One of my areas of interest. Was interested in making my Monopussante conform to the second or third 13zn shown. Unfortunately, 13.33z dials actually don't fit very well. The below dial might not be from a 13.33z as some have thought. I believe unfortuately that it is original to the watch. I prefer the multicolored dial, but will have to find a pair of 13.33z watch to install them on.
My eyes might be bad, I am not catching the differences between the two blue multicolored dials. The red and black are different dials, both look good to me. But then again, I don't know much about watches, so feel free to fill me in.
On the multi-scale dial, notice how the scales nearly contact the subdial whereas on your dial they do not. Secondly notice the signature particularly the "L". On the tachymetre dial, notice the more precisely executed subdials and numerals. Also, it appears that your dials do not have sunken subdials, which is problematic.
These aren't the best photographs. The dials are sunken subdials. In real life, they aren't quite as white either. This is the backside of the dials. If I have time, I will photograph the dials myself. Will be interesting what you think of them. I don't read Italian, but looks good to me compared to Adriano Divadoni's examples. There is one dial in his collection that has a similar L. The left one. http://longinespassion.com/oldlonginespassion/Longines_Passion/Longines_13.33z.html Adriano's dial backside.
I would have to disagree that your two dials compare well with the examples from Adriano's site. Better photos would certainly be interesting though.
This dial is either original or a VERY good refinish because the outer edges of both subdials meet the railroad style track evenly. This dial is refinished because the outer edges of the subdials do not meet that same track evenly. The 9:00 subdial is fine, but the 3:00 subdial is badly overlapping that track.
The dial is only about 30mm in size. In real life, the print is amazingly small and actually difficult to read as you can tell from to 30CH next to it. The precision of printing in enamel of this dial is as sharp as the metal dial.
Just for fun. I'm just a newbie to watch collecting. As far as I can tell, for 3 years there were enamel dials for 13zn. 1936-1938
Thank you for the additional photos but I still maintain that neither dial is original. As Dennis pointed out, the clearance between the subdial printing and the edge of the subdial is inconsistent on the multi-scale dial. On the tachymetre dial, I notice that the width of the tracks on the subdials is quite inconsistent. The 30 minute counter is significantly wider than the seconds dial. This can also be seen on the tachymetre dial that I showed but to a lesser degree.
Yes, I do know this but I am referring to the tracks/printing inside the subdials not outside. The printing in the subdials should be centered (within the subdials) regardless of the asymmetry of the subdials with respect to the outer tracks.
Though we have not deviated far, I would still like to reiterate my original point; that neither dial appears stylistically correct. The signature on the multi-scale dial does not resemble correct examples and the variance in the width of the subdial tracks, on the tachymetre dial, is too great.
I made correction, poor math. Was actually 3 years not two. Still ref 3502, by itself, I have only found evidence of 4. Extremely rare case and maybe only available 3 years in enamel.