A dealer was offering a pretty 34mm 13ZN with an enamel dial at a Paris collectors show yesterday, saying it was from 1936. I really liked it except for the price-- and I noticed some asymetry amongst the registers which made me quite suspicious, even though I now understand this might perhaps occur to a certain level even on a legit 13ZN dial? The seller didn't want me to take any pictures or post them online for guidance. (He didn't quite say no when I asked if he could email watermarked pictures to be shared privately). But now I just found a 2014 post on Watchprosite which I would swear is the same watch (posted by a prolific Paris based collector who did not buy it but whose wife liked it). Interestingly the comments also highlight questions about the dial. http://www.watchprosite.com/page-wf.forumpost/fi-17/ti-931968/pi-6432218/ Any thoughts on this it? I must admit I've been having trouble keeping up with the various technical 13ZN dial discussions, might have to give it a try again. Anyhow, now I have those photos (never underestimate a woman's ability to get what she wants ), so here they are:
I´m not sure (!), but believe that some people had that really splendid idea: buying a "Goldberger", going to an enamel-artist to let produce similar dials as shown there in the 13.33 chapter, replacing the original but ruined metal dials - to sell it as a "13ZN enamel-dialed" beauty for 12000-18000 CHF/USD. http://www.antiquorum.com/catalog/lots/longines-lot-302-192?page=1&q=longines (Dirty Dozen 12 found it...) IMO your example is even one step below. I´d like to introduce the term "jerk-dial" for that kind of dials (but don´t want to be offensive). Just a fraudulent (?) method to pimp up 13ZNs with destroyed dials to earn some more money as one could get if he´d sell the watch with an obviously reprinted dial. rgds - h.u.
I am convinced that this is a fake dial. The signature almost appears italicized, which looks off (compare with an original "printed signature" enamel dial chronograph: http://www.watchnet.co.jp/p-eyes/products/detail.php?product_id=3939). Next, the numerals in the outer track are not the expected typeface (compare with a correct enamel dial 13ZN: http://www.watchnet.co.jp/p-eyes/products/detail.php?product_id=1139). Furthermore, the subdials are not deep enough.
Thanks gents, come to think of it I now wonder if it's the same watch... the one I saw did have some depth to the sub dials, but it might be a distortion from the photo? it would seem strange however for two strikingly similar watches like this to have been seen in the same city when they are supposed to be so rare...
This reminds me of a previous argument on the forum. It was never resolved to everybody's satisfaction. I would recommend a read: https://omegaforums.net/threads/auctionata-13zn-enamel.20222/
Correct. I forgot, that here http://longinespassion.com/oldlonginespassion/Longines_Passion/13_ZN.html are the only three + never seen (by me) in reality enamel 13ZNs. Obviously not the slightest similarity with the examples above, but not so easy to fake: No. 492, 493, 764 of the calderoni catalogue rgds - h.u.
p.s. - sorry Dirty Dozen 12: The japanese early 13zn seems to be legit and is similar to the probable fakes...