Hey, folks:

To my eyes, this piece is really enticing. The only question I have is this: The case back is stamped "1600" but the sticker on the back notes that it is a "16014." The discrepancy is obvious, but is this a big deal? Also, the lume plots seem a bit off, but that is to be expected of a watch of this age, no?

In short, what do you think? Good grab for the money if I could get him to $4400?

Regards,

Chris

 

Sorry, is it me or has it lost it's lume at 2,4,8 & 10?

 

The case-back is stamped 16000, not 1600, which is not uncommon for a 16014. There is missing lume on the dial and what remains isn't particularly attractive to me.

 

I do apologize for the typo, but thank you for answering the question. And yes, this was my thought, too: the lume is problematic.

 

No, you're correct. This is what I was talking about. lol!

 

Ok. No trigger will be pulled.

 

Bad corrosion around the case where the case back seal goes. Id pass and find a better example. This one may have a hard time passing a pressure test.

 

The biggest problem if this watch is this:

 

I once bought a datejust that I thought was a good price at around $2800 without seeing the caseback opened. The repair bills for the pitting no longer made it the steal it seemed. Walk away.

 

Too expensive. Lum looks like he's experienced sun and moisture.

 

Case corrosion and tritium missing dots would put me off straight away, I would pass, but that’s just mho

 

Yep, I passed on this two weeks ago and instead picked up a '69 Speedy.