I would be interested in the Fora's thoughts on the values of the classic 145.022 and the more more modern, let's say modern vintage, 3592.50? Overall, it seems both are great values for the $$, with good 145.022 rising a bit since I've been looking. Do you all think the 3592.50 will hold and rise in value with the 145.022s? Anyway, I've been thinking about this, and wondering what others, thoughts are, as I am currently on the hunt for one or both.

Appreciate thoughts and opinions !

 

Depends on how old the 145 is. Are we talking about a 145 from the '60s or early '70s? Then those values will rise faster than a more modern 3592. If we're talking about a late-70s - early 90s 145.022, then I don't see them rising terribly quickly compared to the 3590/92 since they're a) more or less the same watch, and b) relatively plentiful in the market.
They're still very cool watches though, and because of the low prices I think they're the best value in mechanical watches, period.

 

Having said that the word "value" is currently the most written in the forum, it would be more interesting to point out that there are many subtle differences between references 145.022 and 3592.50. Is someone able to point out a few of them?

 

@watchtink @abrod520 Good points. You guys really are right, the 145.022 are not all equal. I mean an early 70's one with step dial is a far different and more unique and sought after watch than a late 80's for example. Which points out it's not a reference num vs. reference num. comparison. I would expect the early 70's step dials in original condition to be much more sought after and valued. That would be my guess. Is the answer that I need a 3592.50 display back AND a 70's step dial 145?

 

Afraid so. And a pre-moon. Probably a Cal. 321 too. And a straight-lug pre-Professional to round it out