Hey guys, I have known about this Tri-Compax for quite a while now and never had any real interest until now, for whatever reason. It's a super clean watch in steel. It's reference is 22.279, and it's in 35mm. Just want to know the general opinion on the watch, from authenticity, price, to any other comments anyone has. Thanks! Walter
It looks good, I also emailed the seller about a week ago when I first saw this, but have yet to hear back from him! Don't worry, not going to snipe this from ya, I've moved on.. But it looks like a great watch to me. A few things to note is it looks like some decisive scratches around the 1 o clock mark. Also the lume on the hands looks too new.. maybe a re-lume? Experts will chime in soon...
Just my opinion, but I don't like that printing. It seems not crisp enough to me. Here a comparison dial from the same reference, very close serial numbers
Damn now I'm all mixed up. I thought this one you posted, LouS, was a redial giveaway, based on the 6 and 3's alone.. At least the sub-dials? I'll go back into my corner now....
I like the OP's dial. I actually think the comparison dial posted by LouS is a redial. The OP's watch has had it's hands relumed, and the seconds hand is a replacement. It should also be pointed out that while the box and assorted goodies that are pictured are genuine UG, they are nowhere near contemporaneous with the watch. The goodies date to the 1990s-ish.
My instinct at first was the same as yours Lou, but it's not a redial.The second picture is better for evaluating the watch. And here are two examples from Sala's book
UG'll do that to ya...but don't take yourself out of the game yet. Witness the ensuing posts. You make a convincing case, but I will caution that there are more than a few redials in Sala. That said, these do look legit and consistent with OP's example.
Of all the tri-compax dial, this particular type (silver) seems to be the hardest to render judgment on. I also think in the same camp as Lous (although by no means am I any close to being as experienced). What really bothers me is the "tri-compax" in the OP's. It looks far from what I would expect (bigger letters, more crisp etc.)
Usually re-dials the circular groves are painted over. The one Lou posted looks like s redial to me. You have to look carefully with a jewelers loop !
My opinion that from the pictures it is original. Most dials Ive seen have arabic numerals, this one is unusual. Still would have to see it in person to give my opinion with %100 certanty.
I believe the OP's dial is legit. Agree with woodwkr2 that hands have been relumed, possibly the dial as well. The condition of the dial has me thinking NOS replacement, but it might just be a watch that's had a long slumber in a dark, dry safe. Case looks sharp.
as a UG noob what's with the different fonts for tri-compax? or is that just another UG wonderland thingy?
I'm not sure what you're referring to--if you're literally asking about the font for the "Tri-Compax" printing on the dial, the font is consistent on all of the above pictured dials with the notable exception of the one I'm calling a redial.