Hi all. Someone local has this Tri-Compax full calendar and moon phase, reference 12552, in solid gold. Before committing to checking the watch in person and, knowing myself, loving it so much to pull the trigger, I'm hoping I can get some advice.

The seller claims the dial is original. I'm no expert, but some things worry me:

- Dial is too good to be true for a watch produced in the 50s.
- The red date hand is longer than the subdial's radius.
- The moon and stars print is a bit different, more simplistic and maybe a bit less sharp than other examples of this reference I've seen online.
- The "Swiss" text seems janky. Feels like it was hand written as a second thought.

Considering this isn't a cheap watch - the seller has listed it for $8k, which probably there's some wiggle room - I'd appreciate some opinions if it's even worth considering.

The photos below are by the seller.

 

This is in my ebay watch list and if I had the funds available I would have bought it already. Everything looks great to me. The only thing I struggle with is the length of the red date hand, which I cannot explain, but nothing else on the watch looks replaced to me, so I find it odd to potentially only have that one hand replaced when everything else is in such outstanding condition. If it were me, I would probably just not worry about it.

Even at the existing price I think it's a good buy, if you can get a better price and save yourself the ebay fees, tax, shipping, etc, that would be great. If I was local I would be trying to close a deal 5 minutes ago. That's just my opinion, and based on quick assessment and gut feeling, please be sure to do your own due diligence. Good luck.

 

Looks pretty good (maybe Larry and Mark can chime in here with some expert guidance). Another for comparison.

 

+1 Lovely. No SN but …. Mid/Late 40s from the moon face and the fonts and the unsigned crown. Never assume a dial is too good to be true. Some have held up well.

 

serial is 1368XXX

 

Dial looks good to me. The red hand is probably replaced but thats fine - its an old watch..still beautiful.

 

Then it is indeed legit.

 

After your encouraging words that it's the real deal, decided to speak with the seller. He's someone I've a good relationship and bought from before. Unfortunately there wasn't as much wiggle room as I hoped for, so I have to regretfully pass. Will probably hunt for a Compax as my first UG, which are a bit more within my budget.

Thanks to all for their input. Very appreciated.

 

Late to the party, but imho the moon disc is wrong.
The eyebrow should be connected to the nose.

 

No argument about the red date hand being too long and likely a replacement, but the moon disc is almost certainly correct. I’ve owned a few with that exact same configuration. One of mine below, for example, compared to the face of the original post.

 

as per moon disc, they are usually connected, but I don't think ALWAYS. Perhaps a deep dive research for another day. however here's an example of a NOS moon disc currently for sale on ebay......

PS these disconnected one seem to hold their blue paint better, I wonder if a later/improved batch?

 

Lol I thought this sounded familiar, here's a thread already started on this very topic, although didn't really turn up much feedback aside from what I posted......

https://omegaforums.net/threads/moonface-moonphase-discs.111485/#post-1471624

 

I totally forgot that thread... getting old...