Longines ladies, late 30's, bullseye, what are your thoughts?...

Posts
365
Likes
452
Dear fellow OF members. I intend to sell this Longines ladies watch. I hope it will be used as intended and my research tells me that it is manufactured in the late 30's (1938.) The case is 21-22 mm excluding the crown. The inner caseback is marked 2335 wich i believes should be the reference number, and the movement is cal 8.68N. The dial is in a stunning near flawless condtion with an unusual octagonal shaped case.

I am no expert on ladies watches, but dials in this fine conditon are quite rare in my opinion. I just want's to get the description as accurate as possible. Any opinions?
Edited:
 
Posts
1,093
Likes
5,545
I can’t help you with a evaluation but that is a beautiful watch.
I have a simular one from the same era and it`s a keeper because
a sale would not generate much money imo.

 
Posts
2,754
Likes
4,807
Firstly, the 4-digit numbers on the inside of the case-backs of these watches are order numbers, not reference numbers. According to my observations, Longines was using both 4 and 5-digit order numbers during the 1930s and 1940s. The reference number of this watch likely begins with a "3" or a "4".

Secondly, despite some small imperfections (e.g. the grey of the sub-dial bleeding beyond the silver printing), the dial appears original. What intrigues me is the grey and black bullseye design. I think that the late 1930s would be quite an early instance of such a design, in a Longines. Given that the hands seem to fit and the movement is in quite good condition, it seems likely that all is correct.

It is a neat piece. Thanks for posting it.
 
Posts
1,093
Likes
5,545
Firstly, the 4-digit numbers on the inside of the case-backs of these watches are order numbers, not reference numbers. According to my observations, Longines was using both 4 and 5-digit order numbers during the 1930s and 1940s. The reference number of this watch likely begins with a "3" or a "4".

Strangely on mine Longines state the ref number to be 2104 as stamped
in the caseback. Will be interesting to hear what Longines Heritage has to say about OP`s watch😀

 
Posts
365
Likes
452
Thank you lads for your comments. Strange about the reference number though. @DirtyDozen12 are there exceptions? I refer to @Radiumpassion comments. My first pictures were taken in poor daylight. Here is a high resolution picture of the dial, using my macro lens.

 
Posts
2,754
Likes
4,807
@Radiumpassion Thanks for posting that extract! I am surprised that 2104 is supposedly the reference number. If correct, this would suggest to me that the case is quite an early design since 2104 would be an early reference number. I know that Longines used 4-digit order numbers during this period and that these, rather than the reference numbers, normally appear on cases. However, there could certainly be exceptions. For illustration purposes, below is a catalog from 1938 from a great Instagram account: https://www.instagram.com/pharos_vintage_watches/ As is evident, all but one reference number (1965) begin with either a "3" or a "4". I would certainly be interested to know the reference number of the watch above.

 
Posts
1,093
Likes
5,545
Very interesting indeed @DirtyDozen12

Maybe Longines Heritage just «pulled a fast one» on me and called it
a 2104😉 I really hope that I have not worn out my welcome there..

I remember seeing my watch in a period catalog and maybe with some
digging I can find it again.
 
Posts
321
Likes
839
I really often wonder about the reference numbers and how they determine them. Seems to me there's sometimes no logical connection.
 
Posts
1,093
Likes
5,545
I think DD12 is right and the numbers are order numbers and not ref numbers
as they fit in nicely in sequense with the movement serial numbers on my and
op`s watch.



Here is a simular watch to mine in a mid 1930`s catalog, ref 3191

 
Posts
1,093
Likes
5,545
Pleasure was mine, this turned out to be a interesting thread even thoug
@Maskelyne has not got a valiuation of his watch yet😉

PS: the catalog picture belongs to @bigbug1964 I will remove it
on his request.
 
Posts
365
Likes
452
Pleasure was mine, this turned out to be a interesting thread even thoug
@Maskelyne has not got a valiuation of his watch yet😉

PS: the catalog picture belongs to @bigbug1964 I will remove it
on his request.

Much appreciated! 😀 I cant see my watch though. Regarding the value, that´s not my main interest. The main reasons are the history, provenance, condition and beauty of a watch/dial which is more than 80 years old, and to share my pics and thoughts with like-minded here on OF. 😀
Edited:
 
Posts
1,093
Likes
5,545
Much appreciated! 😀 I cant see my watch though. Regarding the value, that´s not my main interest. The main reasons are the history, provenance, condition and beauty of a watch/dial which is more than 80 years old, and to share my pics and thoughts with like-minded here on OF. 😀

Sorry buddy for the thread hi-jack😀 Did you contact Longines for the ref number
and invoice date? Would be cool to know the history of your watch.
 
Posts
365
Likes
452
Sorry buddy for the thread hi-jack😀 Did you contact Longines for the ref number
and invoice date? Would be cool to know the history of your watch.
- No worries, you contributes with highly valuable information! I have sent an request to Longines Heritage customer service, will be back with all info asap. 😀
 
Posts
365
Likes
452
Longines vintage service is excellent! Here is information regarding the watch:

 
Posts
1,093
Likes
5,545
Thank you for posting this! @Maskelyne

Interesting to see Terrasse refered to as the agent for Norway in
April 1940 A week before Norway became occupied for five years.
During the occupation no watches or watchparts was imported or
distributed in Norway apart from mainsprings made in Sweden by
Sandvik.
 
Posts
2,754
Likes
4,807
@Maskelyne Thank you for posting the extract.

A reference number of 4064 is within the range of what I would have expected given the serial number and order number of 2335.

Edit: reference 4604*
Edited:
 
Posts
2,754
Likes
4,807
F fbf
wow. that attracted some interests, didn't it ?
Now re-listed.