This is one of those purchases you rarely get to experience and usually just read about in envy.

But this time the watch turned out to actually be better than the description.
Along with very poor photos and information the one thing I wanted to know was the size.
So the seller measured it to 33mm and sent me a picture of it next to a ruler.

That was good, 33mm is a wearable size for me and sorting out that it probably not was the 31mm version made me take the bet.


Watch turned up (after sent with regular postal service with stamps only even though we agreed to insured and trackable shipping) and actually was bigger than 31mm and even bigger than the messured 33mm, its 35mm+ and you all know what those extra few millimeters does to a tre tacche Longines.


I would like if some better learned members could chime in with some questions I have.


1) Are all parts correct and original?

The numbers on the caseback and case match up, movement and serial number looks correct and would be dated to 1942.

Along with the some dirt and patina the dial looks okey to me, what about the hands?


2) Going to send it to a watchmaker for a clean up and service and replacing the cracked crystal.

Did these have some special crystal originaly or would it be correct to replace it with a suiting one that has the some profile as this one?


3) I’m not even going to try and value it myself since the price range on these 35mm tre tacche are very large, but what would be an aprox market value?
View attachment 1306412 View attachment 1306413

 

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but the dial is not original. The poorly executed signature is a dead giveaway, and the silver foot along with a number of other details only serve as further evidence. As you can imagine, this has a significant impact on the value.

 

That of course is a disappointment if the dial is repainted.

I do not have that much knowledge if these early Longines dials but I just thought the text looked poor because of patina/moisture and general aging. To me only the ”e” and ”s” in Longines looks wonky enough to be a concern, and those could well have ”bled” in contact with moisture.

Many Longines dials from the 40s I have seen age badly and the text sometimes even fades away.

This plus that the radium numerals and indices looks very good and the correct colour did not make me suspicuous about the dial unfortunately.
Even the minute markers and swiss made text looks very good to my eye.

About the dial foot, is this a 100% fact that all original dials have copper and repainted gets silver? Because I recall have seen original dials with silver and redials with correct copper coloured foot.

I’m not arguing with you about the originality of the dial or not and if you state this you probably have the knowledge backning it up
I just want to learn and since the rest of the dial except the ”e” and ”s” looks good to my eye I would love to know which other details are wrong!

 

I agree with @DirtyDozen12 about the dial. The thickness and (low) quality of the font gives it away. Likely a very early re-paint, though, which is why it appears to be superficially sympathetic.

The tough part, ironically, is that your luck related to the size of the watch will work against you in terms of the likelihood of finding an original replacement dial. Those larger versions tend to be quite valuable, and even if a good original dial were to become available, it would almost certainly be very expensive.

 

As an original one would be tough to find, is a dial from a sei tacche would fit this case / movement ?

I know that wouldn’t have the exact same taste, let’s imagine this as a temporary solution

 

For what it is worth i`m in the redial camp too...

That being said I think the 35mm TT still uses a flat 28mm dial like the 33mm
TT and other 12.68ZS so I think it is possible to find a donor.

Still a great catch IMO

 

IMO, none of the letters in the signature look correct. They lack the fineness and style of original Fluckiger and Stern dials (see below). The issues do not look to be the result of aging.

The vast majority of original dials from this period have copper-toned feet as a result of the production process. Still, I would not necessarily conclude that a dial has been refinished if everything looks original except for the foot. However, when details on the obverse are suspicious and the dial has a foot, this is cause for concern.

Other aspects of this dial that are atypical are the minute track, hour markers, and "Swiss Made". Most minute tracks on these are either closed or with numbers. Also notice that the minute hand, which looks correct, does not reach the minute track. The style of the hour markers, specifically the teardrop ones, is atypical. Finally, "Swiss Made" is primarily found on examples that went to the UK. Looking at the movement, I would guess that this watch did not, though I could be wrong.

Looking at the entire watch, it looks mostly original but quite worn. The lugs have damage, the minute hand has been re-lumed, and the gilding on the movement shows quite a bit of wear. IMO, this all fits with the refinished dial.

1936:


1937:


1942:


1944:


1944:


1946:


1948:

 

Thank you for your knowledge and for sharing these photos, are all of these from tre tacche Longines or just Longines generally?

The dial probably was redone a long time ago since the lume looks and act like radium, also the watchmaker did a great job with both the applied indices and minute markers!

 

Yes the dial seems to be around 28mm so that will widen up the options for a donor dial, the movement is stamped 12.68N from what I can see.

Does other models except the tre tacche share the same dial styles, for example the sei tacche and other non waterproof models from early 40s?

And also would it make a franken to find a sub second 12.68z dial and fit this case, does the case belong to any specific dial/movement or was sub second and center second configurations fitted to the same cases? That would also widen the options since the sub seconds seem more common on the 35mm tre tacches.

 

The sample above has just one tre tacche (1937).

I agree, the lume does look like radium so probably quite an old redial.

As @Radiumpassion stated, tre tacches use flat dials. Many sei tacches have domed dials, which would not look right. As for style, yes, there were other models with the same dials. Unfortunately, the spectrum of dials that one sees in 35 mm tre tacches on the market today is much broader than I believe to be historically appropriate. There are many 1940s watches with what I believe to be 1930s dials, but I digress.

This is a good question. Off the top of my head, I do not recall, though I know that certain sei tacche cases did have different case-backs according to movement (i.e. sub-seconds vs. center seconds).

 

Agree with all of the above.

 

It would be a franken but similar cases were used with subseconds movements.
Longines cases cannot be separated from their movements because the very precise Longines archive holds a record of the 5 numbers you see on the cases— which are called “order numbers”, ie batch numbers.

Also about 4/5 years ago now Longines discovered new production ledgers which often include a mention of the type of dial that was fitted to a watch. In the old days collectors thought they could swap and transplant dials, but we now often have means through the Longines archive to determine what type of dial was on the watch when it left the factory.

This doesn’t stop unsuspecting buyers from buying watches with transplanted dials at inappropriate prices, but there may come a time when the party stops, and true Longines enthusiasts are keeping track as best they can

 

Yes as I suspect as well probably a lot of the expensive 35mm tre tacches we see today have dials transplanted from other examples and even models, since the prices are so high there is a lot of upside in finding a good dial instead of selling a bad conditioned 35mm tre tacche.

Is there any way in finding out for sure if the dial was the original one assembled by Longines? Is this stated in the extract of archives from Longines, as @Syrte mentioned if they can find out more about the watch from the 5-digit batch number.

 

I am of course disappointed that it turned out to be a redial, shame you never get to feel fully satisfied by a found.
But I'm guessing the positive surprise that it turned out to be 35mm instead of 33mm probably made it a better catch money wise, compared to if it was an expected 33mm with an original dial.


Anyways I will make a try and finding a donor dial without much expectations, thanks for all your kind help. And if someone stumbles upon a dial/donor watch please let me know!

 

It is not stated in the regular extract, the only way to find out is to query Longines with the serial number of the movement.

However they may not be able to answer in all instances.
Also note you cannot make a query with the batch number

 

Hat tip to all the passionate Longines experts for shedding light on originality! Gives more confidence to this hobby.

@hejsam don’t let a redial take away the joy of wearing a historical 35mm 1940s longines!

 

Out of curiosity and for learning, would for example this dial fit?
A 33mm sei tacche with the same 28mm diameter dial, same 12.68N movement but with a little bit later serial number.

Or is this what you call the domed dial and therefore does not belong to the tre tacches?

 

It is indeed a curved dial as you can see on the sides.

 

I spent some time trying to study some dials on other tre tacches found on the web.
Probably just me that don't have an eye for it, but all these looks like they have the curved/domed dial to me:

 

Distortion caused by crystals makes assessing dial curvature difficult. Additionally, my presumption that the majority of tre tacches have flat dials makes me biased towards seeing flatness. However, looking at these dials, only the black one stands out as potentially curved, to me.