Forums Latest Members
  1. DonovanMartin Aug 23, 2019

    Posts
    300
    Likes
    299
    ED8993D2-D225-4F3E-AD8F-3075A0D170DB.jpeg does this look correct?
    The lume is all but gone but other than that it looks ok to me
     
    Taddyangle likes this.
  2. BlackTalon This Space for Rent Aug 23, 2019

    Posts
    5,160
    Likes
    8,343
    Was that a CB case??? Looks like the facets on the lugs were polished away.

    More photos needed -- case and movement.
     
  3. Dan S Aug 23, 2019

    Posts
    18,604
    Likes
    42,878
    Wrong sweep hand for a -66. Service crown and pushers. Are we absolutely sure it's correct? Can you show photos of the movement (with serial number) and the inside of the case-back?
     
  4. Screwbacks Aug 24, 2019

    Posts
    1,682
    Likes
    4,857
    needs to see more pictures. i doubt it's a cb66. looks generally ok though.
     
  5. DonovanMartin Aug 24, 2019

    Posts
    300
    Likes
    299
    I’ll see about more pictures.
     
  6. abrod520 Aug 24, 2019

    Posts
    11,218
    Likes
    35,254
    If it’s a 105.012-66, it’s got incorrect chrono sweep hand and pushers. If it’s a 145.012-67 or -68, then it could be correct but it all comes down to asking price - it’ll need to be relumed at the very least in order to appear attractive
     
    Foo2rama likes this.
  7. DonovanMartin Sep 4, 2019

    Posts
    300
    Likes
    299
    finally got a few pictures. Serial starts with 2544xxxx
    backcrown.png crownandpushers.png lugs.png Speedmaster 3.jpg
     
  8. padders Oooo subtitles! Sep 4, 2019

    Posts
    8,931
    Likes
    13,873
    I think that may be a replaced caseback. The lugs, hands and pushers look -67/68 to me. The dial could be either since wide space Ts are seen on both. The serial seems right for both too!
     
  9. Dan S Sep 4, 2019

    Posts
    18,604
    Likes
    42,878
    @DonovanMartin

    If this is your watch, you should order an Extract from the Archives to figure out the reference the movement belongs to. If it's not your watch, don't buy it. It’s a franken, and not attractive.
     
    Edited Sep 4, 2019
  10. Ville_W Sep 4, 2019

    Posts
    241
    Likes
    2,434
    Regarding the lume, I agree, past my taste as well but will you be satisfied with relume? Isn’t it better to search for one with nice aged original lume?
     
    Edited Sep 4, 2019
  11. padders Oooo subtitles! Sep 4, 2019

    Posts
    8,931
    Likes
    13,873
    Assuming the bracelet is original, another clue may be gleaned by the date on the clasp.
     
  12. DonovanMartin Sep 4, 2019

    Posts
    300
    Likes
    299
    There is an Extract. Dates to November of 67
     
  13. DonovanMartin Sep 4, 2019

    Posts
    300
    Likes
    299
    Bracelet is stamped 4-68
     
  14. Dan S Sep 4, 2019

    Posts
    18,604
    Likes
    42,878
    Sorry if I missed that in your previous posts. The reference is 105-012 on the Extract? This would be useful information to include, so people aren’t forced to speculate.
     
  15. padders Oooo subtitles! Sep 4, 2019

    Posts
    8,931
    Likes
    13,873
    V late for a -66 so maybe not original to the watch or the watch is maybe not a -66. The -68 model was rolled out in October 1968. With the -67 model being sold for around a year prior to that. Bracelets were usually added by dealers though so I suppose a -66 could have sat in a safe for a couple of years before sale.

    EDIT: as above, the model on the extract will tell all surely! Nov 1967 could still be either -66 or -67, one is a 105, the other 145
     
  16. DonovanMartin Sep 4, 2019

    Posts
    300
    Likes
    299
    Sorry I didn't think about adding that.
    ST 105.012
     
  17. DonovanMartin Sep 4, 2019

    Posts
    300
    Likes
    299
    I'm wrestling with the actual deal as well. I have a -69 with extract that dates to July 4, 1969. You can see it in another post with all the questions surrounding it. The deal would be my watch plus 2 grand for the -66. The real draw for me the extract date as mentioned above. However, I won't be making the deal if there is too much wrong. I think I could live with the lume or a relume. Not a deal breaker for me. But I would like the rest to be correct.
     
  18. DonovanMartin Sep 4, 2019

    Posts
    300
    Likes
    299
    here is one of the cover. I believe there were some variants of these as well.
    movement cover.jpg
     
  19. Dan S Sep 4, 2019

    Posts
    18,604
    Likes
    42,878
    As has been mentioned, the sweep hand and pushers are incorrect for a -66. The pushers (EDIT: I meant to write crown) and dust cover are later replacements. Importantly, the distinctive CB facets on the lugs are completely gone, if they were ever there. Obviously the lume is not appealing, to say the least. The fact that the lume on the hands is so well matched to each other, and to the dial, will make some of us wonder if this is not a franken, but there's no way to know for sure. It's definitely not a collector's watch and personally I don't see the appeal. But I guess you like the November 1967 Extract?
     
    Edited Sep 4, 2019
    JwRosenthal likes this.
  20. DonovanMartin Sep 4, 2019

    Posts
    300
    Likes
    299
    I do like the extract but that is not the real value overall. That is why I posted here. My desire for a birth watch easily blinds me to reality. But you guys could care less in that aspect and have a critical eye to the reality of the time piece. I greatly appreciate that and that has helped me decide to pass. There may not be another one show up this close to my birthday, but I won't be too disappointed down the road knowing I spent a bunch of money just to scratch an itch that will go away.
     
    padders, JwRosenthal and Dan S like this.