When I closely look at 105.003 dials (especially the letters "e" and "r"), I sometimes see little differences.

I think there are at least two versions : I propose to call them mark 1 (on the left) and mark 2 (on the right).



So if you have a 105.003, which version is it ? It could be interesting to count them in order to see if a version is rarer (I think mark 1 is more common).

 

Interesting. I've only got one (never got into collecting more than 1 of any watch model) but here it is, I'd guess a Mark I according to your hypothesis:

 

Would that be the difference between A6 and A7 dials in MWO parlance?

Do the two in the OP's post both have T's at the Swiss Made?

Here's a -65

 

They are both A7 dials with T's, but I think there are (at least) 2 versions of A7. Yours seems to be a mark 1.
Here are mine :

Mark 1


Mark 1


Mark 2

 

would you consider this a mark 1 or 2?

 

Mark 2

 

Good observation! The S's are very much different too. What years are your watches?

 

The first one is a 105.003-65, the second one a -63 and the third one a -65

 

Looks like the E over the D is a great indicator according to that last photo! This is fun.... Mine looks more like the one on the right this time around though...

 

So which one has which mark?

 

Thanks, here is the full photo of my recent acquisition. Referencing the red vertical lines were a great help especially the line on the "e" over the "d"

 

So what's the theory here? Earlier ones, like -63, have the Mark 2 dials and later, the Mark 1?

Does this change how we would evaluate originality or is it more of a point of interest?

 

Lumper or splitter?

Looks to my eye that these are really same font, just that "mark2" is thicker. Could this just not be a function of
normal variation.

 

The S and the r are very much different. The S with different curves and the r with different tops and tails.

 

The evolution of the S is from mark 1 to mark 2. I think people need to post which reference year comes with which mark dial so we can establish a trend.

 

Mine seems to be a Mark 2.
It's a very high serial number 25499xxx:

 

My -64 appears to be a MK1

 

Hello,

Good job pianist. The difference does not come from the dial maker (Singer) but from the manufacturer of 'clichés'. The one on the right is with serifs.
Almost the same situation with dials C3 and C4 in the 80s

 

So, does this change the way one would evaluate originality? Are certain dials expected on specific subreferences within the 105.003 family?