The more I look at this watch, seems more questionable things I see about it. https://www.ebay.com/itm/113242519108?ul_noapp=truePurchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network
Seller discloses that this is a restored watch which probably explains the dial... I'd want an archives extract from Longines. Re that case...Seems like a lot of trouble to go to execute a fake. Makes me appreciate how lucky I was to find mine.
Firstly, this is not a cal. 13.33Z as stated on eBay and in your title. This is a Val. 22GH. Secondly, a number of hands do not look correct, a clear sign that this is not an unmolested piece. The signature on the dial looks wrong. As stated above, maybe this is explained by the eBay description. I think that the case, however, looks okay. Longines may be able to confirm this.
How did you deduce that? Not true. Gold case production was outsourced. This case was produced by B. et C. Dubois. The serial number of this watch is in line with other Val. 22GH Longines.
While we are on the subject of fine looking 13.33 Longines, what do we think of this one! https://www.ebay.com/itm/Stunning-L...=true&nordt=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network Was the 13.33 just an indicator of the size of the movement? I didnt think Longines ever made as low a quality as this thing? Is it possible that all of the chrono modules (and jewels) have fallen out over the last century or so? and someone has replaced all the bridges with this chaton-free three quarter plate?