Forums Latest Members
  1. TNTwatch Mar 5, 2017

    Posts
    2,876
    Likes
    1,949
    Both are incorrect bezels for your watch, IMO.
     
  2. gemini4 Hoarder Of Speed et alia Mar 5, 2017

    Posts
    5,855
    Likes
    16,580
    TNT is right. Send me that nasty DON immediately and I will forward a correct DNN!!
     
    Caliber561, TNTwatch and Barking mad like this.
  3. TNTwatch Mar 5, 2017

    Posts
    2,876
    Likes
    1,949
    Shouldn't he get rid of both?
     
    gemini4 likes this.
  4. trackpad Mar 5, 2017

    Posts
    707
    Likes
    1,030
  5. watchlovr Mar 5, 2017

    Posts
    1,748
    Likes
    2,459
    Magic, I have NOS DNN's.
    Spare DON now, I really should have known I suppose.
     
  6. uwsearch Mar 5, 2017

    Posts
    1,055
    Likes
    1,596
    30597XXX
    21.10.1970
    Taiwan

    30597 IMGL1620.JPG
     
  7. alfanator Mar 5, 2017

    Posts
    707
    Likes
    3,717
    IMG_0762.JPG
     
  8. bhove Mar 5, 2017

    Posts
    54
    Likes
    68
    MWO is a great reference, but the findings are based on research of a (limited) number of cases (watches). The range of serial numbers for the 220's stated in MWO represents the lowest and highest serials the authors have been able to identify in their research for the book. It does not nescessarily mean that watches with lower or higher serial numbers are incorrect. My 220 has serial 30.588, which is below the range identified in MWO, but it is a genuine 220, produced in august 1970. Conclusion: Research is only research, not the ultimative truth [emoji4]
     
    plexyforever likes this.
  9. gemini4 Hoarder Of Speed et alia Mar 5, 2017

    Posts
    5,855
    Likes
    16,580
    Im sure you have a genuine 220 bezel. How do you know it is original your watch?
     
    ac106, TNTwatch and Davidt like this.
  10. bhove Mar 5, 2017

    Posts
    54
    Likes
    68
    Because the watch is produced in Q3 1970 - the second pre-condition for a 220 stated in MWO. By the way the watch had never been serviced when I bought it, so it is very unlikely that somebody had changed the bezel [emoji6]
     
  11. micampe Mar 5, 2017

    Posts
    1,626
    Likes
    6,171
    I don't understand the smugness. As you said, this is research based on examples found and some verification, if you have reliable information that extends the range the range can be extended.
     
    larryganz likes this.
  12. nixf6 Mar 5, 2017

    Posts
    358
    Likes
    1,025
    Isn't the quest to find how many 220 bezels are owned by forum members.Not how many correct watches with the 220 bezel.
     
  13. bhove Mar 5, 2017

    Posts
    54
    Likes
    68
    No smugness from my side. I have informed the authors of MWO about my watch.
     
  14. Darlinboy Pratts! Will I B******S!!! Mar 5, 2017

    Posts
    8,727
    Likes
    69,007
    Watch not included...

    IMG_8443.JPG
     
    airansun, bhove, Jwit and 3 others like this.
  15. abrod520 Mar 5, 2017

    Posts
    11,220
    Likes
    35,254
    My 220 appears to have been on quite a few adventures. Bezel and case are chewed up but the dial and hands are fantastic.

    IMG_2288.JPG

    30.99 serial produced November 1970 and delivered to Mexico. Bought on its original 4/70 1039 bracelet.
     
    bhove, tamura, Pahawi and 5 others like this.
  16. Atalien2005 Mar 5, 2017

    Posts
    396
    Likes
    1,510
    Here is mines with SN 30.592. I've also recently sold a 220 bezel that I didn't realize what it was until looking at the pictures afterward. ::facepalm2::

    IMG_8876.PNG
    4CD52F1A-CBCA-4DCC-A65C-9ADE8FFD8F81.JPG
     
    larryganz, airansun, bhove and 6 others like this.
  17. tamura Mar 6, 2017

    Posts
    759
    Likes
    2,302
    Thank You. I don`t think it is relumed.
    AABBSM69I.jpg
    Tamura
     
  18. plexyforever Mar 6, 2017

    Posts
    238
    Likes
    683
  19. omegasaso12 Mar 6, 2017

    Posts
    410
    Likes
    1,408
    22. (If I counted ok). Serial 30.990.xxx

    20160401_132830.jpg
     
    befobe, airansun, Barking mad and 3 others like this.
  20. watchlovr Mar 6, 2017

    Posts
    1,748
    Likes
    2,459
    You are correct. It was my question half way through asking about serial numbers.