- Posts
- 256
- Likes
- 307
Hal10000
·Can't find much info on this guy. Anybody have any experience?
I know the bracelet isn't original.
I know the bracelet isn't original.
TRI-COMPAX 181101-2 Are these Super Rare?
- Posts
- 173
- Likes
- 389
fibonacci
·Some information on a 481101/02 here, which looks like the same reference or quite close:
- Posts
- 3,616
- Likes
- 8,373
bgrisso
·I think it's the same ref, probably someone is just mixing up the starting digit 4 with a 1 ? OP, who supplied the ref number for this watch? It's hard to make out from the other thread listed above, but the caseback seems to show a 4, not a 1 ?
I also agree the red hand should be over the moonphase/date subdial, not the hour subdial, I think the two hands are swapped.
Anyhow you definitely do not see them very often, I think they are super cool !
I also agree the red hand should be over the moonphase/date subdial, not the hour subdial, I think the two hands are swapped.
Anyhow you definitely do not see them very often, I think they are super cool !
- Posts
- 256
- Likes
- 307
Hal10000
·I think it's the same ref, probably someone is just mixing up the starting digit 4 with a 1 ? OP, who supplied the ref number for this watch? It's hard to make out from the other thread listed above, but the caseback seems to show a 4, not a 1 ?
I also agree the red hand should be over the moonphase/date subdial, not the hour subdial, I think the two hands are swapped.
Anyhow you definitely do not see them very often, I think they are super cool !
Hello good sir!
It was at an auction house. Not much info on these guys!
Interesting!
I was under the impression that on 6 digit references the first digit denotes the metal. "1" being yellow gold.
Maybe I was misinformed.
- Posts
- 256
- Likes
- 307
Hal10000
·I think it's the same ref, probably someone is just mixing up the starting digit 4 with a 1 ? OP, who supplied the ref number for this watch? It's hard to make out from the other thread listed above, but the caseback seems to show a 4, not a 1 ?
I also agree the red hand should be over the moonphase/date subdial, not the hour subdial, I think the two hands are swapped.
Anyhow you definitely do not see them very often, I think they are super cool !
Now that I look closely at this photo is does seem that this is just a blurry photo of a 188101/2
The 4 could be a 1
And the 6 could be an 8.
Makes more sense, no?
- Posts
- 3,616
- Likes
- 8,373
bgrisso
·Hello good sir!
It was at an auction house. Not much info on these guys!
Interesting!
I was under the impression that on 6 digit references the first digit denotes the metal. "1" being yellow gold.
Maybe I was misinformed.
I'm not as familiar with these later references and the 6 digit code, I think it's maybe more complicated than that chart you posted? (Also is that a typo showing the 4XXXXX and 5XXXXX both mean plated, as I'm pretty sure 5 means 14K ? )
Anyhow the ref number and serial are often lost because they are so lightly engraved, the reason I am saying it is a 481101 is that I am going off that other thread where we have two bits of information.....1) the photo above (although it's hard to discern if that is definitely a 4?................ and 2) @billving said he used to own one of these, the ref was not visible, but he researched it and determined it was a 481101, so I am assuming he knows what he's talking about?
- Posts
- 256
- Likes
- 307
Hal10000
·Did the seller provide the reference number, or it was visible in photos, or you came up with the number?
I'm not as familiar with these later references and the 6 digit code, I think it's maybe more complicated than that chart you posted? (Also is that a typo showing the 4XXXXX and 5XXXXX both mean plated, as I'm pretty sure 5 means 14K ? )
Anyhow the ref number and serial are often lost because they are so lightly engraved, the reason I am saying it is a 481101 is that I am going off that other thread where we have two bits of information.....1) the photo above (although it's hard to discern if that is definitely a 4?................ and 2) @billving said he used to own one of these, the ref was not visible, but he researched it and determined it was a 481101, so I am assuming he knows what he's talking about?
All good points. This was the auction house provided number. Now that you mention it though, I don't know how they came up with the number in that it has been polished off.
🤷🏼
Super cool watch though!
- Posts
- 173
- Likes
- 389
fibonacci
·As a data point in the 4 vs 1 discussion, there also exists a 481101/03 which looks very much like the same case with a slight dial variation. I agree with @bgrisso that 181101 is probably just a mistake. (There does also exist a 181102 but it's a distinctly different case.)
https://www.casowatches.com/catalogo/tricompax-14kt-48110103-untouched/
https://www.casowatches.com/catalogo/tricompax-14kt-48110103-untouched/
- Posts
- 256
- Likes
- 307
Hal10000
·As a data point in the 4 vs 1 discussion, there also exists a 481101/03 which looks very much like the same case with a slight dial variation. I agree with @bgrisso that 181101 is probably just a mistake. (There does also exist a 181102 but it's a distinctly different case.)
https://www.casowatches.com/catalogo/tricompax-14kt-48110103-untouched/
Good call and nice detective work! This certainly looks like it. Assuming the dial differences lie in the "/2" vs the "/3"
Thanks again fellas. Looks like the reference they listed is a mistake.
- Posts
- 3,616
- Likes
- 8,373
bgrisso
·Very cool Tri, I would be curious what it goes for
Similar threads
- Posts
- 9
- Views
- 794
- Posts
- 2
- Views
- 361
- Posts
- 9
- Views
- 5K
- Posts
- 9
- Views
- 4K
- Posts
- 13
- Views
- 3K
