Many thanks for the analysis - much appreciated.

I would like to focus on one aspect, the markings on the reverse of the dials.

I'm not sure whether you believe the dials to be Stern or not (you start by saying that they are and then conclude that they are not).

Both dials have the '94' Stern Freres Client Code.
Both dials have the '076' Stern Freres dial type.
The '94*076' markings are exactly the same as the markings on a white dial SAS Polarouter.

There are various sources on the internet that explain this system of dial markings in the context of Rolex (which had a Client Code of 103).

These black SAS dials are not redialled Polarouter or Polerouter dials. The reason I can be sure of that is because there are no holes where a logo had previously been riveted to the dial. All UG logos on Polerouter dials are riveted in place, something that I only realised myself recently.

I think this leaves 3 possibilities:

1) They are genuine Stern dials produced for UG. I would accept that we don't know why they were produced or what they were used for.

2) They are incredibly elaborate fakes, where the redialler had knowledge of the Stern Freres markings on the reverse of a genuine SAS Polarouter, of which there are less than 15 known examples, a number of which are in the hands of the family of the original owner.

3) They are redialled SAS Polarouter dials

I personally think that the first of these scenarios is more likely.

Are you saying that you believe the second scenario to be true?

 

By "they are not original stern Or ug"

I meant

1. produced by stern AND printed by stern with logo for UG
2. Produced by stern and printed by UG with SAS logo

They are however produced by stern AND may have had a different paint scheme ...

 

you are correct, that was bad info on my part (when I posted that the back of my dial was not black, when it clearly is in the photo).
It's just angled in the light differently than the one from @Mazoue
I will go back and correct my post now, sorry for the confusion.

 

So you are saying that it is a Stern dial that was redialled at a later date?

But then it would have a different number on the reverse and not exactly the same as an SAS Polarouter?

Different Stern dials have different numbers as I have explained. I could show you the reverse of several Stern Polerouter dials, all with ‘94’ client code but, unsurprisingly, higher dial numbers.

 

so, are you saying that the numbering on back of dial proves that it is a black SAS ? Where is the evidence for that ? It could be a date, model, type or stock code and have nothing to do with dial configuration. Why would they use the same code for a white or a black dial ?

 

A few more thoughts.....

We've had questions since the start of this thread about the missing polarouter text, the different lower text layout, and the missing swiss. We don't have any answers on that, maybe we never will, but it seems an incredibly obvious mistake to attribute to a redialer? Surely someone capable of producing this quality dial can get the text in the right position and size, and put swiss on the bottom?

I don't think the seller of my watch, from ebay, is a watch person, their account looks more like an antiques "picker". At the moment they have three things for sale, and old yeast bowl, a vintage can of spray paint, and box of spa time bromide tablets. They told me they purchased the SAS watch as part of a group lot of old watches from a woman, the watches had belonged to her husband who had passed away, and that was all he knew. He said neither he nor the woman assumed the watches had much value, and he was quite surprised in the interest. (I assume he must have googled SAS UG and at least figure out something about it being potentially unusual watch, because that was in the title of the listing). It was up for a starting bid of $200, and had no bids, and I made an offer, and that was it.

The theory that this second example came from the same redialer as the first, and was put together after that one surfaced, in a gold capped case this time no less, and on a dial with moisture damage, and then brought to market on ebay through an older woman in a bulk lot, via a low level antiques picker, for a modest sum, strains credulity, at least to me. That is some next level conspiracy stuff. Wait wait wait...........of course unless that's what they WANT us to think. Maybe the third example is actually going to be the money watch, and the first two just laid the groundwork

If these are fakes/franken/redial and someone is releasing them properly, I would think you would bring a second example of the exact same type as the first. It was in better condition, and the SS case is more desirable. And then take it to one of the big auction houses, and list it for $50K. That kind of scenario would bear more scrutiny.

Alternatively, the info we have so far seems pretty straight forward, just on face value. We have two watches now, the dials are exactly the same, the backs of the dials are the same, they are both in -4 cases, and they both came to market via non collectors. Pretty simple.

And just to be clear, I'm not arguing for the watch because I own it. It was the other way around, I bought the watch because I already felt it was, in all probability, authentic. (I could see the exact same printing details on the dial from the ebay pics as from the earlier example in this thread, and that was enough for me to purchase).

I will say this, it is quite a delightful mystery !! I love UG

 

Now we’re getting somewhere.

I am saying that the black SAS dials and the white SAS have the same number. This is not coincidence.

Every other UG Stern dial I have seen has a different number. The Polerouter dials I’ve seen all have higher dial numbers (i.e. greater than 76) because they were produced at a later date.

 

Some catalogue descriptions from Christie’s and Phillips respectively, which reference the Stern numbering system.

‘Each dial was individually stamped with a number code and Stern Frères star symbol. The present dial is stamped 103*989 2, the number 103 being the Stern Frères code for Rolex, 989 referring to the dial type and 2 indicating that it is the second example of this particular dial made.’

‘The records of the legendary dial makers Stern Frères show that this dial, with serial number 103 (Rolex code at Stern) * (meaning made by Stern) and 770 (order number) on the back of the dial’

 

Did you ever confirm the source of the information ? Reading through the entire thread there are still questions on whether manufactures code pertains to UG. That was never conclusively established ... Looking at a number of rolex dials, there does not seem to be any relationship in numbering ...




You quote archives, where are they and Where is the evidence showing that relationship as well as the following number placing it at a specific point in time ?

 

I am at odds how you can say that the quality of the emblem looks good. It looks a lot smudgier and lacks significant quality when compared to the original. So does the text as well as missing Polarouter and Swiss ...

 

The simple explanation for this could well be that whoever did the printing, knowing that it would be different from the others, used the text layout on the gold dial for his guild ... I am at odds why the Polerouter and swiss was missed out !

 

Here is a list of the Polerouters that I've had serviced, where I have an image of the reverse of the dial and which had a Stern dial. Unfortunately I had many more serviced before I realised how useful the information on the reverse of the dial is. I now insist on a photo of the reverse of the dial. I do have many more photos but not all Polerouter dials were made by Stern; many of the early Pola/Polerouter dials were made by Singer and some later dials by Beyeler.



A few points of interest:

- All have the UG client code of 94

- They are in Stern Dial Number order. Apart from one outlier, this also places the watches in UG Serial Number order. I accept that this is a small sample but there is a clear pattern here with later watches having higher Stern Dial Numbers.

- Two of the watches, both gold capped Broad Arrow Polerouters, that are very close in serial number have the same Stern Dial Number

- One of the two dials with the same Stern Dial Number is black (S20214-13) and the other is gold (S20214-14). It is therefore clear that dials with the same Stern Dial Number need not be the same colour.

 

It is a very small sample and cannot be seen as conclusive evidence but i am open to the possibility that dials were produced for UG. However, one step at the time. I have not seen the white polarouter with the same supplier/type number. Please show that one ...

 

I see your point. There are many aspects of the dial I am uncomfortable with which are mentioned throughout this thread and perhaps, will never be resolved. Your claim would have further weight if @Lucas would share his example ...

The two examples that have been shared by @Mazoue and @bgrisso are different and print seems to have degraded in quality between the two. It would be nice to hear from @woodwkr2 and bubawatch ...

However, as difficult as it may be, as a forum, we need to come together and establish whether it is possible that the dial or dials could be some sort of pre SAS test run or (i hate the word) prototype. The discussion has has been limited to very few forum members. We should aim to include as many members of the UG forum as possible. It would be good to hear other views for and against and establish what's the consensus of the Forum.

 

Question for @Mazoue and @bgrisso - How is the SAS logo applied to the black dial?

Is the SAS logo printed on top of the black dial, as was clearly done to the white dial example? Or was the SAS logo produced in the traditional "galvanic sandwich" method, where the underlying gilt dial is exposed through the black in negative relief?

 

Printed

 

The gold is printed on top of the black, just to be completely clear.

 

I hear you. I was also thinking the P word myself yesterday, which I hate to use also, but perhaps might actually be appropriate in this case.

 

I still don't see an issue with the dials themselves.
The issues i see, is whether or not either of the watches are likely to have been born like this originally.
My own opinion, in light of *current* evidence, is: very unlikely, but still possible.

One is in a steel case (20217-4), and the other is in a gold capped case (20214-4).
The steel one is a 2nd execution case (168 serial), the gold capped is a 1st execution case (164 serial).
White dial SAS polarouters were all first execution cases (164 serial).

The steel one has lumed hands, the other does not.
Both "-4" subreferences should be lumed hands and dial, but neither dials have lume.

White SAS dials had their own subreference (-6), which were never advertised as being available to the public.
These two black dial examples are in cases where other dials should be - lumed black Pola (one 1st ex, one 2nd ex) dials, with lumed dauphine hands.

Without further examples, I'd guess they were either some special order modifications, or test dials that were never put into manufacturing and and eventually found in a drawer and made their way into cases.
Considering they have the same order numbers, perhaps UG ordered 100 white, and 100 black, and decided to go with white in the end for the final SAS watch.
We can all speculate as much as we want whilst we wait for more to surface.