Forums Latest Members
  1. adrienhk Jan 25, 2019

    Posts
    21
    Likes
    4
    Hi Guys,
    I was looking for this watch in my city for quite a while but now that I have found it at a reasonable price, I am not sure it is original. I haven't bought it yet so any opinion would be more than welcome.
    Could anyone please tell me what you think of the watch and condition? I quite like the 2039 strap that comes with it too.
    The main thing that bother me is the star under constellation which seems too close.
    Like always, thanks for your help!
    Kind regards,
    Adrien

    Screenshot_20190126-090336__01.jpg Screenshot_20190126-090546__01.jpg Screenshot_20190126-090534__01.jpg Screenshot_20190126-090450__01.jpg Screenshot_20190126-090517__01.jpg Screenshot_20190126-090525__02.jpg Screenshot_20190126-090425__03.jpg Screenshot_20190126-090501__01.jpg Screenshot_20190126-090405__01.jpg Screenshot_20190126-090347__01.jpg
     
  2. ebrohman Jan 25, 2019

    Posts
    327
    Likes
    5,187
    My star doesn't touch the text
    10E286E6-767F-44D1-8E47-6274C3F760C1.jpeg
     
  3. 105012 Jan 26, 2019

    Posts
    174
    Likes
    386
    Dial looks altered. Here is my 168.027 in white gold and stainless steel on a 1040 bracelet.

    EE9CB0B6-5098-4F17-8081-BDA4EC263269.jpeg
     
    Alpenschneerot likes this.
  4. adrienhk Jan 26, 2019

    Posts
    21
    Likes
    4
    Thanks @ebrohman and @105012, it is really helpful.
    The more I look at the dial, the more I feel there is something wrong. I asked for another picture of the dial to be certain.
    Even the MOY letters dont seem to be at the right place.
     
  5. adrienhk Jan 27, 2019

    Posts
    21
    Likes
    4
    A couple more pictures below.
    Does it look legit?
    Does 800 usd seem a lot for this watch?

    Screenshot_20190127-233719__01.jpg Screenshot_20190127-233710__01.jpg
     
  6. fskywalker Jan 27, 2019

    Posts
    3,032
    Likes
    5,946
    Seems to be a redial based on the shape of the "n" in Constellation; otherwise looks good
     
  7. CdnWatchDoc Jan 27, 2019

    Posts
    1,806
    Likes
    7,113
    Agreed, re-dial. The MOY "lines up" too straight for my liking. Here is my 168.0056 and 168.0029 for comparison. See the change in the font on the newer piece?
    2018-12-19 21.54.32.jpg 2018-09-03 17.12.55.jpg
     
    adrienhk likes this.
  8. jB1128 Jan 27, 2019

    Posts
    719
    Likes
    9,582
    The hour markers don't look right for this reference, they are too thin and don't have the center groove. Also, there doesn't seem to be any evidence that there was ever any lume at the hour markers.

    I am pretty sure that this reference should have have a tritium lume plots, as each of the other examples pictured do...?

    Those inconsistencies along with the position of the star would have me passing on this one.

    Good luck!
     
    Edited Jan 27, 2019
    adrienhk likes this.
  9. Noddyman Jan 28, 2019

    Posts
    1,116
    Likes
    1,771
    Transitional dials can have straight “n”s in Constellation, MOY doesn’t always line up correctly, thin markers are fine and not all models have lume on dial and hands.
    I am not totally convinced there is anything wrong with this dial. It needs to be seen with a loupe to be sure.
     
    lando, Dedalus05, ConElPueblo and 2 others like this.
  10. Passover Jan 28, 2019

    Posts
    1,854
    Likes
    2,528
    The transition from S to T on mine looks different, there seems to be a step, transition should be linear

    [​IMG]

    But its very hard to tell without a straight on picture...

    I'm unshure, at first glance it looks good ::confused2::
     
    upload_2019-1-28_10-25-49.png
    adrienhk likes this.
  11. adrienhk Jan 28, 2019

    Posts
    21
    Likes
    4
    @Passover , good catch, it was quite hard to spot that one.
    Thanks all for your replies, I have now enough information to take a decision, I will pass on this one.
     
  12. ConElPueblo Jan 28, 2019

    Posts
    9,587
    Likes
    26,961
    I don't see any glaring issues either, I have to say. The C-cases with the slim markers and hands are less common than other varieties and you'll have to decide if this more dressy option is right for you.

    I had the same bracelet on a later C-case I owned once and it is unreasonably nice to have on the wrist.
     
    adrienhk and Noddyman like this.
  13. KarlsKrone Feb 7, 2019

    Posts
    25
    Likes
    6
    I think MOY doesn’t always have to line up correctly but is nice to have. I would be worried about the distance between the star and the "Constellation" lettering.

    Calibre looks legit.

    In addition I have to say the dial looks a bit "dirty" on the outer rim...hence it would need a service. Combined with the other "issues" I would suggest to keep searching.
     
    adrienhk likes this.
  14. adrienhk Feb 16, 2019

    Posts
    21
    Likes
    4
    @ConElPueblo and @KarlsKrone , thanks for your replies.
    Indeed, I have decided to keep searching, I prefer to guy a more common version of the C-case.
    I am in no rush so I will take my time.
     
  15. dra43b Aug 13, 2020

    Posts
    188
    Likes
    41
    Did the 168.027 really have a date magnifier? Desmonds Blog showed none
     
  16. MtV Aug 13, 2020

    Posts
    3,121
    Likes
    11,971
    And regarding the price: Seems ok for the white gold bezel. It’s not a bargain, but for an example in good condition with an original bracelet that’s fine from what I saw on eBay the last couple of month. Without the white gold they usually end at about 500-600€, so slightly less.
     
  17. 105012 Aug 14, 2020

    Posts
    174
    Likes
    386
    Hi dra43b, I sent pictures of the piece to the man himself and he confirmed all original. Pretty sure I spotted it on a blog article of his somewhere as well...
     
  18. 105012 Aug 14, 2020

    Posts
    174
    Likes
    386
    Not every 168.027 would have it, just a possible variation (and I much prefer this ‘interior’ magnifier to the exterior kind).
     
  19. 105012 Aug 14, 2020

    Posts
    174
    Likes
    386
    Yes, page 6 of the PDF on the C-shape Connies, there is a 168.017 with the same type of crystal...
     
    MtV likes this.
  20. 105012 Aug 14, 2020

    Posts
    174
    Likes
    386
    And also page 7 of the Accessories part 2 blog, in this case a 168.027 identical to mine (but not mine).