Roast my speed

Posts
1,616
Likes
3,857
I remarked that @Spacefruit updated his speed chart recently, adding some finer granularity in the cosmetic scale: there are now 5 categories to choose from, poor/fair/good/very good/excellent. Thanks, by the way, for the work you have done!

Small unimportant details are keeping me sane nowadays, and I have been wondering how my own speedy could be cosmetically rated using this scale. It is notoriously difficult to precisely grade a watch besides a binary grading poor/good, as it is somewhat subjective. We all have different dealbreakers and standards... and a "good" rated watch may still be unpleasant, while a "fair" one may end up prettier.

Anyway, here is a pretty picture conveying (I hope) the general impression of a well worn, but still pretty watch:



The case was incorrectly refinished at some point : sides were polished, bevels are still here but not crisp anymore, top is brushed. Must have been done by a Rolex fanboy 馃榿. Pushers are screw fit, not friction fit. Standard service pushers were replaced by me with smaller pushers, found in a box full of old discarded Speedy pushers among other things. Are they from a Speedy? Who knows.
Movement is clean, s/n was not in the usual bounds and extract rejected. Endlinks are aftermarket.
Hour counter dial is scarred, it shows clearly in some pictures/lighting, not always.



My own assessment of the case and handset/dial would be something around fair, but I saw few watches described as fair or good that do not look better that mine.
What's yours? 馃嵖
Edited:
 
Posts
2,086
Likes
2,897
I think it is too good to be poor and too fair to be good... 馃榾
 
Posts
1,616
Likes
3,857
No, a -63. More precisely, that is what the caseback says. Without any extract (sn is in the 20077xxx range), I can't offer a definitive datation.
 
Posts
1,372
Likes
2,000
I do like how the bezel has evenly ghosted, much more attractive than when it goes splotchy
 
Posts
1,616
Likes
3,857
I do like how the bezel has evenly ghosted, much more attractive than when it goes splotchy

I like it too: I rarely enjoy patina but I prefer evenly ghosted bezels on Speedmasters and Submariners to new looking ones.
 
Posts
1,174
Likes
7,600
There should be another grade...."May not be collector grade, but perfect as a daily wearer"
 
Posts
128
Likes
558
I think it is too good to be poor and too fair to be good... 馃榾

I agree.... Its extra-medium!
 
Posts
94
Likes
60
"Still pretty" is modest. A dive bar beauty is my experience. I love how the bright white hands still pop off the dial and contrasts with the aged colors. If the watch is entirely put together, it seems well matched and sings harmony to this drunk, gap toothed, quadraplegic bottom dweller. It doesn't feel right to compare a tool watch to that lead boxed, never seen the light of day, now it's luxury, prissy Ed White that erased wabi sabi from this board and messed with my head. Yours is a darling survivor invisible to scalawags and degraded by some, but a beauty never the less.
 
Posts
7,805
Likes
35,448
Was the Extract rejected, or did it come back with a different reference?...There's a big difference...
 
Posts
1,616
Likes
3,857
Was the Extract rejected, or did it come back with a different reference?...There's a big difference...

It was before the new extract procedure : I was just refunded without explanation. I did not try again afterwards, I don't really want to pay for ... not much probably. I just assume that the movement, while period correct, is "wrong".

Edit : Then again, I was more interested in this thread by the cosmetic classification than the internal minutiae...
Edited: