Some interesting observations on my 22409

As mentioned in the EBay thread it finally arrived! Gave it a quick clean and after that made some pics. I recently acquired a no name VJ 22 with Spillman case and inverse pushers. The case is very similar to a 22409 but I think there are some subtle differences.



Another very interesting thing is the movement serial. I have a database with >900 of them and exactly zero doubles. Up until now...

I have little doubt about the serial/movement combi of my 22409:
1.009.643 and 210.641 because close siblings are:
https://www.invaluable.com/auction-...mpur-n-22xxx-1009xxx-vers...-106-c-7874ca0b17
with 1.009.577 and 210.576 and
https://www.sothebys.com/fr/auctions/ecatalogue/lot.48.html/2019/important-watches-ge1901
with 1.009.728 and 210.571

But I also have this one in my database: https://www.catawiki.nl/l/39040547-...niversal-262-no-reserve-price-heren-1901-1949
So reference 31223 and serial: 1.126.052 and 210.641. An identical movement serial!

Closest serials around it I have on record have movement numbers of 196k and 281k so this one seems to be out of range. Or not?

2 other 31223's :
https://watchcharts.com/listing/702439/universal-geneve-vintage-cal-262-diam-34mm-40s
and
https://avaluer.org/explore/12495518-universal_geneve_cal___262___33x40mm
Both have a (close) 210.xxx movement.



There may be a couple of options to explain this:
1) Faked movement serial
2) UG used the same numbers for both chrono and time only movements
3) Someone at UG made a mistake when sharing the designated movement numbers with the movement producers/the departement which made the inscriptions.

IMHO 1 is unlikely. If 2 why don't I have more examples. That leaves 3 but that also does not feel very Swiss....