Hi, folks-- Curious how the collective wisdom would evaluate (and value) this case, from a 105.003-63 apparently. I am trying to educate myself and via pics, it is always difficult. I would say it looks like the bevels have been polished down and especially the ends of the lugs misshapen as a result? A lot of Ed Whites out there seem to look like this, even the examples in MWO. And then there there the un-beveled -64 cases....
They are both from the same maker HF and made for a short time only... I have seen -63 without bevels.
We have discussed EW case variation at length on here previously, the -65 and -64 are now pretty widely known and agreed upon, there is still some debate on the -63 but on balance I am swayed to think that they were originally more like the -64 than distinctly bevelled -65. The point above about who made them is valid, the -63 and 64 share a maker, the -65 is by someone else. All these though have nothing like the excessive bevel seen on the FOIS. The OP case has clearly had some wear and maybe a polish or 2 but does seem to have the -64 type profile of no distinct bevel but a compound curved side. It may well be correct but a bit tired.
Yes I have read several of the OF threads on this, but as stated there isn't much (yet) on pre- 64 cases with regard to the bevel/non-bevel question. It's also odd that MWO does not discuss this non-bevel case phenomenon, which even in their own pictures in the book seem evident in -64 (and some earlier) straight lug cases.
And MWO book is already in its 3rd edition and nobody cared to amend this particular content... There is the question: do the authors not know or don´t they care to update? edited the error...
To me that looks like a -64...(edit : the one with the bracelet on...the case without a bracelet looks like a late 2998/105002 case...so maybe a 63???)
Is anyone frantically searching for errors or omissions in the 30mm bible right now, or is that perfect in every way?
I wouldn’t say frantically but I’d like to see more copy / details on the 1957 50th anniversary Speedy limited enamel dial. 311.33.42.50.01.001.
I was talking about another book, also highly regarded which covers the 30mm movement Omegas the author of which commented earlier . I am afraid the reason why you won’t see much on the enamel dial 50th Anni Speedy in MWO is that it has a non Lemania movement, a prerequisite for inclusion. That model lovely though it is has a curious one off version of the 3x33 F Piguet derived auto with no rotor making it manual wind. I too have a 3313 Speedy and love it to bits but I understand why the MWO haven’t included the Broad Arrow watches, they have to stop somewhere! Is the so called grail in there? I can’t actually remember? If so then there is a case for Broad Arrow inclusion I guess.
Ahhhhh.... I hadn't caught the connection. Its very cool we have such a mix of folks here! Today I learnt something! I hadn't realized the 3201 had that heritage. It was my first speedy, so I have a special affection for it. I bought it purely on the enamel dial which is wonderful. Now that you've clarified the movement details, it makes sense that MWO didn't include more details - it's mentioned but only as an addendum to the Gold Seahorse 50th Anni Speedy. (1861) Had a qiuck look see on MWO - couldnt see the grail. A few moonphases based on 1866. I might have missed it, but it didn't leap out.
