Forums Latest Members
  1. ewand Feb 15, 2018

    Posts
    1,290
    Likes
    5,852
    I was looking at this 145.005-67 Seamaster chrono on Ebay, and discussing with @RJwatches. I thought the dial looked far too good to be true. Hands are definitely suspect...

    The ebay watch:
    upload_2018-2-15_7-33-48.png

    My "honest" 145.005-67 currently OHPF awaiting some corrective surgery before completion of the deal, shown for purposes of comparison:
    upload_2018-2-15_7-35-51.png

    Firstly, before looking at the Ebay listing, do you think that first dial could be refinished or is it just in excellent condition?

    The listingPurchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network.

    The seller?
    upload_2018-2-15_7-39-17.png
    A little background on the seller... here.

    Now, do you think it's a redial?
     
    Edited Feb 15, 2018
  2. Caliber561 Feb 15, 2018

    Posts
    1,474
    Likes
    2,512
    Doesn't look like a redial to me. The text is all pretty crisp, and the subdials are very sharp. If it is a redial, it's been done impeccably well.
     
  3. ewand Feb 15, 2018

    Posts
    1,290
    Likes
    5,852
    Yeah, it does look like either a really well done redial or a genuinely nice dial. upload_2018-2-15_7-52-42.png

    I have my doubts if that dial ever knew those hands, that case or movement before the recent past, mind ;) Looks like the movement serial number is a very long way ahead of mine...
     
  4. padders Oooo subtitles! Feb 15, 2018

    Posts
    8,982
    Likes
    13,922
    Suspect hands or not, I prefer the ebay one!
     
  5. Foo2rama Keeps his worms in a ball instead of a can. Feb 15, 2018

    Posts
    17,088
    Likes
    25,329
    Dial I don’t question... hands and Chrono creep I do.

    Dial lume.. verdicts out.
     
    padders likes this.
  6. ConElPueblo Feb 15, 2018

    Posts
    9,587
    Likes
    26,977
    Not a redial, IMO. These are usually easy to spot when looking closely at the subdials.
    The hands I don't know about, but the look like late-sixties issue, and given the black inlay I would have liked there to be some black inlay on the markers, too.
     
    bubba48 likes this.
  7. mr_yossarian Feb 15, 2018

    Posts
    2,418
    Likes
    4,572
    I wouldn't bother with the watch. The seller is going to be a real issue. Ewan, avoid!
     
  8. Dero13 4 watches. All set to the wrong time. Feb 15, 2018

    Posts
    1,602
    Likes
    6,451
    Buy the seller not the watch...
     
    mr_yossarian likes this.
  9. ewand Feb 15, 2018

    Posts
    1,290
    Likes
    5,852
    Don't worry, I wasn't ever thinking of buying - just watching from the sidelines ::popcorn:: and thought I'd share for posterity.

    So far, the consensus seems to be that the dial may well be original - in which case, it's very nice indeed.
    But IMHO, the movement dates to mid 1960s (on a 1967 watch - not impossible, but might need some explaining / an extract), and the hands are unlike the hands of any other 145.005-67 I've seen photos of.

    Someone paid £3,500 for it on Ebay.
     
  10. tyrantlizardrex Feb 15, 2018

    Posts
    8,881
    Likes
    27,410
    With the inox infill in the hands, I'd bet they came off something dressy in the constellation/seamaster lines...
     
  11. padders Oooo subtitles! Feb 15, 2018

    Posts
    8,982
    Likes
    13,922
    I had a 1970 Geneve with those hands btw.
     
    tyrantlizardrex likes this.
  12. mario linus Feb 15, 2018

    Posts
    115
    Likes
    59
    Nice dial, wrong hands