Thoughts on these Tri-Compax's?

wbfondren · Apr 10, 2017

I'm sorry to ask again, but my Sala's is still in the mail!

What do you all think of these two Tri's?

Screen Shot 2017-04-10 at 4.51.25 PM.png

Screen Shot 2017-04-10 at 4.51.36 PM.png

Screen Shot 2017-04-10 at 4.51.44 PM.png

Screen Shot 2017-04-10 at 4.51.50 PM.png

Screen Shot 2017-04-10 at 4.51.56 PM.png

Screen Shot 2017-04-10 at 4.52.02 PM.png

Screen Shot 2017-04-10 at 4.52.16 PM.png

Screen Shot 2017-04-10 at 4.52.23 PM.png

Screen Shot 2017-04-10 at 4.50.54 PM.png

Screen Shot 2017-04-10 at 4.51.03 PM.png

Screen Shot 2017-04-10 at 4.51.10 PM.png

bgrisso · Apr 10, 2017

Something is off with the moon phase disc on the first one. The edge of the dial is also scratched up, not sure if the chrono hand did that? But overall I like it if the price was right.

Second one don't think it should have a signed crown, can't tell about the moon phase disc, but again overall I like it at the right price. Good luck.

Mlafra · Apr 11, 2017

First one is all good a part from moonphase disk (I think that is not UG original) and a few little spots and scratches on the dial, but overall a very good example in much better shape than the vast majority of what's out there at the moment.
Second one I have some little doubts about the dial, you would need to see it live: the potential red flags I identify are not circle that encloses the top date compax, the 31 in the date compax is not in red and I cannot tell if the 6s and 9s in the hour compax at 6 o'clock are open or closed (they should be still open with this serial number). But it might be original as otherwise the graphic looks sharp, tough one to call from pictures alone.
Also, the crown should not be signed and the case looks from these pics polished a tad too much but again hard to judge from pictures alone.

wbfondren · Apr 11, 2017

Thanks, I thought the same about the moon phase disc on the steel piece. And I noticed the non-red 31 and the lack of a disc.

I also have another one that I've come across that is 38mm, but I'm waiting on more pictures. If you could give me preliminary thoughts on what you think I'd appreciate it! It looks fairly original to me. The fonts match up, the moon phase disc looks correct, the date compax looks correct with the properly aligned circle that encloses it and with the red 31, the steel lugs look original and look like they haven't been re-welded on. My only concern is the crown and possible the pushers (it almost looks like the bottom pusher is slightly farther out than the top pusher), but it could be the angle.

Please let me know what you think! Thanks.

Larry S · Apr 11, 2017

Mlafra
First one is all good a part from moonphase disk (I think that is not UG original) and a few little spots and scratches on the dial, but overall a very good example in much better shape than the vast majority of what's out there at the moment.
Second one I have some little doubts about the dial, you would need to see it live: the potential red flags I identify are not circle that encloses the top date compax, the 31 in the date compax is not in red and I cannot tell if the 6s and 9s in the hour compax at 6 o'clock are open or closed (they should be still open with this serial number). But it might be original as otherwise the graphic looks sharp, tough one to call from pictures alone.
Also, the crown should not be signed and the case looks from these pics polished a tad too much but again hard to judge from pictures alone.

I have a later 50's Tri that does not have the red 31. So might be a later dial.

Oku · Apr 11, 2017

wbfondren
Thanks, I thought the same about the moon phase disc on the steel piece. And I noticed the non-red 31 and the lack of a disc.

I also have another one that I've come across that is 38mm, but I'm waiting on more pictures. If you could give me preliminary thoughts on what you think I'd appreciate it! It looks fairly original to me. The fonts match up, the moon phase disc looks correct, the date compax looks correct with the properly aligned circle that encloses it and with the red 31, the steel lugs look original and look like they haven't been re-welded on. My only concern is the crown and possible the pushers (it almost looks like the bottom pusher is slightly farther out than the top pusher), but it could be the angle.

Please let me know what you think! Thanks.

Bottom pusher is definitely farther out. But I don't believe that this is a big problem that a watchmaker cannot solve.
Concerning the dial, it has numbers 6 and 9 without pigtails. There was a discussion about dials here not long ago but I don't recall the final result.
Here it is: https://omegaforums.net/threads/ug-tri-compax-dial.48137/

Mlafra · Apr 11, 2017

Dial of the last one 100% original, no doubt there. I would say all correct a part from, but only maybe, the crown, but you need a pic from a different angle to be conclusive on that one. Bottom pushers surely more out than top, but I am fairly sure it is more than fixable. Moonphase disk also correct just a bit "washed-out".

Oku · Apr 11, 2017

I forgot: Don't forget to test the movement! If something is broken, some parts are really difficult to source.

Thoughts on these Tri-Compax's?

wbfondren

bgrisso

Mlafra

wbfondren

Larry S

Oku

Mlafra

Oku

Similar threads

Please help for this Tri Compax 12265

Thoughts on UG Tri-Compax

UG Tri-Compax 22536 - Thoughts?

Tri Compaxes Missing 'SWISS' Signature

Should I buy this UG Tri-Compax?

Irregular Features on Early-Mid 40s Tri Compax Dials