Constellation 1962 - Need help and advice

Posts
8
Likes
2
Hi everyone!

Could I please have some advice and on this watch. The seller says it's from about 1962 and looks like in good condition. Is it a redial or original? This is the images from the seller.

Thank you
 
Posts
24,661
Likes
54,774
Looks good enough at first glance to deserve a closer look. If you want a deeper evaluation you'll need to provide good clear photos from all angles, inside the watch also if possible.
 
Posts
8
Likes
2
oh thank you for your quick response! I will probably receive the watch tomorrow so can upload more images then 😁
 
Posts
1,580
Likes
2,693
We'll need clearer shots of the dial, but at first glance there don't seem to be any red flags.
 
Posts
2,790
Likes
6,908
I’m going to go with fake. Note the shape of the 6 and 9 markers - originals would be shaped like the 12 marker. This is a common mistake on the fake dials IIRC. Need more pictures of the movement and inside and outside of the caseback to confirm.

Where’s the watch located?
 
Posts
985
Likes
3,987
I agree with @seekingseaquest.

Normally, we could find both versions that can be correct. Both pictures were copied from internet.

The first one with both 6 and 9 makers would be shaped like the 12 marker.


Another version with only 12 marker looks different from the others, but it should be “double” black onyx inserts.
 
Posts
322
Likes
163
What could be the reason for the 6 & 9 markers to be identical to the others ? I agree that they should be "double", but I just can't understand why a fake would have those single markers...
 
Posts
8
Likes
2
Have not manage to find anyone like it neither. Here are some better photos and it's now located in southern Sweden. From the serial number 24801621 looks like a 1966?
 
Posts
3,489
Likes
13,345
A 14900 should a) not have a date window and b) not have a cal. 564.
 
Posts
13,477
Likes
18,722
Frankenwatch. Put together from pieces of other watches.

For parts only,
gatorcpa
 
Posts
9,940
Likes
56,242
A 14900 should a) not have a date window and b) not have a cal. 564.
+1
 
Posts
8
Likes
2
Than you for all feedback!! I guess can live with a replacement back case... If thats is the only thing thats have been messed with? The biggest issue for me is that the seller did not mention anything in the description. I have a 30 days invoice. What is a reasonable price for this watch or is it just a no go?
 
Posts
3,489
Likes
13,345
Than you for all feedback!! I guess can live with a replacement back case... If thats is the only thing thats have been messed with? The biggest issue for me is that the seller did not mention anything in the description. I have a 30 days invoice. What is a reasonable price for this watch or is it just a no go?

If it's a no-go or not is for you to decide, we can only provide info. Personally, I'd consider buying this for parts if I needed them, but the price would have to be in the triple digits. This isnt 1k+ in my book.
 
Posts
322
Likes
163
For me, it would be a no-go, because
a) it's a mix-up of everything
b) the seller apparently did not specify anything
but the decision is obviously yours as @MtV stated
 
Posts
505
Likes
737
It all depend of you.
From a collector side, it has been modified and is not a keeper, no interest in having a piece that is not the same as it was when leaving the factory back then.

From another side of view, once it’s known, the watch looks good, mouvement seems in shape, case is not over polished. The watch is nice and beautiful. 99,9% of people will see a nice vintage watch.

So knowing that, you have to decide in which side you are 😀

Of course, price has to be in accordance with the fact that some pieces have been mixed up.
 
Posts
13,483
Likes
31,788
Can we have a shot of the outside of the case back and some shots of the bracelet including the clasp and and markings on it?
 
Posts
2,790
Likes
6,908
Can we have a shot of the outside of the case back and some shots of the bracelet including the clasp and and markings on it?
Bracelet is almost definitely fake. I still think the dial is fake.. I just can’t see someone swapping out those 6/9 markers. Case it’s hard to tell.. caseback photo will help.
 
Posts
322
Likes
163
I’m going to go with fake. Note the shape of the 6 and 9 markers - originals would be shaped like the 12 marker. This is a common mistake on the fake dials IIRC.

?? It's not clear what you mean here : 6 and 9 markers should not be single markers ? I am a total Newbie in Connies, but can list at least 20 pieces ref. 168.005 Pan Pie on Chrono 24 which are on sale at the moment and have similar dial. They can't all be fake, so could you please clarify for me what you mean here ?
 
Posts
6,536
Likes
10,081
?? It's not clear what you mean here : 6 and 9 markers should not be single markers ? I am a total Newbie in Connies, but can list at least 20 pieces ref. 168.005 Pan Pie on Chrono 24 which are on sale at the moment and have similar dial. They can't all be fake, so could you please clarify for me what you mean here ?


The premise is that, if the 12 index is ‘shaped’, then the 9, 6 & 3 index should also be shaped.
( if there is a 3 index of course)

If the 9,6 & 3 indices are ‘simple’ then the 12 index should be a double version of the simple index.

If you have any examples that you think are exceptions to this rule it would be useful to post them.

Trawling through the 9 pages of the ‘pie pan porn’ thread I came across one similar ‘outlier’ example from 2017 which, in retrospect, has a number of red flags.