A friend just pulled the trigger on this one, but he wants to know if the watch is redialed. I'm not an expert on these Chronos but there are some things I don't like (the polishing job, unmatched subdial hands, etc...) Any opinions?
Poor redial and overall a poor example. Case also looks like a South American rather than a swiss case. I'd say the value of the watch is melt value for the case plus the cal. 320 movement value. Full listing here: http://www.ebay.com/itm/STUNNING-OM...es_Watches_MensWatches_GL&hash=item1c2ae03087Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network Same seller who sold the misrepresented "NOS" Golden Seamaster cal. 751.
OUCH, that's a really bad redial and a poor case. A BAD buy, especially when you see what this one went for. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...%2BjcLnhqkAmWQBQwce3k%3D&orig_cvip=true&rt=ncPurchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network
And to think the seller describes the dial this way: "The original, unrestored dial is in virtual mint condition" The hype and hyperbole from this seller as I've said before is particularly shameless.
That sucks. Hope he can get a refund. The seller did say it was a perfect unrestored dial so he can claim "item not as described".
I paid 2200 USD for my cal320 which admittedly needs a full overhaul but that's ~700 including parts, the dial is clean and 100% original. That's just for a point of reference
Out of interest, how can you tell its a redial ? Are you relying on knowledge of the original dial, or are there other (typical) tell tale signs you're seeing ?
The other guys no doubt know more than me on this, but its a 1958 watch that has no water resistance at all really, and pushers that don't seal to any significant extent, for it to be that pure white would have to be an act of god.
Wrong fonts, too dark and wrong style for subdials (belongs to cal. 33.3 rather than cal. 320), and tritium symbol used with swiss made in a dial with no luminous and during an era when radium and not tritium was used. Essentially everything is wrong with the dial - just a poorly done job.
The comparison between the reaction to this watch here, and the reaction where the buyer posted it on TRF is rather stark: https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?p=3554330
Yea its never fun to see anyone spending their hard earned cash and not getting their money's worth, its not the buyer's fault that he didn't do enough research considering the seller's claims amount to outright lying about the dial and came across as rather convincing unless you have people around that know exactly what they're looking for. That's part of the reason we haven't taken on any sponsors, as we don't want to be in a position where we're defending someone selling crap's reputation in order to keep us getting paid.
This watch is for sale again on ebay so it was returned after all - clearly the correct decision in this case.
