Opinion on a dogleg caseback

I can’t be definitive for you I’m afraid - I had noticed the engraving looked ‘beefy’ in your for sale ad.

I can confirm SGR did have varying thicknesses of engraving on dogleg case backs.
Here are two of mine - one thick one thin.
(All of my photos courtesy of watchguy)
As you can see the style of perlaging differs too, the later version has much more evident spiralling.

I notice yours is even later than my later of the two.

1. Thick - serial 25,2xx cal564
2. Thin - Serial 21,2xx cal561




my later (contemporary) medallion compared with your caseback
Mine (pre-service!)


Yours

My reply to @nanjingcigaretes was along those lines, too - thanks for the picture of the thicker font @Peemacgee
What also gives me some stomach ache is the cursive layout of the ref, reminded me of the “007” in James Bond intros and seemed overall a bit too modern for a 60s watch. But I really wouldn’t wanna make a final call.

Hi Harry
My personal opinion is that, assessing the watch overall, the shape of the caseback, the perlaging and the medallion, the case back is different but original later SGR caseback.
However, I’m going to caveat my support by saying that unless you find a similar SGR 168.005 case back with the (even) thicker ‘italic’ numerals, there is always going to be some doubt about its authenticity.

A bit of homework for you or the future owner.
Best of luck and please do report back if you find anything