Hi all,
Just looking for some helpful advice, please and thank you…
I believe this crown looks correct but I’m not an expert.
Do we think this is the correct crown for the reference?
Thanks in advance
Is it a 166.020? I have one with a different dial configuration: photo, more photos. The crown looks like a replacement. The hands too in my eye; they're supposed to have a black part and the hour hand looks too long, but I may be wrong.
Hands look fine as this appears to be a no lume dial. Original crown would be scalloped, but this one might have been a legitimate replacement as the scalloped one was NLA for awhile.
Hands look fine as this appears to be a no lume dial. Original crown would be scalloped, but this one might have been a legitimate replacement as the scalloped one was NLA for awhile.
Agree the dial is original but not in the best shape. Crown is certainly not original.
There’s a lot of DeVilles around in great condition so it’s not a model where one should compromise on quality imo
Those scalloped crowns are my favorite of that whole era, I use them even on some Constellations and early Seamasters which should have clover or decagonal crowns since they’re much easier to grip and pull yet still look good and fit the design of the watch.
The uni-shell cases (14725, 166.020, etc) were originally fitted with crowns which had the female portion of the stem fixed as an integral part of the crown (they didn't unscrew). Crown size and stem length were related to the reference and or caliber family.