Forums Latest Members

Please help me with this one

  1. matthewG Jun 14, 2018

    Posts
    21
    Likes
    18
    899064A2-A5CA-437C-96F9-C78F8339492E.jpeg DB2EFDC8-F7D3-43D1-BBEC-3455C2148A12.jpeg F97FFFF2-AB17-46DE-942C-8ECB2DFF74FB.jpeg 54AC32E7-E1F8-412B-8170-5130AE5041E3.jpeg 8E79DFEA-6B7C-4F6C-B701-5854EEEA1144.jpeg 8FF3FD68-BFC6-4B01-B751-6274CD2C3B6C.jpeg I have a 7151 with cal 291. I’ve never seen this dial configuration. Anyone have any insight about this? Case and movement are all matching per Longines- appears the second hand might be a replacement or just broken off. The dial could be original but could be an early replacement as well. Anyone have any input they could offer? Thanks!
     
  2. Dan S Jun 15, 2018

    Posts
    18,818
    Likes
    43,265
    I haven't see this one before but at first glance it look good to me. If I wanted to be really picky I might say that the three stars look a little wonky, but they're probably fine.
     
  3. dougiedude Carpe horologium! Jun 15, 2018

    Posts
    7,162
    Likes
    74,255
    Unless there's a defect in the crystal causing distortion, those stars aren't right. They're misaligned in each of the pics, so I think they may have been added or re-done. Crown appears to be a replacement, too.

    If it were me and I were looking for a date@12, I'd keep looking; there's much better ones to be had.

    But for further edification, I think we need a veteran rodent give an opinion on this one...

    Calling @ulackfocus !
     
  4. ulackfocus Jun 15, 2018

    Posts
    25,983
    Likes
    26,974
    You rang?

    I believe that is distortion / refraction from the crystal causing what appears to be minor alignment issues with the stars. The fonts are correct for an early 1960's watch, which is what this should be, since the 291 only offered the date-at-12 option on 1961-ish calibers (very late 1960 through very early 1962). I have seen these 3 star dials before, both on stainless steel and gold plated / capped Conquests and Admirals of the era.

    The hands look correct and probably are original, but I agree with @matthewG about the second hand being broken or a poor replacement. The crown is most certainly a replacement, but that shouldn't be too hard to fix. This watch didn't have a scalloped crown to my recollection - just a normal serrated style.
     
    Screwbacks likes this.
  5. matthewG Jun 15, 2018

    Posts
    21
    Likes
    18
    This is great info thanks!
     
  6. michael22 Jun 15, 2018

    Posts
    1,790
    Likes
    1,897
    The dial appears to have had lume outside the battons, but just black paint on the hands. Would that be correct?
     
  7. Dan S Jun 16, 2018

    Posts
    18,818
    Likes
    43,265
    I was assuming that those hands had lume that had aged to a very dark color. Or perhaps the lume had been removed and replaced with paint? In any case, you're correct that if there is lume on the dial, there should definitely be lume on the hands.