This one didn't last long because the seller decided to let it go for USD3000 - a pittance given its rarity. It is the last 18K Tri-Compax reference, contemporary with the twisted lug steel references well known to UG enthusiasts.

It is not in the best condition, and was lifted out of a lot of 8 or so watches, most of them garbage or good watches in very poor shape at an estate sale earlier this month. The price allows the seller to make his nut, but again we have an instance of a person who has little idea about the watch's value ending early for a behind the scenes offer. Do people like that not realize that the offer would probably not be made if the buyer was not hoping to undercut a straight auction? In this case, the watch would have broken $5000 at auction.











On the design side, it isn't as well composed as some other Tri-Compaxes IMO. There is necessarily a lot going on in a Tri-Compax, and the dial easily becomes overloaded and busy unless designed very carefully. Compare with a similar sister watch in steel..



..and a similarly conceived Primero reference, the G 382



I find both to be more successful


I am very interested to see a case so similar to the Zenith A 386/G 381 - clearly from the same drawing board. I don't recall the hallmark on the Zenith, but I won't be surprised to find hammerhead 136 inside.

 

Lou

Forgive the potential hijack from the Omega side of the fence, but the Tri-Compax dial puts me in mind of the Speedmaster moonphase dials which I think first appeared in 1999 with this cal 1866 piece


(Photo from Fratello/RJ)

As RJ points out, cal 1866 is based on Lemania caliber 1884, with the addition of a moonphase disc, a date and better finishing. The Tri-Compax further adds the day and month discs.

So, I'm wondering... how similar are the Tri-Compax movement(s) to the 1866 & do they share any common origins ?

 

No hijack at all - no fences in this forum!

Well, I don't know from the Lemania side, but from the UG side, the movement dates from the 1940s and belongs to Martel. Martel spun off from UG in the 1950s and was acquired lock, stock and barrel by Zenith in 1960. It is from Martel that Zenith gained the expertise to create El Primero. On the basis of that, I'd say there's no connection at all, similar though they may be from the dial side.

Anyone who knows the Lemania side of the history, or who knows more than I about the above, please jump in. How old is the 1866 and its parent movement?

 

I'm sure it's pretty darned impressive in person, Tom - I virtually never met a Tri-Compax I didn't like to some degree, and gold on gold rarely fails to make a statement. Besides, what I wrote just may have been colored by some regret at the fact that I was outbid at the estate auction where the watch in question sold initially (for handily under $3000). I got the reference number out of Pietro Sala's book - he's got one of these documented therein.

I find your watch looks better than the one I started the thread without the black paint on the hands, even if it decreases legibility. The matte black hands - original, as far as I can determine - are one of those design elements I was taking issue with in my comments above. Functional sure, but boy does it kill the look. Why not use hands that simply have a black element down the center, like the Zeniths? For that matter, why does UG insist on using these fat planks of metal on a watch that has so much information underneath them on the dial - there is hardly a time of the day when day, date, month or some subsantial part of the chronograph counters are not obscured.

 

Thanks Tom.

 

Hi and welcome Alex, very nice first post!

 

A few people use Tapatalk. Although it isn't fully supported it works well for the most part.

 

I want purchase at the prices of 2.5 years ago.