Hi guys, I'm currently considering the below watch. I have handled the watch and think it is in great condition. The aging is even and consistent throughout. Pictures do not do it justice at all. However, once I got home and started looking at the pictures, I noticed that there seems to be a discrepancy with the lettering of the 4 numerals. The number 40 seems to be slightly darker than the other lettering and the 4 in 40 seems different to the 4 in 45 and the 4 hour marker. I cannot tell that it has been touched or repainted but it still looks different. The outer track seems unaffected and is consistent throughout. What do you guys think? I also noted to the seller that the second hand seems incorrect as I thought it should be blued but he noted that he thought it original. It seems the correct length. Any idea if this could be correct.
Nice 'Sei Tacche'. Interesting observation but the dial looks fine to me. I am confident that the seconds hand is a replacement though as it should at least match. Do you know the caliber, serial number, or case reference number?
So no concern about the 40 text at all? To be honest I looked at the watch with a loop and didn't notice the text until I got home. I agree about the second hand. I have seen most with a matching blued hand with a small lollipop counter balance. A similar watch is in the FS section but with a sub second dial. The second hand of that watch has the hand I'm talking about. Yeah, got that. Serial is a 6,8mil number dating it to 1945. Back stamped 22967 and matching 592 stamped on back and lug.
Is it possible that the 40 was touched up at some point? Yes, I suppose so. But Occam's Razor suggests to me that it probably wasn't.
Accepted. Thank you both for the time in responding. I'm off to post in the WDULT thread about Occam's razor...
Dial looks right to me too, congrats on a nice pick up, mine says hi! Agree blue second hand and lollipop but otherwise looks good
Maybe during the printing of the numbers it somehow came out as it did... There doesn't seem to be a noticeable difference between the 2 numbers....
Hi guys, Since posting I finally managed to land the watch. I picked it up this past weekend and had to wear it today (hence the incorrect size strap). I will probably look to find a two piece nylon strap for it. It's a great looking watch and although it's on the slightly smaller size it wears quite big due to it's thickness and my smaller wrists. Is that radium on the numbers? There are one or two loose pieces of something under the crystal and I will probably not wear it again until I can get it cleaned up. Pictures!!! And finally a little family pic to show the size difference (yes, I stole the strap from my brother - both circa 1944)
If the luminous material is original (and it appears to be on the dial at least) then radium is indeed involved.