I have bought this Connie, but can still return it. Was wondering what the community thinls regarding its authenticity. Dial seems to pass MOY test, as well as the serif script test to my eye. Seems to have fading commensurate with age. Not sure about the double T marker though, nor the fact that the second "A" in "automatic" is a little wider than the first, although I have seen similar instances on other watches too. 561 movement looks kosher due to equal wear/fading of parts; clean and rust free. Keeping about +25s/day so due for a service. I suspect the notorious 168.005 case back may be replacement/fake based on the quality of engravings and the perlage, as well as missing bricks on the observatory, but maybe I am just being anol. I am not so sure the actual case is fake due to tapered edges on the lug, flat front bezel, and bulge along the side of the case where the bezel meets the case. I like that it hasn't been dulled through over polishing. Aftermarket crystal, obviously. The database shows the 168.005 case to carry a pie-pan dial, while this is a dome. Not sure if that means anything since I know these listings are incomplete and case back could be a replacement anyway. I've spent the last few months trying to find a decent, affordable-to-me Constellation that's not overly a frankenwatch or with ugly redials; it has been quite the task! I'm thinking to settle on this one due to the condition of the dial and case, and relatively low price. What does the community think: fake or great? Lipstick on a pig or good value for the money? Thanks!
You are OBLIGATED to post an incoming thread, or... Heck yeah grab that for the price and MAKE IT YOUR OWN!
Haha thanks! Well technically I already own it, but I am still within the return period. The original photos were rather sketchy so I was pleasantly surprised at the condition when I received it. The only issue was that the movement was advertised as a 564, but in reality its a 561. I'm thinking to ask for a slight discount off the price I paid to make up for this inconsistency, and the fact that the 564 is more desirable. I appreciate all your feedback! Now the search for a band...
Hmmm...let's look at it this way then: It's a fake 564. I will handle the refund. Please PM for return address... !!!!!!
