- Posts
- 9,957
- Likes
- 15,636
padders
路路Oooo subtitles!On an artists impression? Many of which were wildly different to production models?
Let me return for a second to the specific case of the -65 vs the 64 and use the principle of Occam's razor. It is plain to see that the overwhelming majority of -65s seen on a quick google search or on here have facets of some form. It is also plain to see that most -64s do not. Why did this mysterious talented refinisher who was able to put such uniform chamfers on the -65 models shy away from doing so to the -64s? The logical explanation is the that the -65 had them and the -64 didn't, not that all the -65s had them added and the -64s for some reason have been spared. The -64 had a sharply radiused curved join between side and top. The -65 (and IMO many earlier models) had facets on the lugs.
Refinishing well is not easy and most times when done by someone other than the factory it leads to soft, rounded facet joins, not a uniform sharp result, that takes sophisticated machinery and skill and is why most refinished vintage watches look crap and are to be avoided.
I can see why you are keen to believe what you believe but I don't think either the weight of evidence or the learned opinion of many other collectors supports it. Did some models have no chamfer, evidently yes. Did all models have none? No, not a chance.
By the way, there has already been a 105.003-63 posted in this thread which has very visible facets, so that doesn't really help the case for that model being like the -64...
Let me return for a second to the specific case of the -65 vs the 64 and use the principle of Occam's razor. It is plain to see that the overwhelming majority of -65s seen on a quick google search or on here have facets of some form. It is also plain to see that most -64s do not. Why did this mysterious talented refinisher who was able to put such uniform chamfers on the -65 models shy away from doing so to the -64s? The logical explanation is the that the -65 had them and the -64 didn't, not that all the -65s had them added and the -64s for some reason have been spared. The -64 had a sharply radiused curved join between side and top. The -65 (and IMO many earlier models) had facets on the lugs.
Refinishing well is not easy and most times when done by someone other than the factory it leads to soft, rounded facet joins, not a uniform sharp result, that takes sophisticated machinery and skill and is why most refinished vintage watches look crap and are to be avoided.
I can see why you are keen to believe what you believe but I don't think either the weight of evidence or the learned opinion of many other collectors supports it. Did some models have no chamfer, evidently yes. Did all models have none? No, not a chance.
By the way, there has already been a 105.003-63 posted in this thread which has very visible facets, so that doesn't really help the case for that model being like the -64...
