http://www.ebay.com/itm/201247311969?_trksid=p2060778.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:ITPurchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network

Some education please.
Did this not sell because of
1) Price
2) over polished
3) redial
4) no one likes two tone now
5) ???

 

Redialed.
A dome dial with crosshair of 14381 looks like this

 

So simply too expensive

 

Even if you don't mind redials (many if not most OF don't), I would say a bit more than too expensive. Seems this redial is also incorrect compared to Hoi's example

Why spend any $ on an incorrect redial ...

 

It's a redial, but not all 14381s have the same dial script like Hoi's example: http://omegaforums.net/threads/omega-constellation-ref-ot-14381-just-because-it-is-friday.4431/

 

Ahhhh. Variation. Connies' middle name

 

We are talking about dome dials with cross hair of 14381 not pie pan. Can you find me some exceptions?

 

It's quite hard to find actually. Is it your observation or it's documented somewhere? There're only a few examples of redial on Google. Actually there're very few dome dial for the 14381 compared to the pie-pan dial on Google, probably 1-10 ratio. Does that mean 14381s with dome dial are very uncommon as compared to those with pie-pan dial? Not that likely. So I'm not really sure why the 3 line script is only found on pie-pan dial but not on dome dial of the 14381. Do you have an explanation?

Any chance this dial could go on ref 14381?

 

It's a good candidate for a 14381 but a 167005 dial can be trimmed to fit into a 14381 case.too.
By looking at that wrong set of hands I guess the dial was not made for that case.

 

This is my 14381 with crosshair for ref.

 

Here is my 14381. Matches for the crosshair and two line script though the onyx markers look different on mine. Just the photo or a variation?





Thanks.

Carl