- Posts
- 6,498
- Likes
- 10,176
Mark020
··not the sharpest pencil in the ΩF drawerThese UG dials are legit. They don’t really fit into the UG mould they are original
UG compax reference 22209
- Posts
- 337
- Likes
- 613
fizz
·This seems like a really nice and all-original version (consistent with the discussions here, including the position of the S in Swiss vs the numerals on top) at a very fair price. The only visible "concern" seems to be the heavy patina near the 20-minute mark.
The caseback serial no also seems to be in the correct 875XXX range usually seen.
https://www.windvintage.com/universal-genve-compax-reference-22209-unpolished
The caseback serial no also seems to be in the correct 875XXX range usually seen.
https://www.windvintage.com/universal-genve-compax-reference-22209-unpolished
- Posts
- 6,498
- Likes
- 10,176
Mark020
··not the sharpest pencil in the ΩF drawerNice watch but bit of a celebrity premium there IMHO
- Posts
- 3,586
- Likes
- 8,278
bgrisso
·This seems like a really nice and all-original version (consistent with the discussions here, including the position of the S in Swiss vs the numerals on top) at a very fair price. The only visible "concern" seems to be the heavy patina near the 20-minute mark.
The caseback serial no also seems to be in the correct 875XXX range usually seen.
https://www.windvintage.com/universal-genve-compax-reference-22209-unpolished
the watch looks looks extremely attractive overall IMO and there’s value in that. Plus the recent service. Seems quite reasonable to me compared to what I’ve seen on the market otherwise. I feel like a lot of sellers are asking crazy prices for these small/med cases with round pushers. The patina around lower pusher (plus maybe has this one been sitting for a while?) is probably dropping the asking price. I’m not looking for watches this size but if I was seriously in the market I would probably jump on this one.
- Posts
- 337
- Likes
- 613
fizz
·Yes, I don't think the price is unfair and the condition is good. While I own a 35mm Tri, the lug to lug of that is a respectable 43 (and it has considerable wrist presence) but I don't I could put off a 34 with 40mm lug to lug.
This was listed in mid-Aug so hasn't been on offer too long though I think it has gone through a price adjustment recently. Good entry level for those who might be curious (or like to collect these).
This was listed in mid-Aug so hasn't been on offer too long though I think it has gone through a price adjustment recently. Good entry level for those who might be curious (or like to collect these).
- Posts
- 82
- Likes
- 109
Seabass23
·I'd like to take advantage of the obvious expertise in this group and share a photo of a UG that I am looking at. I'm told it's a 22209.
One concern I have is that the dial is unlike any others I've seen.
Feedback and advice on this particular watch would be greatly appreciated.
One concern I have is that the dial is unlike any others I've seen.
Feedback and advice on this particular watch would be greatly appreciated.
- Posts
- 6,498
- Likes
- 10,176
Mark020
··not the sharpest pencil in the ΩF drawerWell the serial would be handy but - if it is <1 mio - it may be 875k. One of the largest UG batches
Some observations:
1) relumed by someone who was not overly talented
2) the UG print is pretty convincing but the 30-35-40 are not (but that may be camera/digital distortion)
3) the pushers are replaced. I do have to admit that I kind of like them but they are for sure not original
4) index hands should be straight (the hands used look older)
A typical 22209 dial looks like this but that does not rule out other dials may be legit/original. These dials have a tendency to have a colour difference between the dial and the indexes whereby the indexes become darker.
Some observations:
1) relumed by someone who was not overly talented
2) the UG print is pretty convincing but the 30-35-40 are not (but that may be camera/digital distortion)
3) the pushers are replaced. I do have to admit that I kind of like them but they are for sure not original
4) index hands should be straight (the hands used look older)
A typical 22209 dial looks like this but that does not rule out other dials may be legit/original. These dials have a tendency to have a colour difference between the dial and the indexes whereby the indexes become darker.
- Posts
- 82
- Likes
- 109
Seabass23
·Well the serial would be handy but - if it is <1 mio - it may be 875k. One of the largest UG batches
Some observations:
1) relumed by someone who was not overly talented
2) the UG print is pretty convincing but the 30-35-40 are not (but that may be camera/digital distortion)
3) the pushers are replaced. I do have to admit that I kind of like them but they are for sure not original
4) index hands should be straight (the hands used look older)
A typical 22209 dial looks like this but that does not rule out other dials may be legit/original. These dials have a tendency to have a colour difference between the dial and the indexes whereby the indexes become darker.
Another picture shows us something else that I find curious. Note the Rolex style of case back. I'm told it's stamped UG, made by Spillman. Have you seen this before?
- Posts
- 6,498
- Likes
- 10,176
Mark020
··not the sharpest pencil in the ΩF drawerSo what is the serial?
- Posts
- 82
- Likes
- 109
Seabass23
·So what is the serial?
I have a hunch that this might be a case back that was borrowed from a different watch, but I look to your expertise.
- Posts
- 6,498
- Likes
- 10,176
Mark020
··not the sharpest pencil in the ΩF drawerThats not good
- Posts
- 82
- Likes
- 109
- Posts
- 3,586
- Likes
- 8,278
bgrisso
·It would be best if you can provide photos of the interior and exterior caseback so we can make direct assessments. I'm not clear, is the seller saying that the case reference is visible, but the case serial is not (that would be hard to understand), or neither the case reference or the case serial are visible (if so how does the seller know this is a 22209?).
There are UG casebacks of that style, but you would need to research if there are any known examples on this particular reference (if we even know for sure this is the actual reference?).
My gut sense is the dial is fine, aside from the weird lume (does it say swiss or swiss made at the bottom, hard to tell?).
I agree the hands are questionable, and the pushers are not original, and if you add this all together...........lots of questions.
There are UG casebacks of that style, but you would need to research if there are any known examples on this particular reference (if we even know for sure this is the actual reference?).
My gut sense is the dial is fine, aside from the weird lume (does it say swiss or swiss made at the bottom, hard to tell?).
I agree the hands are questionable, and the pushers are not original, and if you add this all together...........lots of questions.
- Posts
- 82
- Likes
- 109
Seabass23
·It would be best if you can provide photos of the interior and exterior caseback so we can make direct assessments. I'm not clear, is the seller saying that the case reference is visible, but the case serial is not (that would be hard to understand), or neither the case reference or the case serial are visible (if so how does the seller know this is a 22209?).
There are UG casebacks of that style, but you would need to research if there are any known examples on this particular reference (if we even know for sure this is the actual reference?).
My gut sense is the dial is fine, aside from the weird lume (does it say swiss or swiss made at the bottom, hard to tell?).
I agree the hands are questionable, and the pushers are not original, and if you add this all together...........lots of questions.
I can't see it in the photo but I'm told movement is marked "CHL 381"
I believe the dial says Swiss Made.
Edited:
- Posts
- 3,586
- Likes
- 8,278
bgrisso
·hmmm yah a lot of questions that require more research. The other examples in this thread seem to have hex back, I suggested trying to find other 22209 with this knurled style back, but who knows if it's even a 22209? There's no way to just look at the rest of the case and guess the reference based on shape because there are so many varities with very small differences.
Have you seen a pic of the caseback? That's what I mean it's helpful to see photos, and actual high quality photos, because just to have someone tell you there's no numbers on it, fine, but with the right pics you might be able to determine if the caseback is significantly polished and the numbers were lost, or if the caseback finish still looks factory, etc
anyhow with the info and pics you have so far not sure what else to say.
Have you seen a pic of the caseback? That's what I mean it's helpful to see photos, and actual high quality photos, because just to have someone tell you there's no numbers on it, fine, but with the right pics you might be able to determine if the caseback is significantly polished and the numbers were lost, or if the caseback finish still looks factory, etc
anyhow with the info and pics you have so far not sure what else to say.
- Posts
- 1,475
- Likes
- 3,067
Diabolik
·P
IMHO pushers are wrong, that reference should have "pulsanti a pompa" which are impossible to find so like many other 22209s they may have been retrofitted or adapted to something newer. Check out the following thread for pusher variations.
Movement could be a 283 (13 ligne) or the later 281 (12 ligne). The 283 was used around the 40s 50s which is a little earlier than the 281. I have seen a knurled case back on the Girard Pearagaux version of the 22209 (which is identical). The pushers are rare. I have come across those pushers once before but do not remember the reference.
I don't like the dial, it looks like some sort of custom job.
I'd like to take advantage of the obvious expertise in this group and share a photo of a UG that I am looking at. I'm told it's a 22209.
One concern I have is that the dial is unlike any others I've seen.
Feedback and advice on this particular watch would be greatly appreciated.
Movement could be a 283 (13 ligne) or the later 281 (12 ligne). The 283 was used around the 40s 50s which is a little earlier than the 281. I have seen a knurled case back on the Girard Pearagaux version of the 22209 (which is identical). The pushers are rare. I have come across those pushers once before but do not remember the reference.
I don't like the dial, it looks like some sort of custom job.
- Posts
- 82
- Likes
- 109
Seabass23
·I sincerely appreciate all the information that is rolling in here.
Here are some pictures of the case back. I do not see any evidence that a serial number was ever present.
Here are some pictures of the case back. I do not see any evidence that a serial number was ever present.
- Posts
- 3,586
- Likes
- 8,278
bgrisso
·If the case ref and serial were on the exterior, the only plausible reason I can see they would be missing is if there was a personalized engraving that someone later removed, and the numbers were lost in the process. Otherwise they are usually pretty deep and I can't see them disappearing. If they were on the inside caseback there's no reason I can see they would be removed. If the caseback never had a case ref or serial I don't have an explanation.
It doesn't appear the caseback is seated properly in the case, there is a large gap. I don't know if that something as simple as the wrong gasket, or could be indicating the caseback and case were not originally paired.
Has the seller been able to come up with a convincing explanation of how they know it's a 22209?
It doesn't appear the caseback is seated properly in the case, there is a large gap. I don't know if that something as simple as the wrong gasket, or could be indicating the caseback and case were not originally paired.
Has the seller been able to come up with a convincing explanation of how they know it's a 22209?
- Posts
- 82
- Likes
- 109
Seabass23
·If the case ref and serial were on the exterior, the only plausible reason I can see they would be missing is if there was a personalized engraving that someone later removed, and the numbers were lost in the process. Otherwise they are usually pretty deep and I can't see them disappearing. If they were on the inside caseback there's no reason I can see they would be removed. If the caseback never had a case ref or serial I don't have an explanation.
It doesn't appear the caseback is seated properly in the case, there is a large gap. I don't know if that something as simple as the wrong gasket, or could be indicating the caseback and case were not originally paired.
Has the seller been able to come up with a convincing explanation of how they know it's a 22209?
Here are more dial photos.
- Posts
- 6,498
- Likes
- 10,176
Similar threads
- Posts
- 7
- Views
- 7K
- Posts
- 26
- Views
- 4K
