Lorologiese Medico-Compax

Posts
2,671
Likes
24,903
Bgrisso's is a different dial design whereas we're talking about 3 watches with the same design - Lorologiese clean & dirty, and Sala. Nonetheless there are differences between the 2 Lorologiese dials, the placement of "Pulsations" being an obvious one.

I raised the 22420 dial in Sala's book on the assumption it would carry some weight as a reference guide. I'm not suggesting the clean Lorologiese is a redial but the difference is noteworthy. It's a question for the UG experts here whether it is usual to see such variations in the same dial? I'm trying to learn something.
I still believe the clean dial is genuine for the following reasons:

1) the styling, cliche and all looks like they are in the realm of correct alterations
2) concentric circles in subdial are clearly present
3) subdial edges are still sharp
 
Posts
3,338
Likes
7,865
Here's sala archive, the first example in french shows the pulsations ending at 12

Again I haven't studied Medico in detail, but offhand I'm not seeing anything outside of the realm of normal UG variation..
 
Posts
1,385
Likes
2,930
I dont think so.

The clean dial is also out of sync with pulsations. I may be nit picking but 200 pulsations on a 15 second scale should line up with 4.9999 seconds recursive (so pretty much the 5 second mark).

200 bpm / 60 * 15 = 4.9999~ secs

While it matches up with the originals, it does not with the white dial.
 
Posts
2,671
Likes
24,903
I dont think so.

The clean dial is also out of sync with pulsations. I may be nit picking but 200 pulsations on a 15 second scale should line up with 4.9999 seconds recursive (so pretty much the 5 second mark).

200 bpm / 60 * 15 = 4.9999~ secs

While it matches up with the originals, it does not with the white dial.
I think they are pretty alright using the 200. In fact the old dirty dial is even more off and away from 4.99 seconds.
 
Posts
212
Likes
2,497
I dont think so.

The clean dial is also out of sync with pulsations. I may be nit picking but 200 pulsations on a 15 second scale should line up with 4.9999 seconds recursive (so pretty much the 5 second mark).

200 bpm / 60 * 15 = 4.9999~ secs

While it matches up with the originals, it does not with the white dial.

Shouldn't it line up with 4.5 seconds? (200 bpm = 0.3s per beat x 15)

A shame Lorologiese swapped out the dial as they've made what looked an original watch a fraudulently marketed one. Only reason I noticed it in the first place is because it's the same reference as mine with a serial number one away (and a similarly tired dial)

p1040295-jpg.951708
 
Posts
1,301
Likes
2,576
Shouldn't it line up with 4.5 seconds? (200 bpm = 0.3s per beat x 15)

A shame Lorologiese swapped out the dial as they've made what looked an original watch a fraudulently marketed one. Only reason I noticed it in the first place is because it's the same reference as mine with a serial number one away (and a similarly tired dial)

p1040295-jpg.951708
Your maths is correct, and you've got a great looking authentic watch 👍
 
Posts
2,671
Likes
24,903
Shouldn't it line up with 4.5 seconds? (200 bpm = 0.3s per beat x 15)

A shame Lorologiese swapped out the dial as they've made what looked an original watch a fraudulently marketed one. Only reason I noticed it in the first place is because it's the same reference as mine with a serial number one away (and a similarly tired dial)

p1040295-jpg.951708
May I know what the first four serial number is, i am trying to test the theory that the dial with concentric circles are relatively newer than ones with none.
 
Posts
212
Likes
2,497
May I know what the first four serial number is, i am trying to test the theory that the dial with concentric circles are relatively newer than ones with none.

Serial number is 1634152
 
Posts
2,671
Likes
24,903
Serial number is 1634152
Trying to make a timeline out of the medico style by googling (phots from the internet and OF), there are many different samples (at least a few per variety) of these variations and the timeline of each variation also falls in the same serial range.

these red pulsometers seem to have the serial inside the case and are the oldest version among the varieties here with 1,172,xxx-1,3xx,xxx serial number (1945-1949). If anyone sees any older iteration than this please let me know.


these ones are usually with 1,4xx,xxx serial number (1949-1951) the distinction with the next version is the applied markers for 8 are full and not cut off. This also seems to be similar version to that of the replaced dial.


These ones are similar to the original dial of OP and had serial number of 1,6xx,xxx (1952-1953)


the one below belongs to Ben Clymer and has a serial number of 1,8xx,xxx (1956-1957)
Edited:
 
Posts
1,385
Likes
2,930
Shouldn't it line up with 4.5 seconds? (200 bpm = 0.3s per beat x 15)

A shame Lorologiese swapped out the dial as they've made what looked an original watch a fraudulently marketed one. Only reason I noticed it in the first place is because it's the same reference as mine with a serial number one away (and a similarly tired dial)

p1040295-jpg.951708



You are Correct !

My maths is flawed. Looks like i need to go back to school ! It should have been:

15 / (200 / 60 Secs) = 4.5 secs
 
Posts
5,882
Likes
9,128
This was serial 1.172.xxx and reference 224109

 
Posts
2,671
Likes
24,903
This was serial 1.172.xxx and reference 224109

Thanks so we could broadly infer that the oldest iteration with the red pulsometer goes back to 1945, I will edit the text above as well.
 
Posts
5,882
Likes
9,128
Did some digging on the 224109 and found 6 of them. All in the 1.172m range. Lowest 557 and highest 801. Wouldn't be suprised if the entire range will have been 500 pieces
 
Posts
5,882
Likes
9,128
I have my doubts about that dial
 
Posts
1,251
Likes
12,171
Thanks for showing this.
I was following Lorologiese on IG but I've decided to quit now. That will save me time (& or money) !
 
Posts
203
Likes
106
Thanks for showing this.
I was following Lorologiese on IG but I've decided to quit now. That will save me time (& or money) !

Well you can keep following them and studying UG as well.
 
Posts
1,251
Likes
12,171
Yes you're right Chris, I could.

I guess I just don't like and avoid professional seller that hide stuff (in watch or for anything by the way) and especially when I'm not able to directly makes the difference.
And more specifically about Lorologiese, I do like a lot of watches they are advertising and publishing but if they disguise the truth on one, how can I tell they don't do it for the other ones I'm looking at now or later on.
I have had one bad experience with a professional dealer before and for me that was enough to keep away of those type of transaction. Lose/Lose at the end IMO.
Having said that I'll keep learning things on UG (and some other brand) here in OF which is a much better, safer and warmer place 😀
Well you can keep following them and studying UG as well.