Forums Latest Members

Thoughts/knowledge on 1950s “science dial”

  1. buddman Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    183
    Likes
    147
    Any info re reference, authenticity, similar models etc appreciated.

    David

    E4FE8C7B-DDA4-4843-92DC-4748EFEB4E6E.jpeg A3BC71AE-16B9-43E8-9897-12A18CFB682E.jpeg 4155B55E-238D-4D36-BF52-4EF2692A7C63.jpeg
     
    Benbradstock likes this.
  2. DirtyDozen12 Thanks, mystery donor! Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    2,677
    Likes
    4,592
    Almost certainly a redial. Totally incongruous with the date of the watch. The one odd detail is that the sub-dial font is quite similar to a known variant.
     
    minutenrohr, Benbradstock and Mark020 like this.
  3. buddman Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    183
    Likes
    147
    Looks pretty good quality printing for a reprint? Plus dial print loss around the 1 o’clock area.
     
  4. S.H. Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    1,515
    Likes
    3,511
    1/5th seconds track ... with a subdial for seconds, looks strange to me.
     
  5. DirtyDozen12 Thanks, mystery donor! Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    2,677
    Likes
    4,592
    Sub-dial design is of late 1940s and 1950s sei tacche dials whereas the scientific dial design is primarily seen on Longines from the 1930s and early 1940s. It just does not fit.
     
  6. buddman Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    183
    Likes
    147
    Thanks!
     
  7. oinkitt Sep 9, 2019

    Posts
    422
    Likes
    811
    I think the dial is original. God knows what happened to the print at the "1" area.
     
  8. oinkitt Sep 9, 2019

    Posts
    422
    Likes
    811
    It is missing the screws that hold the movement in the case
     
  9. w154 Sep 9, 2019

    Posts
    2,532
    Likes
    5,454
    I’m out of my depth with vintage Longines but I thought the dial looked good on this one. If the dial and case/movement are from different periods could it just have been transplanted from an earlier watch ?
     
  10. buddman Sep 9, 2019

    Posts
    183
    Likes
    147
    I too think the dial looks good, but shared the thought it might have been transplanted.
     
  11. oinkitt Sep 9, 2019

    Posts
    422
    Likes
    811
    I think it consistent with the watch. The extract would confirm it.
     
    Benbradstock likes this.
  12. S.H. Sep 9, 2019

    Posts
    1,515
    Likes
    3,511
    @oinkitt , @w154

    Sorry to insist, but could somebody explain to me why a 1/5th track at the periphery of a subsecond sector dial even makes sense? To me it does not. So two possibilities in my opinion, 1) fake fantasy dial and 2) real dial for a sweep seconds modified with an added subdial printing. Could be, as fonts do not match at all, hard to tell with a small picture. Also, the seconds hand look bogus too, plus missing screws... I would not touch this one with a long pole.

    Option 2) may even be an interesting one, but would it be a factory modified dial? I doubt it...
     
  13. michael22 Sep 9, 2019

    Posts
    1,790
    Likes
    1,897
    The subdial looks poorly aligned: rotated counterclockwise.
     
  14. oinkitt Sep 9, 2019

    Posts
    422
    Likes
    811
    I'm not a betting man and I would put my money on it being original. I don't know why the 1/5th track was included.... maybe because it looks good. I have a similar Omega somewhere.
    I own over 100 vintage Longines and have looked at 1000s, after a while you just get a feel for them. Having said that, I have been wrong in the past but I don't think this is one of those cases.
    I am more intrigued with the missing dial print at the "1' position.
     
    Benbradstock and S.H. like this.
  15. w154 Sep 9, 2019

    Posts
    2,532
    Likes
    5,454
    Could it have been from a 12.68 chronograph ?

    Are the dial feet in the same place ?
     
    bobbee and Benbradstock like this.
  16. Tony C. Ωf Jury member Sep 9, 2019

    Posts
    7,348
    Likes
    24,044
    I'd say that it is an original dial, with the distinct possibility of a re-lume. I haven't looked into whether it began its life in that case, so have no opinion on that topic.

    If it is a redial, I'd like to give some work to the artist. ;)
     
    Benbradstock likes this.
  17. oinkitt Sep 9, 2019

    Posts
    422
    Likes
    811
    Relume??????????????????? I think not.
     
  18. Tony C. Ωf Jury member Sep 9, 2019

    Posts
    7,348
    Likes
    24,044
    You can think what you like, but such bright and clean radium on a 70+ year old dial would be very unusual at best, let alone matched up with hands that are completely dissonant.
     
    Benbradstock likes this.
  19. oinkitt Sep 9, 2019

    Posts
    422
    Likes
    811
    That's rather specious reasoning. How do you know that it is actually lume?
     
  20. ConElPueblo Sep 9, 2019

    Posts
    9,587
    Likes
    26,961
    If it isn't the lumed hands are of concern...

    I'm going with original Longines dial installed in a later case w/ incorrect hands :cautious:

    It positively reeks of being a put-together.