Hey guys, I'd be interested to hear thoughts on this one. I think chrono second hand is wrong, flat ended. Is that hour recorder creeping? Chipped paint on the minute hand near the center, on the bottom edge? Lugs look ok. What else? No movement pics yet.. Thanks for your time and feedback! J
I like the dial... can I have this one? LOL I guess all the real experts are asleep right now, and it's just you and me, Joel! Does that mean all the real experts are across the pond? Or, just getting 'brain' rest? Or, do they not respond until there's a 'meat-of-the-matter' movement pic?
An expert that's awake! Good point. The hands don't match the indexes at all, do they... the seconds hand looks way out of place, and wrong, like you said already.
I think those hands could be original. I've seen a few where the lume on the hands has aged much darker than the dial. Also think the lume on the hour markers is original, just shrunk slightly. I'd certainly want more pics from different angles and one with the back off but its not a bad start. One of my concerns would be the discolouration around the crystal. Is that rust inside the watch or dirt on the outside edge of the crystal? I think dirt but so some more pics will help.
I think the jury is still out on flat bottomed chrono seconds on a 145.012. I have one on mine but the lume matches the other hands so appears to be original.
I'd consider the flat bottom good on a late 145.012, Moonwatch Only also states that both are good on that reference.
For me this is at first glance, and one photo, is that this is an attractively aged correct watch. Now it's not worth top money, as the ageing appears to verge on decay, but that can be photos. The hands are grubby and I would want to improve things in this area. For me the plots have aged,the lume shrinking and the hands look to have aged along the same time line. The case looks good and the parts I can see are correct, though as I said, aged. The price should take this ageing into account. I understand hands and plots are slightly different in "architecture" and so some difference in aging is to be expected. The matching hands and plots, in terms of colour, often only appear because owners exchange them. I still like them to match, but in my experience this happens more by intervention than by neglect. When a dial is relumed, it is often done so the plots look like catapillars, a bit wobbly. In this case the lume does not cover the base marking, and does appear aged. I have seen the same shrinkage shown here in many original dials, and so I would have to say in my opinion it is unlikely this dial is relumed. Calling Micheal E for his opinion? My concern is that at the edge of the dial it seems dirty. Is this a sign of water damage? And yes.... I was asleep.....
Yea I was looking at that browning around the edge, I actually thought it might be just gunk / wrist slime / dirt accumulation between the bezel and crystal rather than on the dial as its more uniform around the edge than focused around the crown/pushers as you'd expect for mild water intrusion.
The issues appear relatively minor: lost lume on minute hand, wrong small second hand and dirty/rusty crystal tension ring. All boils down to the price now. Good luck.
So then wobbly lume inside the borders is ok wobbly lume outside the borders is not ok see, you learn something everyday. lol
Don't be surprised if your caterpillar experiences some shrinkage with age is what Space is saying I think.
is the hour recorder creeping ahead? is that an issue to be concerned about, or is that basically just proof of a service needed?
The missing lume on the minute hand can sometimes distort the the shape of the hand over time since theres nothing in between to hold it. But if u plan to change the hands then i guess its a non issue. The hand of the 30min sub dial seems to be slightly misaligned too as well as the hour recorder hand. Probably due for a service