerned about is the 885103/01. That is the reference of the evil nina (black dial with white registers) so clearly there has been a bit of a job done on this one. I may be wrong, but i think it has had a (albeit good quality) lume job.

 

Actually this seems like a good place to suss this out too.



Now we have the UG logo above based on time line (take from Dre’s thread)

And we have below the different crown with different UG logo that seems to come from different timeline but they are all seen with the Nina and Clapton. I will call the first one the 57 crown, the second one the 60 crown and the third one the 65 crown. They each resemble the UG logo above of the same year. It is probably fair to say the 65 crown is the best match for Nina and Clapton with serial number 2,5xx,xxx

But was it possible the 60 and the 57 also came out factory fitted given those should be the parts that were in stock about the time the first Nina and Clapton came out the production line in 1965/1966?

57 crown


60 crown


65 crown



Also in my experience it has been relatively easy to source 57 crown, possible to source 65 crown but I have not come across 60 crown that I can purchase.

 

That is wrong. The 1960s funny U that you show is actually a later 1970s design, introduced with the Quartz and Golden shadow design. You will not find that logo on 60s UGs. Whoever compiled the dates and logos legend, has it wrong ...



nina and evil nina production started much earlier than 65. Difficult to put an accurate date on it, but serial 2.2 mill is about the earliest I have seen. The logo on dial was the earlier applied logo, however, the crown has always had (as far as I know), the later 60s logo or linear U. The model started out as a 22706-1 and -2 which used the famous valjoux 72-6 or caliber 130 (same as rolex daytona) movement not the later caliber 85 (not as prestigious).

 

Great question @ELV web... Maybe like @CajunTiger / @Diabolik said these 60 crowns were fitted on service or maybe they were fitted in factory. I would venture that we may never definitively know though because how could anyone truly know what Universal did and didn't do unless they were there? The more I learn about Universal as a brand, it seems like the company made incredible watches but philosophically never held a strict/ rigid template for their "assembly lines". And that makes the most sense to me if you look historically at how they built themselves up in the 30's, 40s and 50s - Different hands, different fonts, different dialmakers, etc.- to an extent that this practice never left them as a manufacturer.

I also agree with the @Diabolik that the dates and logos legend isn't accurate. I've seen more 57 logos on most watches that were produced in the 60-65 era than any of the other logos. And that 57 logo continued on dials/crowns on many watches manufactured after 1965 too.

That mickey mouse 'U' I've seen mostly on 70s models UGs.

 

Just to give some other ideas, from Sala page 33 and 35 on the Mickey Mouse U dial timeline. I think there is no such a clear time line as being strictly 70s on the Mickey Mouse logo. Of course Sala can also be wrong (according to him it was already used in 1966).

And also this page also came from Sala

 

if you read through page 32-33, it talks about the two references (shown in page 33) being presented at the basil watch show in 1966 (which corresponds with polerouter.de timeline. That is the earliest that logo may have been shown and it would have been a while before it would have reached the high street. I can accept that while the old stock was being sold off, the two logos may have co-existed (on different lines/models), however, it is not a logo that was produced in the 60s.



In a nutshell, i think that nina did not start life as we see it ...

 

just on the golden shadow, I would be very surprised if they presented it at Basel in 1966 and did not sell it to the public in the same year....

Can someone who knows mr. Sala kindly ask Him how he got this? Or was it just a mistake?

 

I have ...

Although Sala covers some of the later (60s and 70s) UGs in his book, his work is centered around the early (30s-40s and 50s references). What is in the guide about later references, should not be used as the ultimate reference to UG or guide to determining timelines beyond the early years.

That image, has been around on the internet for some time. I am unsure of its provenience. However, i believe that image started life from the book by "italo bonifaccio" and was originally put together by antiquorum (see image from book below without the 53, 57, 60 and 65 logo) the auctions house we all know and love. It was modified at some point by someone (don't ask me who) ...



It is about time someone corrected it to reflect accurate dates of logos ...

 

I have always wondered about the fat U logo timeline. Not knowing anything about it, never looked right in that logo page from Sala, going in between the shield U and the skinny U. Just from a purely visual asthetic, it always seemed like it should be AFTER the skinny U and before the 80s U logo.

 

I know what you mean. It makes sense to me that fat U was later, with the logo being another example of the wider design decline across UG’s later years.

I wonder if some of the confusion is due to buckles. I have taken delivery of three different Polerouters on branded UG leather straps all with a stamped fat U buckle attached. They all seem to be later replacements after the original straps wore out. I accept that this speculative ‘evidence’ is completely anecdotal but I always thought that it was weird that the dial and buckle logos were so very different.

 

Maybe those dates under the logos were the dates they were trademarked, not the dates they came into use.
Anyway I reached out to Sala about the dates/logo timeline and pointed him to this thread. This was his response in Italian. He gave a more holistic outlook.

Nel 1961/62 UG aveva perso la fabbrica di Pont Martel, era in difficoltà economiche e fece tutto il possibile per venire fuori da questa situazione.
Per fare questo ha utilizzato tutto il materiale che aveva in stock, combinandolo come meglio poteva a seconda delle esigenze.
Non è un caso che in quel periodo sono usciti tanti tricompax, perché avevano molte scorte di questi movimenti che in quel periodo non
erano apprezzati come ora.
Il tanto decantato Nina Rindt, che ora pagano delle somme ingiustificate, altro non è che l'assemblaggio di casse che avevano in stock
con inserito un Valjoux 72 acquistato, in quanto loro avevano terminato i movimenti per i Compax e anche per gli Uni-compax (Val.23)
Del resto, in quel periodo tutte le case orologiere attraversavano un momento di difficoltà economiche e cercavano di superare la crisi.
Per questo motivo non è possibile per orologi di quel periodo avere dei riferimenti certi.
Io l'ho scritto nella mia prefazione che ho preferito fermare la mia attenzione (e la mia collezione) solo sui modelli che montavano i loro
movimenti di produzione Universal.
Detto questo, UG non poteva certo pensare che 50 anni dopo si sarebbe sviluppato un collezionismo del marchio che portava ad avere
pezzi perfetti, originali e coevi in tutte le loro parti.
Questo è il mio modesto pensiero, non avvallato da altro che dalla mia esperienza, visto che gli archivi non esistono più.
Google translated:
In 1961/62 UG had lost the Pont Martel factory, was in financial difficulties and did everything possible to come out of this situation.
To do this he used all the material he had in stock, combining it as best he could according to needs.
It is no coincidence that in that period many tricompaxes came out, because they had many stocks of these movements that in that period were not appreciated as now.
The much vaunted Nina Rindt, who now pay unjustified sums, is nothing more than the assembly of boxes they had in stock
with a purchased Valjoux 72 inserted, as they had finished the movements for the Compax and also for the Uni-compax (Val.23)
Moreover, at that time all the watchmakers went through a time of economic difficulties and tried to overcome the crisis.
For this reason it is not possible to have certain references for watches of that period.
I wrote it in my preface that I preferred to stop my attention (and my collection) only on the models that mounted their
Universal production movements.
That said, UG could hardly think that 50 years later a collection of the brand it led to would have developed
perfect pieces, original and contemporary in all their parts.
This is my humble thought, not supported by anything other than my experience, since the archives no longer exist.

 

The easiest way for me to see the logo transition is to look at the Golden and White Shadow models. Looking at these, we see the "rounded U" logo with lower serials than the "fat U".

More info, including examples, here:
http://alphahands.com/faq/universal-geneve-nina-rindt-crown/

 

Having held this one in my hands and inspected thoroughly I can say the crown is indeed not the usual style we see, the ref is normally for the Evil Nina but I do not view it as a major issue like it would be for a rare dial exotic Tri Compax to have the incorrect ref number to match the dial as values for both dial variations are similar but of course would be better to be the usual ref. Lastly the lume is all original, definitely not a modern lume job. This watch has been in this exact configuration via various top collectors from Belgium, the UK and Hong Kong over at least the past 6-7 yrs. Hope this info helps