The 15.26 movement number seems to date this one to around 1937. Dial is obviously quite nice - trying to gauge whether (i) it is correct for a movement number in the 5,600,000 range, and (ii) it looks original. Thoughts? Thanks! Darren
The dial font and dial style are typical 1920s... the case is definitely a 1930 case. Longines may have used a dial from an old stock, so who's to swear it can't happen -- but short of direct evidence, the combination would make me suspicious... Is this an enamel dial? I remember discussions about refinished or fake enamel dials having been used to refurbish 13ZN chronographs from the 1930s-- and the same thing may easily have happened here. Again my gut tells me it's not right. Best regards, S
Get a Geiger counter and check the lume. I doubt it's radium (which it should be) and if it was the lume in the hands would have degraded more. I suspect it's an original enamel dial that's been cleaned and re-lumed. A very good job doing the colour and texture. Does the condition of the movement match the dial?
Size=? Looking like a pocket watch size. Watches were alot smaller back then. As above movement and case back needed for better help.
+1 on checking for radium...looks so puffy and perfect for an 80+ year old watch. Pretty looking watch nonetheless!
Thanks all. The watch is 38mm, which is correct for a 15.26 in this style of case. The movement number matches the number inside of the case back, so I believe the case and movement are all correct. However, the movement number would place the watch in the mid 1930s (maybe around 1937), which seems a bit late for this style of dial. My guess is that the dial is a correct Longines dial, but I am grappling with the same thing as you all - the dial may be from an earlier timepiece rather than this one. And the radium does indeed look quite perfect. Having said all of this, I have found a few other examples of enamel / porcelain dials inside of these large "coin edge" cases. There is a somewhat similar timepiece in Goldberger's book (I can't seem to get a copy, so am left watching the YouTube video he posted with a few scans from the book), however that one has a non-cursive Longines signature on the dial. Interested in hearing more thoughts on this one. Darren
Here are a few similar examples with enamel dials dated from the mid 1930s. My sense is that the dial is in fact correct for the watch above, but the radium question remains - seems to perfect for 80 year-old radium......
Reminds me a lot of the RGM 801-COE, in fact the dials and hands look almost identical. Beautiful watch, whether it's refinished or not.
That's interesting, you're reminding me I've seen the one from L'Orologiese before, had forgotten.... Those do make it more plausible. I'll have a look in Goldberger when I have a chance. I wonder whether the large size of the watch could have played a part in them using older dial stocks.