- Posts
- 11
- Likes
- 12
T*M*M
·Any input is much appreciated.
Soo the running seconds hand is wrong on this 2998-62. Ya?
- Posts
- 15,188
- Likes
- 44,620
Canuck
·If the minutes register hand didn’t return to zero when you pressed the RESET button, there is a problem.
- Posts
- 11
- Likes
- 12
- Posts
- 15,188
- Likes
- 44,620
Canuck
·I didn’t give you an incorrect answer. I answered the question I thought you were asking. Perhaps learn to express yourself in a way that people understand the question you are asking!
- Posts
- 11
- Likes
- 12
T*M*M
·I didn’t give you an incorrect answer. I answered the question I thought you were asking. Perhaps learn to express yourself in a way that people understand the question you are asking!
- Posts
- 7,519
- Likes
- 13,895
Evitzee
·I didn’t give you an incorrect answer. I answered the question I thought you were asking. Perhaps learn to express yourself in a way that people understand the question you are asking!
- Posts
- 606
- Likes
- 785
Franco
·It depends whit 2998 is. If I regenerate well, up to the -4. Is one type, from the -4 up is another.
These should be ok in a -6
These should be ok in a -6
- Posts
- 1,346
- Likes
- 5,948
Aludic
··@SpeedyBirthYearThe resolution of this picture isn't great, so perhaps it's just the image, but the point of the subdial hand under discussion here seems a little blunt and a little short. @T*M*M is that your concern?
Either way, I'd be more focused on the hour counter hand with these as these 2998s and 105.002s are the only ones with a hour counter hand without the obvious 'nipple' around its post. Neigh impossible to find if it isn't there. The other two subdial hands are far less specific and can be sourced more easily. And on a positive note, the watch in question seems to come with the correct hand. Nice.
At first glance, this looks like a slightly worn, yet attractive 2998-61.
Either way, I'd be more focused on the hour counter hand with these as these 2998s and 105.002s are the only ones with a hour counter hand without the obvious 'nipple' around its post. Neigh impossible to find if it isn't there. The other two subdial hands are far less specific and can be sourced more easily. And on a positive note, the watch in question seems to come with the correct hand. Nice.
At first glance, this looks like a slightly worn, yet attractive 2998-61.
- Posts
- 11
- Likes
- 12
T*M*M
·The resolution of this picture isn't great, so perhaps it's just the image, but the point of the subdial hand under discussion here seems a little blunt and a little short. @T*M*M is that your concern?
Either way, I'd be more focused on the hour counter hand with these as these 2998s and 105.002s are the only ones with a hour counter hand without the obvious 'nipple' around its post. Neigh impossible to find if it isn't there. The other two subdial hands are far less specific and can be sourced more easily. And on a positive note, the watch in question seems to come with the correct hand. Nice.
At first glance, this looks like a slightly worn, yet attractive 2998-61.
The resolution of this picture isn't great, so perhaps it's just the image, but the point of the subdial hand under discussion here seems a little blunt and a little short. @T*M*M is that your concern?
Either way, I'd be more focused on the hour counter hand with these as these 2998s and 105.002s are the only ones with a hour counter hand without the obvious 'nipple' around its post. Neigh impossible to find if it isn't there. The other two subdial hands are far less specific and can be sourced more easily. And on a positive note, the watch in question seems to come with the correct hand. Nice.
At first glance, this looks like a slightly worn, yet attractive 2998-61.
