Hello all,

Just wondering what the cause of oxidation on the hands of these watches is - anyone know what the plating is? Especially on examples which clearly have original and very clean dials, but on which the hands have clearly got some spotting.

A few examples below. Two nice 2846s for sale in Japan, taken off Chrono24, and then a pic of a really nice Calendar I’ve just bought (ignore the specs below the Seamaster text, these were specs of dust which were removed as the watch is currently being serviced - and the dial is immaculate).

Is there anything that can be done to restore hands, or is the only ‘fix’ a new set?

Thanks!

Edit - I want to note a couple of things. Firstly in all three cases, where there are silver dial markers, they are not oxidised like the hands. I wonder why?
Secondly I’d like to clarify that if I did get a new set (suggestions please!) I would obviously keep the originals.

 

My guess would be that the speed of corrosion depends on a) the thickness of the metal and b) their exposure to air. Hands do much worse in this regard than indices.

The can be cleaned and polished to a degree, but really only up to a point. Finding non-luminous replacements in great shape will be a hell of a challenge, though.

 

Nobody knows why there is some corrosion on the hands of a given 70 year old watch on the internet. It is what it is. Dials and hands are different, they don't always age exactly the same way. This is true for lume, plating, etc. If you don't like the way the watch looks, my advice is don't buy it; just wait for a better one. You might get lucky and it might clean up a little, but you shouldn't count on it.

 

I would love to find better hands for this dial...

 

It’s not a huge issue. My question was theoretical, and was asking why might hands and indices age differently; what sort or coating is it etc.

I also forget how small these watches are; at 34mm, they look a lot smaller in the flesh than they do in photos online, where every detail is exaggerated.

My suggestion would be a WTB.

 

After reading a number of your posts, I have a suggestion. Have you considered a modern vintage-style watch? There are a lot of great vintage re-issues these days.

 

I’ll address my point about the sizing first: this was merely to say that details in photos online often don’t appear or are a lot less visible when looking at these watches in the flesh. As a matter of fact I dislike large watches - and for me large is anything over about 40/42mm. I very regularly wear a 33mm Longines that is also extremely slim as it’s a quartz watch. These watches don’t need to be large; they have a great presence even at their ‘small’ 34mm.

To my second point, about the hands: here, I was merely focusing on a small defect which is slightly more noticeable due to how clean the dial is. I am a huge fan of originality, and having owned a classic car (1960s), appreciate the value of preserving this. However, I equally understand that there are cases where it is relatively easy to make something look/function slightly better, without affecting the originality of the piece. In this case (and since this post I’m less bothered about this now) finding a new set of hands, fitting them, and safely storing the old set so they may be refitted in future. For the sake of argument, it it was a case of messing with the original dial finish, I wouldn’t even entertain the idea.

With regard to modern reissues: I have seen a number of brands do this, and Omega in particular have a few lovely pieces. However, to me they are simply too big in most cases, and just don’t look right on the wrist (I have slim wrists, but still they are large watches). Coupled with the bold retro styling I think they’re just too much, but I understand why they make them larger and also get the appeal. I like to look at them but probably wouldn’t own/wear one over a vintage piece.

I appreciate your advice, but I also wanted to portray here that I’m not out of my depth and am enjoying learning about these watches. I very much appreciate the advice of the forum and knowledgeable users, and any questions I ask are merely to tap into this base.

 

I know of one sure explanation because I have witnessed it happening twice with two watches in my collection.

It's next to impossible to keep non-condensing (and therefore generally invisible) moisture out of a vintage watch.

Under certain conditions, a watch will fog up and when it does so, depending upon the composition of the hands, just one such occasion can cause oxidation on the hands while leaving the dial pristine.

I've trotted out this example a couple of times now:



Above is my Sherpa graph as it appeared years ago when I first purchased it. The previous owner apparently had the hands painted white in an attempt to cover the oxidation.

Closeup of central seconds:



Years later I obtained a NOS hand set and here we have a photo of the watch before just one instance of condensation, a week after full service and a hand swap, and just a day after fogging up:



In the upper photo there is no bleed of iron oxide into the luminous material.

After just one instance of condensation, there was enough oxidation to stain the luminous material.

There are many examples of vintage watches where the dial is in excellent condition and the hands are "rusted." It would have been great if the hands of most vintage watches were made of a stainless alloy, but apparently such is not the case.

The photo below shows a watch that I purchased with damaged hands and a great dial. I subsequently had the hands relumed.

Some people would think: "Hey, that must be a replacement dial," but in many cases they'd be incorrect.

The second watch that fogged up was Gallet MC-45M which had blued hands. Fortunately, there was no damage afterward. Perhaps blued hands are more resistant to oxidation.

 

Thanks for a well informed and detailed reply! I’m struck by how quickly oxidation shows up on even NOS hands. I guess due to the age of the lume, the surface isn’t as well sealed and that would potentially allow for the quick ingress of any moisture.

 

What a bummer that the condensation caused those changes. Very good object lesson about exposing vintage watches to moisture.

 

My reply was even better after editing and cleaning up the typos.

Edit: I have acquired a second pair of NOS paddle hands.

Dare I replace them a second time?

 

Who knows? Perhaps they become oxidised because of just how close to the crystal they are, and also the fact that they move around, almost sweeping up the moisture? At that distance, the moisture may even be drawn to the hands by the power of static(?)

 

Here is what happened in my case . . .

I was having a house rebuilt with an extension put on. The contractors working inside had the Central air cranked up so that the place was a bit like a refrigerator. The day itself was a hot and humid summer day. I went from my AC car to the great outdoors, then into the house and back out again.

That was with the Sherpa Graph. I did not see the watch completely fogged up until I stepped outside.

A week later, I repeated the process while wearing this watch:



Fortunately, no damage.

I will not be building any additional homes and I will not be going in an out of places with huge temperature and humidity changes in future if I can prevent doing so.

 

Unfortunately, this is increasingly difficult to control in our changing world.

 

Sadly so…

 

Re the hands. When I sent a similar example off for service a while ago and asked if the hands could be polished, I was advised many 60’s Omega hands are plated, not solid steel and so cannot really be polished to clean them up.

No idea if this is true as I always assumed solid stainless (unless gold plate etc) but this is what I was told.

 

Yup. As I suspected.

 

My refinisher polished and re-plated both gold plated and steel as long as they weren't pitted

Won't know unless you try

Can always email a Parts supplier with case reference number and caliber and see if they have hands in stock

DON

 

Interesting. What would hands on a SS watch be plated with?