Yesterday I bought a watch. Yesterday, I bought a few watches, but I've been negotiating this one for three weeks ... and now I'm confused. I have searched online and read what I can and yet I'm still coming up blank. So, calling out to the knowledgeable on OF to see who's got a reference book or past knowledge to point me in the right direction.

The watch in question is a Jaeger LeCoultre Master Mariner.



What I know about this line of watches is that it was introduced in 1958 to celebrate Jaeger's 125th anniversary. It was a chronometer aimed at ships officers and essentially a waterproofed dress watch. The original iteration came with a 476-3 and was made for the American market, signed "LeCoultre" .

In the same year, Jaeger introduced the Geophysic range which eclipsed the more niche Master Mariner and this line seems to have been mostly forgotten.

My example seems to date to the later 1960s but what confuses me most is that it houses a K 881. It's also in steel and the dial signed Jaeger LeCoultre. The case is 34mm rather than the original 36mm (though with those lugs, it does wear bigger).


It's rare enouh for me to be unable to find the same watch online. It doesn't appear to have been altered at all and, apart from some stress fractures in the glass, is in superb condition.

So, my call out to OF ... is anyone familiar with this reference? And, secondly, is anyone holding a correct replacement glass with the internal trapezoid cyclops?

What won't photograph is the number on the outside of the caseback which is 1006680.

I look forward to any and all comments.

 

I do not know about these but it looks great! Wear in good health.

 

Nice watch, but no, not a chronometer, and not remotely in the same class as the Geophysic.

As Gator suggested, this model is not rare.

 

Thanks all. @gatorcpa - I found those images, a few others and also a couple for sale. While one was incredibly similar, they are all powered by an 883. This one's a two owner, so there's room for doubt, but it all seems original and the last owner certainly never had the movement swapped.

It doubles my JLC count, I'm just unable to quiet all my worries that it is fully correct.

I'll do more searching when i'm back home.

 

Yeah it definitely says more 1960's than 1970's. Is that a bit of rotor rub or shadow? Would be unusual for JLC. The yellowish light makes the details a little difficult to see. I've a few JLC's myself though all 40's and 50's. I don't see anything here that screams wrong kept maybe the hands. Good luck finding a replacement crystal..JLC parts are notoriously hard to find and usually very expensive. Those catalogue pics are from 1968, I'd suggest yours pre-dates them....might be a reason for the K881.
Here's an interesting thread elsewhere:
https://forums.watchuseek.com/f11/jaeger-lecoultre-k881-4553465.html

 

I did read more this afternoon, though I've not added to the thread. I am of the opinion, aided by the ad Gator posted and your own comment, that this is just pre-1968 and is correct throughout.

This was a purchase that came with "rules". I couldn't see the movement before I bought but at least that gave me leeway to "underbid". You're correct about the rotor rubbing. I saw that when I was looking at photographs of the inside of the caseback. It seems to be the only real flaw. We'll see how much that adds to the service. Reading the service marks (which helpfully carry dates), this hasn't seen any tender ministrations since 1994. As one collector I know is fond of saying: "drop it in a bucket of diesel. That'll sort it."

For now, this one will just go on one side. The collection is starting to get a little "stringy". Losing any focus it once had, so I'm going to wait for a few to sell before I think carefully about which I want to keep. There are times I think I would be happy with a four watch set, instead of an 80 watch collection ... then I tell myself I would also need to keep a tank. In gold. And one in steel. And, of course, I should keep a Seiko for when a Jaeger/Vacheron/Omega/Rolex/Whatever isn't appropriate ... and suddenly I'm back into the high double figures. I mean, how could I ever sell that barn find Gruen that I picked up off the floor today and put in the safe? And everyone needs a Breguet, right? Ya know, I found a Breitling in an overnight bag earlier this week. I can't even remember the last time I used that bag ... so that one's on the block first up. When I get around to photographing it all in daylight. It's a full set and I'd forgotten all about it.

 

I think everybodys' collection goes off script at some point. I never wanted to buy dive watches after the one Seiko prospex..but some old tritium dials are soooo pretty and I'm never forking out for a SM300. I'm not quite at 80 but I've got quite a lot around. I've been thinking the same as you lately and will try to cut a few from the herd. Parts of my collection like the Orators is like a progression through the eras and not very valuable but I'd hate to do it in. ...but there are a few "hmmmm" Omegas..ones that aren't in particularly great shape I bought for the BOR or for an attempt at Omega movement collecting..but am I gonna wear them? Not with so many others more worthy of wrist time. I think all the JLC's (with the exception of possibly 1) I'll keep because there's no getting them back from the Black Hole. So The omega herd gets cut to about 6, the assorted chronos down to three or 4 ....and all the biscuit tin heroes stay exactly where they are as resale isn't as yet going to make any fun money. ...
Easier said than done eh?

 

[/QUOTE="chipsotoole, post: 1082443, member: 22550"]I've been thinking the same as you lately and will try to cut a few from the herd.]
So I can't interest you in a Superocean as a "nicer beater" ?

[/QUOTEQUOTE="chipsotoole, post: 1082443, member: 22550"]Easier said than done eh?[/QUOTE]
This is where the pain lies. There are a few watches that I won't let go: my CYMA (first watch); my Sub (classic); my ghost 220 (so friggin unique); my two birth years, the MKII and 8003. But then we get to the "Love but rarely wear: the VC ... I've now convinced myself it's a factory redial, despite many " experts" saying it's correct, the sigma dial doesn't jive with a '61 production date. But there are so, so many others.

I thought I'd made progress selling my barn-find 2998 ... I thought that was the watch I'd always wanted but I just couldn't gel with it. Maybe if I'd spent another £4500 on it to make it absolutely "correct" again ... but it wasn't calling to me. After that one sold, I thought I'd start into some regular sales ... but I don't really want to.

i took a couple of watches down from sale yesterday. I had offered up the Jaeger 467 ... but I like her; there's a UG that's been recased, and she needs help or she will become a donor, so I took her back. I've a couple of Smiths that need little work and will be stunning ... I do think they're great. Maybe I should fix those and just keep them?

But here's just one small drawer of items that aren't currently in my "daily" watch box:

And do I really need those or would I enjoy a few thousands a little more? Then again, I'd probably just use it to buy more watches.

 

This is where the pain lies. There are a few watches that I won't let go: my CYMA (first watch); my Sub (classic); my ghost 220 (so friggin unique); my two birth years, the MKII and 8003. But then we get to the "Love but rarely wear: the VC ... I've now convinced myself it's a factory redial, despite many " experts" saying it's correct, the sigma dial doesn't jive with a '61 production date. But there are so, so many others.

I thought I'd made progress selling my barn-find 2998 ... I thought that was the watch I'd always wanted but I just couldn't gel with it. Maybe if I'd spent another £4500 on it to make it absolutely "correct" again ... but it wasn't calling to me. After that one sold, I thought I'd start into some regular sales ... but I don't really want to.

i took a couple of watches down from sale yesterday. I had offered up the Jaeger 467 ... but I like her; there's a UG that's been recased, and she needs help or she will become a donor, so I took her back. I've a couple of Smiths that need little work and will be stunning ... I do think they're great. Maybe I should fix those and just keep them?

But here's just one small drawer of items that aren't currently in my "daily" watch box:
View attachment 645072
And do I really need those or would I enjoy a few thousands a little more? Then again, I'd probably just use it to buy more watches.[/QUOTE]

Therein lies yet another problem..apart from the disease of objectifying watches with a feminine gender..which I often do too.....Buying watches that are right on the edge of fixer uppers because they look so forlorn and its such a shame to let a lovely thing like that get pulled apart or melted down for gold. ..I've got a "lovely" and thoroughly knackered 468 JLC European without a Euro-style snap on case back languishing next to a working cal 478 in my parts bin just waiting to be dropped in!! Who knows when the caseback will ever show up!
Generally once I put them up for sale they stay there..If you love something set it free....
If you didn't even notice it was missing the Breitling's gotta go!!

 

I think that VC must have slipped into the box by mistake.....

 

Ha! You're a Constellation man ... there's no way you'd want a VC cluttering up your collection.