Early Polerouter Sub Discussion

When I saw this, I switched off as soon as I saw the dial. The seconds hand is also clearly wrong. And they wanted a huge sum for it too!

I'm not at all sure that a Cal 215-2 is correct. Why would they use a movement with a date function?

They offered me this watch for 2,9K€ - I made a "stupid" bid without looking at it carefully. So this watch went under the reserve price but the owner offered me this at that price.
So I came here to study, but I think I won't accept his offer! 😁

Even if I still have some doubt about the caseback.
The second hand is just painted, it's not a big problem to restore it - but yes it looks awful.

Wise decision I think.

The seconds hand is not just painted - it is too short.

Yes absolutely, but I've seen other "fake" example with the same short hand. Of course at the beginning I didn't know they were all fakes.
But then there's this last doubt: why this lovely back? Shouldn't they have a poor back with "brevet" or other things in it?
Plus: is in your opinion that case a poor quality case? It looks polished but absolutely steel to my eyes.

Hello all,
I too have read this thread with interest and would like to point out a couple of differences I’ve spotted and haven’t been mentioned (edit: for a while....since page 1!)
There are some case variations round the internal cut outs for the crowns. All watches have a large cut out for the bezel rotating pinion, but some watches have no cut out for the winding stem where others can be seen that have a large cut out for both.
1 large cut out https://shop.watchsteez.com/product...ter-sub-super-compressor-42mm-first-execution
2 large cut outs https://www.bernardinimilano.com/products/universal-geneve-polerouter-sub-1
(Examples googled and first type of each selected, I have my opinion about these watches but will keep it to myself for the moment!)
Edit: it appears no one has drawn a conclusion to this difference although it was one of the first discussed on page 1.
The other difference I’ve spotted is the triangle engraved between the 2 crowns with a corresponding mark on the case back which I assume is a reference for tightening. This can be easily seen in the example Chris posted pictures of on page 10. This can also be found on other brands super compressor watches.
Could this be added to the things to look out for?
Cheers.

The Bernardini one looks absolutely fake to me. Well, accordingly to this thread.

Dial, bezel, case all wrong. Tired looking movement (Cal 215-2 again - not convinced that moment would ever have been used) and a nonsensical falsified military engraving.

I agree the Bernardini is a fake, I only used it as it illustrates the double large cut outs.

Could me "mine" be a brother of the one sold by Bernardini, with polished back?

What does everyone think of this one?
https://www.invaluable.com/auction-lot/universal-geneve-polerouter-sub-in-steel-94945C699D
Just been featured on hodinkee’s bring a loup for what that’s worth.
To me it looks like a rather tired watch, case back looks to have been highly polished and the movement is no good and makes alarm bells ring. I don’t like that it has the MicroSet balance adjustment and the train bridge has completely different ware markings from the barrel bridge. This makes me think that it’s a bittsa movement from a drawer.

It looks okay, but your observations do have merit !

There are so many subtle variations with these that I'm not keen on making judgements, particularly without seeing the watch in person (the Fortuna photos seem to have a slight soft-focus/photoshop look to them).

I think it's only fair to say that it definitely doesn't seem to be one of the Australian fakes we've seen e.g. the case material looks correct and it does not have a space in 'GENEVE" on the dial.

Other aspects I like include the ageing to the hands, correct crowns (asymmetric in this case) and the inside of the case back including the gap in the ring and the correct markings.

Since the case reference and serial numbers are not stated in the listing, I presume that they are not present, which is not ideal although the case back may simply have been polished to remove scratches as the inside is as we would expect I think.

The only aspect I am slightly unsure about is the bezel. The printing looks a bit thick and actually reaches the inner edge of the bezel in places. I could not definitively say it was wrong though. It may just be that there were different bezel types produced. Personally, I prefer those with the scruffy partial lume, which always seem to have the narrow font.

I'm not a watchmaker so I'm not really qualified to comment on your comments regarding the movement although it looks like I would expect a Cal 218-9 to look. I think the balance adjustment you describe is one of the key differences between a Cal 215 and Cal 218.

In short, this looks like a good example to me and most likely correct and original.

Mazoue I agree that the case, dial, hands and crowns look legit from the not ideal pictures. I don’t particularly like the rotating bezel as the numbers don’t look sharp enough (eg no gap between 4 and 0) and it has no lume anywhere.
My biggest problem is that if you look carefully at the bridges they just don’t look like they match. The plating on the smaller train bridge is worn right through to the brass yet the larger barrel bridge looks almost perfect.
I will be watching it with interest though!

My 2 cents:
- dial, hands, case, crowns look right to me, this is definitely not an Australian one indeed
- hard to have an opinion on bridges from the pictures, they are too soft, may be the light, may be some parts replaced but the caliber looks consistent to me
- outer bezel is bothering me too, at 40 and at 45 mainly, and there is no lume. The bezel looks like a replacement we see often on fakes. Mine has this funny triangle that looks hand painted, with the first 15min lumed.
curious to see the sales price...
good day,
Laurent

Sorry about the terrible annotation but hopefully this shows what I mean.
You can see the train bridge where I’ve marked wear that the plating has gone and you can see the brass underneath, this bridge is also Matt in appearance.
The barrel bridge and balance cock on the other hand have no signs of ware and are a different colour/ shiny showing that it’s not just a trick of the light.

you are right, the train bridge looks tired and some screws are too. I still would want better pictures, and would be more concerned about the bezel. cheers

Dear all,
I am pretty new to this forum so let me quickly introduce myself. I like a healthy mixture of new and vintage pieces - mainly Omega.
I am pretty new to the vintage UG chapter and your information helped me a lot.

I guess I found another pre UG SUB without the ’Polerouter Sub' text.
It has no lume plots and a lumed triangle at the inner bezel.

What do you guys think - 'pre' or 'fake'?

I would love to look more closely but you will need to attach some hi-res photographs correctly.

I'm not sure what you've done but you need to use the 'Add Photos' button when creating your post.