http://www.ebay.com/itm/201008299911?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649#ht_987wt_896Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network

 

If you look carefully at the left index near the 12 hour subdial, you'll notice it oversteps a little. At least that what it looks like to me. It's at the very least not even with the right one. Don't you think so?

The other pictures in the Ebay auction make this more clear.

 

I do not know what you are referring to, and very much doubt that the dial is not original.

 

The applied index near the 12 hour subdial looks to be crossing over the subdial. At least that's what it looks like to me, in some of the other pictures. That's all I'm saying.

The rest looks good.

 

I remain confused. Near the 12 hour subdial? There are no applied indexes remotely close to the top (i.e. 12:00) subdial. In fact, the only applied index that might be construed (I'd argue misconstrued) as crossing over a subdial is the 7:00 marker. I don't believe that to be the case, though, and would argue that it is a shadow.

For future reference, if you are going to refer to an applied index, why not simply refer to the precise hour?

 

I don't mean the 12th hour of the 12 hour subdial. I meant simply the 12 hour subdial, as I said. You're right. It's the 7 hour marker. I don't see a difference between the identifications.

In any case, I disagree. Here is a face shot and an enlarged look. I believe that the sides are not symmetrical.

 

I agree with this view, and do not believe that the marker issue undercuts the conclusion that the dial is original.

 

I agree as well. As I said, the rest of the dial looks good.