Forums Latest Members

Compax 22101/1 signed vs unsigned crown

  1. bgrisso Jan 23, 2019

    Posts
    3,126
    Likes
    6,883
    I have a Compax 22101/1 with an unsigned crown. I assumed it was not original and have sourced a signed crown. However in the meantime I have come across multiple examples that are not signed, and the crowns also look extremely similar/identical.

    So I am wondering, perhaps it can be correct and original to have an unsigned crown? Or not? Just wanted to get some other options before I swap it out. Here are a few other examples I came across (last one is mine), without even really looking, I'm sure I could find more. (And obviously, I have also come across plenty of signed crowns, so have seen both).
     
    example 1.jpg example 2.jpg P1020038_adj.jpg
  2. bgrisso Jan 23, 2019

    Posts
    3,126
    Likes
    6,883
    here's a signed example..
     
    Compax-Linnen-2.jpg
  3. ELV web Jan 24, 2019

    Posts
    2,668
    Likes
    24,651
    Given the UG of around the same period (think Nina, Clapton etc.) all come with signed crown (and many of those have lost their original crowns as well). I would be inclined to believe that the original crowns are signed And the unsigned ones are replacement.
     
    billving and bgrisso like this.
  4. Woops Jan 24, 2019

    Posts
    541
    Likes
    2,419
    I tend to side with @ELV web for the reasons stated. The crown on mine is signed too and I remember wondering about this myself when I was researching this reference. There was a conversation I remember here ages ago (between @Florent and someone else....maybe @jsflog ?) where it was stated that 222101 should have a signed crown and an unsigned crystal.

    More importantly, HTF did you find an original signed SS crown?!?
     
    billving and bgrisso like this.
  5. Woops Jan 24, 2019

    Posts
    541
    Likes
    2,419
    bgrisso and vujen like this.
  6. CajunTiger Cajuns and Gators can't read newspapers! Jan 24, 2019

    Posts
    2,678
    Likes
    9,741
    even the earlier models had signed crowns...should be signed.
     
    bgrisso likes this.
  7. bgrisso Jan 24, 2019

    Posts
    3,126
    Likes
    6,883
    Yes, those were my thoughts generally as well, but how do ppl explain the consistency between the unsigned crowns? Do ppl feel these are all service crowns from UG? I find it odd to stumble across 3 in a matter of minutes without even really looking hard. I would think they would be less common than that......
     
  8. CajunTiger Cajuns and Gators can't read newspapers! Jan 24, 2019

    Posts
    2,678
    Likes
    9,741
    The watch is over 50 years old...it’s more common to find replacement crowns than originals. I would guess far less than 10% still have original
     
    bgrisso likes this.
  9. bgrisso Jan 24, 2019

    Posts
    3,126
    Likes
    6,883
    gotcha, well I guess I will happily swap out for this signed crown then :thumbsup:

    next question, what do I do with the service crown? I guess it's worth hanging onto, I wonder which models it would be "correct" ?
     
  10. CajunTiger Cajuns and Gators can't read newspapers! Jan 24, 2019

    Posts
    2,678
    Likes
    9,741
    The service crown has no value...its a generic crown. Finding the correct crown is not easy...not just any signed crown will do. Your better off just leaving the crown as-is. It doesn't affect the value all that much.
     
  11. bgrisso Jan 24, 2019

    Posts
    3,126
    Likes
    6,883
    oh then it's not like a "UG" service crown then, it's just an "anything" crown?

    I think I already have the right one to replace, fingers crossed.....
     
  12. rolokr Jan 24, 2019

    Posts
    1,195
    Likes
    1,918
    Always change out if you have an original one to replace a generic crown ?