Edited title to reflect that I am more "whacked" than my new Valjoux 7733 (although it may still have some issues). To summarize, I was comparing a 7733 to a Universal Cal. 281. You would be amazed at how lacking in insight that comparison can be!

My post.....

Hello everyone. So, I'm two years into this hobby and I'm still paying noob taxes in new, creative and ridiculous ways! This is another one, but fortunately, a very small one this time. Bottom line is that I made a lowball offer on an Amer "Football Timer" (seriously) because I liked the dial and because it had a Valjoux 7733 under the hood. For $300 (unlikely to be accepted), what could go wrong? Hmmmmm....

Furthermore, the seller actually included a nice photo of the movement......of which I "reviewed".....including a quick glance at a known image of a 7733 (Note: Al's excellent "movement issues" piece had not yet published!). Oh, and I "may" have been drinking. I'm pretty sure, too, that my review of the movement would have involved mouth-breathing.

Here are some pictures:

My 7733:



For easy reference, a real Valjoux 7733 (ignore the red callout....just part of the internet image)



And, for fun, the dial that caught my attention. Can't wait for the "Post your Green Dials" thread!



My reason for posting this story is to learn something. First, can someone tell me what this is?!?!?!? My movement is clearly not the same as a real 7733.....but truth be told, there are other 773x images out there are closer to mine! It is a total fake? Is it a former 7733 with a ton of parts replaced (believe there would normally be a cover on a real 7733's column wheel.......and why doesn't my boomerang-looking-thingy have any info on it -- knock-off replacement?) Is there something else entirely going on here?

Could the seller been confused (vs. worse) because of the distant similarities of the various parts?

Should I ever be allowed to drink and shop on eBay again?

Thanks for any input you can share. Be kind.

Tom

 

http://www.ranfft.de/cgi-bin/bidfun-db.cgi?13&ranfft&102&2uswk&Valjoux_7733

 

I'm not sure which movement you posted (maybe a Valjoux 72?) but the 7733 isn't a column-wheel movement - yours is closer to what an actual 7733 is than the GP example you posted. It even bears the 7733 stamp (under the balance) and the "Seventeen Jewels Unadjusted" text opposite the crown. I'm not an expert but it looks close enough to a 7733 to me...

 

I like the dial. its a little cloudy, is the crystal scratched?

 

Thanks Abrod.......appears I cant even go on a rant correctly! The link I used says it was a 7733...but I guess not.......

http://thewatchspotblog.com/?p=265

I realize should have ranfft on speed surf by now. Much better comparison!

 

Yes, crystal is scratched. Dial in very nice vintage shape...

 

Ah! The post says "In a column wheel chronograph such as the Universal Cal. 281 below" in the paragraph preceding & introducing the photo you used.

 

Looks pretty good to me. I just picked up a cool Bulova with a 7734 after chucking in a lowball offer that was automatically accepted...needs a little work like yours, but both are cool watches for the money. Looks like you did okay.

 

Yes, just saw that. When I was doing my utterly thorough review, I only searched for images and didn't go into the article. Big mistake!

Thanks for pointing me in the correct direction!

 

thank you!

 

Actually the picture you refer to doesn't say it's a 7733.
The one at the bottom of the page shows the 7733 of the watch in the title.

 

Tom, Maybe stick with Ploprofs

 

Well, I didn't exactly do that right either!

 

tks for the wise words...ebay and drink are just one of many unwise combinations, every days a school day.........

 

funny thread, im enjoying it...even more so, since you didnt get stung...

would it be too offensive if i say you cant even screw up correctly

 

I know, right? Drinking and shopping as I type!

Seriously, though, I have so many screw-ups in my drawer that if this isn't one of them, it's because the old adage "a broken vintage watch is correct twice a day" is true!