Hi All, Here are a couple of photos of a gold Constellation dial: Does anyone know what the letters 'ZJ' stamped on the dial mean? Also I've been told it might be a redial but it looks OK to me - there are no traces of glue on the underside and the 'grinding' marks on the hour marker studs look genuine - What's your opinion Cheers
I think "ZJ" is the dial manufacturer. Further research shows that stamp was likely used by ZJ Fluckinger in St. Imier, Switzerland: http://www.iwc.com/forum/en/discussion/59768/ They were a major dial manufacturer going way back. Even US watch companies like Hamilton used them. Fluckinger was eventually bought out by Patek Philippe and now produces their watch dials. I agree with Ash in that while this looks like a genuine Omega solid gold dial, it's been rather indifferently refinished. gatorcpa
Thanks for the info on the dial manufacturer. I should say that the watch is of UK origin with the case, dial and handset sourced by OWC (UK) in 1966. I have seen an identical one recently and it had the same dial. My theory is that there were subtle variations in Constellation dials - the one here passes the MOY test and has some age-related patina. Also there are no marks on the underside of the dial other than those created during the original manufacture - and certainly no glue.
If a redial was done correctly there would be no glue - glue is for amateurs. The scrape marks on the back (which are correctly done after re-riveting) look awfully fresh, with no tarnish - I would be quite suspicious of this one.
Its a lot more than a subtle variation though compared to all the others, minute hashed are touching the edge of the facet, the edge of the facet isn't sharp at all even aside from the text
Actually, the 2nd "0" looks correct. It is slighly narrower than the first. I think the redialler has the correct dies for this dial. Not easy to find. If not for the lack of sharpness of the fold and the overlapping minutes register, I wouldn't be able to tell. gatorcpa
Ah I didn't realise that, saw it on Desmond's blog listed as being owned by a guy named Jorge from South America, but I thought I'd seen it more recently on here too
It might be ok - the dial surface is slightly out of focus and that might account for some of the problems pointed out here. My biggest concern are the hash marks between 7 and 9 on the dial pictured. Here is one of mine - 18k rose gold:
That's ok Ash I bought it from that guy and you are right, the dial in question was refinished at some point in the past. The minute markers are wrong and the pie pan edges are dull, not sharp any more.
Was waiting for you to weigh in- The fonts and their alignment are perfect. Just very heavy, along with the other problems you mentioned.
Well, if it is a redial then it's an exceedingly good redial - the font is right, the alignment is right, the MOY is right and the oval 'O' in Constellation is right (for that period - if in doubt Desmond's blog has others like this).
Here are a couple of photos comparing the dials seen in this thread:- The top one is MSMWatch's and the bottom is mine Whilst the script in the lower one is heavier,the font and spacing is exact - hence I don't think the lower is a redial
The thickness of the script is actually a big deal. But an even bigger concern is the hash marks placement as I pointed out earlier (especially between the 7 and 8 o'clock markers) and the lack of sharpness of the piepan dial edges. I would still like to see a sharp, perfectly focused high resolution photo of the dial to be able to tell for sure if it is a redial (the photos you have are focused on the hands with what looks like a shallow depth of field setting).
Another thing is the striations of the dial metal. On Mike's it is a starburst pattern. On the OP's it seems to be Vertical.
Don't forget, this is NOT a Swiss Made Constellation - it was imported into the UK as a bare movement with the dial, hands, case, datewheel all sourced separately by OWC in the UK and assembled in the UK.