- Posts
- 38
- Likes
- 8
need help with redial
- Posts
- 3,731
- Likes
- 6,338
hoipolloi
·My opinion? Blurry!
- Posts
- 3,781
- Likes
- 20,199
ahsposo
··Most fun screen name at ΩFImage size is too small to tell much.
- Posts
- 1,181
- Likes
- 4,963
apsm100
··Noob taxpayerI remember seeing this on eBay a little while ago. Wasn't as blurry and the dial seemed original, but I didn't save the listing.
Would be helpful to post better photos.
Would be helpful to post better photos.
- Posts
- 38
- Likes
- 8
Regan888
·
- Posts
- 38
- Likes
- 8
- Posts
- 17,646
- Likes
- 36,912
JimInOz
··Melbourne AustraliaDial looks fine to me (based on the latest pics).
- Posts
- 28
- Likes
- 4
- Posts
- 38
- Likes
- 8
Regan888
·Dial looks very well preserved but I cannot tell the same for the the case, according to the original Im attaching.
Let us see the caliber as well if possible for you.
I was not sure because of pristine condition of the dial. Usually in these 50s 60s models I can see some patina because of aging, also they are usually not greatly water-resistant.. this ref. number CK 2900 is 1956, according to serial number it is 1957 .. Case IMO looks polished but nothing horrible.
- Posts
- 335
- Likes
- 290
Azveld
·that seems correct to me
- Posts
- 970
- Likes
- 1,508
timoss
·Many of the markers are not centered in the minute ticks, some appearing worse than others.
- Posts
- 335
- Likes
- 290
Azveld
·I was talking about the dial when I said it felt right to me.
for the mechanism, the specialists here will enlighten us on the color difference of the parts
for the mechanism, the specialists here will enlighten us on the color difference of the parts
- Posts
- 28
- Likes
- 4
Erkan Gulmez
·I was not sure because of pristine condition of the dial. Usually in these 50s 60s models I can see some patina because of aging, also they are usually not greatly water-resistant.. this ref. number CK 2900 is 1956, according to serial number it is 1957 .. Case IMO looks polished but nothing horrible.
Case is polished according to me. Based on the attached pictures of indices 2 and 3 and the sub-dial I still claim that it is not a redial.
On the movementi screws look new, shows at least it is serviced.
Similar threads
- Posts
- 9
- Views
- 176
- Posts
- 0
- Views
- 269
- Posts
- 11
- Views
- 837
- Posts
- 10
- Views
- 587
- Posts
- 10
- Views
- 498