After getting my first Speedy, a '66 105.012 in jan, I knew it wouldn't be the last but I had planned to start saving for a nice Ed White. However, I came across this '69 145.022 a couple of weeks ago and to my mind it looked in decent nick, and was for sale from the estate of a gentleman who bought it new in 1970 and only wore it for church and special occasions. At the risk of getting a hiding from the missus, I went for it and it arrived a few days ago. Pleased to say I'm very happy with it (unless someone points out any problems that I missed?!). To me at least, it looks unpolished, with the original stepped dial, hands and lovely DoN bezel. It also came with the original 1039 which was a bonus! Initially i I though the hands were new. However, when you hit it with a camera flash, both the hour markers and hands glow for around 15 seconds before fading so I think they might be original. Couple of questions; Is it usual for the hour markers to be in this condition on a '69 after all this time? The lume is definitely still there and it looks original but it's a white/minty green hue. Not yellow or brown. Should the lume still glow on a watch of this age? Even if it's just for a few seconds after a bit from a strong light source? I'd welcome any thoughts or comments, both positive and negative, as I'm still learning....
Tritium is almost 'dead' after 45 years, but the photoluminescent pigment can still be excited by light, but of course for only a few minutes after the end of exposure to light.
Glowing hands do seem not right to me. Guess is, it may have been treated but not something I can confirm. I like the watch. Nice snag!! Somethink that can be worn ... a lot Oh!! You're officially now locked in, with two of these babies. Downhill from here on
Cheers guys. Yes I suspect the hands may possibly be newer replacements. It was simply the fact that they only glow after being subjected to a strong light source (like a camera flash) and even then, it's only for 15 secs or so. If I just go into a dark room, without being given a hit from strong light, neither the hands nor dial glow at all. So if they have been replaced it can't be recently, can it? The fact that they fade equally made me wonder if they were contemporary. Any thoughts on the case? I thought it looked unpolished but could it have had a decent repolish?
Assuming the price was right, looks as though you snagged a nice example to me, congrats! I've seen a wide range of lume aging on Speedmasters, even those of similar age. Different lives and exposures I suppose. I have a '68 transitional with nearly white plots. As for the hands, not sure it can be said with certainty if they are replacements or not. If so, no doubt pretty old ones, and correct for the reference.
Yeah, whether the the hands are original or not, they're at least appropriate, which is fine for what I paid. Its in good condition, an 861 which I wanted for a daily wearer (but has the stepped dial and pre moon case back), two vintage leather straps and the original 1039, plus it came direct from the original owners family with a nice story. Overall I'm very happy with it.
Incidentally, I now have two 1039 bracelets with correct end links. I bought one a couple of weeks ago, before I acquired this watch and as this came with its original bracelet I'm thinking I'll probably share the wealth and sell the other one as I don't really need two. If anyone's interested, bear with me, as I'll put up a for sale ad in the next day or so.
Nice one David. Hard to tell about the hands, as others have said. Still, a lovely wearable watch. And nice to have two 1039s ;-) R
I've put an ad up on the 'parts for sale' section. I'm in the UK so it might be of more interest to folk in the EU?