Below is a "Heuer" that was sold by a dealer this year. I am not an expert on Heuer but the watch appears to have a laundry list of unusual attributes. I question whether any part of the watch is authentic.

Starting with the dial, I am not well-versed enough to make a confident assessment. However, my untrained eye finds the seconds scale, sub-dials, and hour markers odd. Though not an issue on its own, the pristine condition in conjunction with the aforementioned potential oddities is noteworthy. Lastly, the absence of lume does not fit with the luminous hour/minute hands. So, it seems reasonable to assume that either the dial is wrong, or the hands, or both.




Moving onto the case, there are a number of atypical features. Firstly, there are the large round pushers. Comparing these pushers to all other round-pusher references listed on OnTheDash with Valjoux 71 or 72, none are similar. As a side note, these pushers can also be found on certain examples of the highly suspicious "original" Longines Avigation BigEye chronographs that have surfaced. Secondly, the case-back markings do not fit with original examples. Comparable examples have perlage, an "Ed. Heuer & Co Swiss" marking, and either "Stainless *Steel*" or "Stainless Steel".



Ref. 346 AT, photo from OnTheDash: http://www.onthedash.com/chronograph/reference-346-at/


Ref. 2447, photo from OnTheDash: http://www.onthedash.com/chronograph/reference-2447-white-silver-dial-radium/


Ref. 2444 T, photo from OnTheDash: http://www.onthedash.com/chronograph/reference-2444-t/


Finally, the movement has a number of apparent issues. Firstly, Heuers with the Valjoux 72 (pre-1960), usually have copper-toned wheels. The example in question has silver-toned wheels. Secondly, original Heuer Valjoux 72 movements usually have a distinctively-shaped "chronograph" bridge. The example in question has a generically-shaped bridge. The bridge is also missing the usual 6-digit number. Furthermore, the "Heuer" marking on the bridge is also missing its usual copper tone. Thirdly, the balance cock with mobile stud carrier is not typical. I also find it noteworthy that the movement of the example in question has severe where underneath the balance wheel, and an incorrect minute recording jumper spring.



Ref. 2447, photo from OnTheDash: http://www.onthedash.com/chronograph/reference-2447-white-silver-dial-radium/


Ref. 2444, photo from OnTheDash: http://www.onthedash.com/chronograph/reference-2444/


To conclude, the watch in question appears highly anomalous among known Heuer chronographs. Unfortunately, the given example is not the only one I have seen (three thus far).

I look forward to any comments.

 

Here is a side-by-side pusher comparison. The first three photos were taken from OnTheDash: http://www.onthedash.com/

 

Not an expert - especially not on these variations - but this seems to me a franken. Bridge wear does not match the movement. Inscriptions are wrong and too fresh. Dial does not feel correct. So: I think you pointed it all out.

 

Expanding the discussion to Heuers with round pushers and Landeron 13 movements, reference 2406 has similarly large pushers. However, the shape of the pushers differs from those found on the watch in question. Case-back design and marking seems to vary on ref. 2406. However, all have perlage and none are marked like the watch in question.

Ref. 2406, photos from OnTheDash: http://www.onthedash.com/chronograph/reference-2406-white-dial-no-radium/


Ref. 2406, photos from OnTheDash: http://www.onthedash.com/chronograp...-no-radum-tachymeter-and-telemeter-tri-color/



Ref. 2406, photos from OnTheDash: http://www.onthedash.com/chronograph/reference-2406-black-dial-radium/

 

Just look at all the variation in the numbers on the dial - the differences in the 5s alone, yikes.

As for the movement, from my limited knowledge it should at the very least be Swiss-signed, though the presence of another non-signed example on OTD casts doubt on that.

Either way, stay far away from this one!

 

Yes, I also wonder if that bridge and the balance cock have been transplanted.

I agree about the movement being marked "Swiss" and wonder about the example from OTD.

 

Those movements are from 3 clearly different generations. I would not take the signed bridge differences as having any meaning. I can spot at least 2 major revisions on the 2 "Legit" pieces. In fact ref 2447 looks the fishiest to me...

 

Yes, the three movements shown are three different iterations of the Valjoux 72. I must amend my comments about the silver-toned wheels, mobile stud carrier, and minute recording jumper spring. While one screw on the spring appears to be incorrect, the rest appears normal for a Valjoux 72 from the late 1960s/early 1970s. However, comparing the movement in question to a comparable Heuer Valjoux 72, the bridge still stands out as atypical both in terms of shape and markings (see below).

Carrera 12 - Second Execution, photo from OnTheDash: http://www.onthedash.com/chronograph/carrera-2447-decimal-second/

 

Below is another late Valjoux 72 in a Carrera. The shape of the "chronograph" bridge is generic, but the markings differ from those found on the watch in question.

Photo from OnTheDash: http://www.onthedash.com/chronograph/carrera-2447-tachy-black-registers/

 

I like the phrase “a laundry list of unusual attributes”

 

Unfortunately, the "laundry list" part is not my invention. But it is fun to use.