I meant the Australian fakes which are max 10 years old I guess. But I might be wrong...

 

Just to add more food for thoughts, below the paint job on the indexs, I have just used a 10x loupe and I can see the real lume and the tritium dots behind the paint... 1st exec dial then! Could the 2nd exec be only different in the case shape and the rest being identical to 1st exec???

PS: do you think it is possible to get rid of this paint without damaging the dial?

 

That is interesting. I was going to suggest that this may have been a 1st exec dial because most 2nd execs usually have the space between 'GEN' and 'EVE' but I thought it too unlikely.

I'm not sure I go along with your 2nd exec theory. In my opinion, this watch is more likely to be a mix of parts that did not leave the factor this way.

Close up those lugs do seem to have the dull grey scratched look that many of the fakes do.

I don't like that polished case back either. I also do not accept that the numbers have simply been worn off. Assuming they were present, then they were removed by the circular polishing on the case back. I have handled four 1st execs; all have displayed wear but all had both serial and case reference number present.

 

I reckon it is quite difficult to appreciate through photos but I do not agree with your conclusion:
There is another example in this thread with case back numbers worn off
I have seen tons of legitimate UGs (not specifically this model) with numbers invisible due to wear and polishing
Mine has most probably been heavily polished to get rid of scratches on lugs, case back etc... This watch has probably be worn a lot in the past. This is why it has now a "refurbished" look to it. Nothing comparable with the aussie fakes in terms of steel quality. Moreover, my case back is 100% original unless you can prove me wrong, look at the inside of the caseback, the hallmarks , the space in the screwback I was refering to earlier etc... Nothing to compare with the presumed fakes. The exact same case back with french writing ACIER INOXYDABLE can be found in this thread on a genuine 1st exec.
I am just trying to understand that mystery around the 2nd exec...

 

Would this one from antiquorum in 1994 be a beveled lugs version, the photo seems to lead to that. A SWISS T dial like mine by the way. And same type of crowns.
That does not mean that this was a genuine one back in 1994 but at least there might be some similarities.

 

With hands from a Polerouter and a first exec dial?

I do appreciate your efforts to help understand the 2nd exec. I'm afraid I'm rather cynical about them, as I am still to see a 2nd exec that seems entirely genuine (i.e. does not appear to be a mix of parts) and invites no questions.

 

As vintage watch collectors most of us have learned it's best to keep open minds - histories get rewritten every year with new discoveries /evidences- but as buyers its generally tough to shell out the multiples that some of these watches are going for when there are questions involved that can't be answered. I've seen 1st execution Super Compressors for sale as high as 18k Euro.
Even at fractions of that- most collectors will demand certainties that these "2nd executions" don't yet have.

 

Agreed.
Quite unbelievable that UG may have been so inconsistent with these polerouter subs series. The other polerouter series are quite well documented and consistent, so are the x- compax series.
I will still continue the search for answers on my model which has really nothing to do with the australian production on all counts.
as of now, all the info we can find on 2nd execution models is in contradiction with my watch...

 

I don't think your watch is an Aussie special fwiw
The case and dial don't seem to fit with that lineage.

 

Thanks.
Just to concentrate the discussion on one thing: has anyone ever seen a beveled case which seemed to be genuine, that is to say with "genuine and consistent" markings, properly shaped with quality steel apart from mine (even if lacking the numbers on the back)? If yes, I would be grateful to get some feedback, pictures, anything
Many thanks in advance.
Best.

 

Actually I'd like to correct what I said in a previous post as I forgot to mention that there might be another model from the Polerouter serie that lacks the certainty of being 100 % factory genuine, the Polerouter Broad arrow with microtor... Any link between those apart from the early microtor calibers? Same production years? Something weird happened at UG factory at this time? or those models are just pure creations from people that "inherited" from NOS parts, prototypes etc ???
Sorry to raise more questions than to bring answers

 

I have collected watches for many years , I have had in my pocession both the 1st and 2nd executions. The quality of the first execution is a very high quality gloss case with the normal UG swiss case numbers. Very precision made solid water proof screw case with seal. Remember, these are a divers watch ! How anyone who really knows UG would think a beveled base metal looking case or any variance of, with no swiss numerals, imperfect dial script, caked lume, and a flimsy overall feel would think any of these are genuine, Ill never understand. IMHO none of the beveled cases are genuine, so get over it ! If your example does not follow the guidelines of the first execution, it's most likely a FRANKEN ! Maybe some genuine elements or not ! I guess if you have not held a original one it's harder to understand. Maybe we should weigh the watches to see how much the variance is between the two executions , and weights within executions ?

 

If i decided to post in this thread, it was exactly for the purpose of trying to understand why my model does not fit with the 2nd exec poor standards. I am not a fresh starter in watch collecting, many years behind me also, I have owned (way too) many UGs in the past, however no 1st exec Polerouter Sub. I have handled Longines and JLC Divers from the same era though.
I would never have bought this watch if I did not have the "proper feeling" about it (after having done my research before, which was unconclusive on 2nd exec models...)
It is a pity the pictures don't do justice but my case, I am quoting you, is following all these principles :"The quality of the first execution is a very high quality gloss case with the normal UG swiss case numbers. Very precision made solid water proof screw case with seal. Remember, these are a divers watch ! " apart from the serial and ref number on the back which is once again not conclusive of a fake case. On this specific models the engravings were very lightly engraved...
Just look at the inner case back, do you spot any difference with a 1st exec caseback???
High quality steel is there, correct markings are there. So why this case could not be genuine???
Good idea about comparing weight: caseback on mine weighs exactly 11 grams and watch head only weighs 57 grs
It is a puzzling piece but I don't agree with your conclusion saying it is a FRANKEN...

 

Some pictures to compare steel with another UG in my collection.

 

Case back on my first execution weights 12g and watch head only weighs 60g.

Not sure that helps us conclude anything. It's different but not significantly so.

 

Thanks Mazoue. Numbers are somehow matching.
BTW, the model with the "Classic" Polerouter Hands I showed earlier in the thread was exhibited at Foire de Bale in 1961 as per Antiquorum notes on the lot! So unless the hands have been changed between 1961 and 1994, this Sub may well have left UG factory like this! Same possibility for the case shaped like mine.
Sorry to add more counter arguments into this debate

 

Your example definitely looks like a first execution overall, it could be an anomele,
does anyone else have a first execution that has no swiss markings on the case back ? More people should weigh in on the weight, sounds funny. Three grams light seems somewhat significant, let's see overall when there is more data . What does the inside of yours look like
LoMat ?

 

Rolokr, I do have the swiss marking on the inner caseback as per the pictures I shared earlier in the thread. My inner caseback is identical to many 1st exec Subs with the french Acier Inoxydable wording instead of stainless steel. 3 grams with the different shaped case, the fact that i do not have any lume on the inner bezel is not that much i think.
I share the inner caseback again for you.


Inner casebacks with HF (Huguenin Freres) mark are specific to the aussie fakes.

 

I can't find photos of all of the the case backs for the first executions I've had but the two that I have found have "Swiss" and "Stainless Steel" along with the UG shield logo and the gap. Presumably the language just depended on what market the watch was headed for?

If I was splitting hairs, the circular polished finish inside your case back looks a bit less refined compared with the two below. These two have an identical finish which looks a little less clunky. On its own, I would not suggest this is significant.

What do you think about your crowns? The hatched crowns on first executions (there is very often one larger signed non-hatched crown) seem to have a lip before the hatching that yours do not have.