Would like to hear more knowledgable collectors' opinions on the salmon dialed Compur that sold at Bukowski's for 16000 SEK + fees (~$2000). I hadn't really looked into bidding on it so I didn't do my homework on the reference, request a condition report, etc. Over on the vintage omega subforum there were some issues reported with internet bidding not working so I'm not sure if it sold for this price because of that, because of the condition issues I can see (spot near the logo, the fading on the sub register, the not-perfect case, and wrong crown), because of condition issues I'm ignorant of (redial?), or if this is market price for this condition. Just seems low to me. Thanks in advance and would be great to know if anyone here won it! Andrew https://www.bukowskis.com/en/auctions/614/66-universal-geneve-compur-chronograph
from a casual glance at the above photo I thought it looked fine, but if you follow the links and look at the closeups, as @Dan S said, looks like a redial
Thanks - as someone not as familiar with this era, can you help with the tells? Is it more the different thickness of the printing and the subdial markers not extending to the edges?
I think the Compur in question is a redial. There is spillage of the hash marks of the minute markers on to the minute sub-dial (more visible when zooming in on the auction website). In comparison, the printing on your example is a lot cleaner and I don't see any spillage.
Yes, I noticed the encroachment onto the minute subdial - in my experience, this happens sometimes for these old UG dials. Rest of the dial ticks the checklist for me.
IMO, dial is 110% authentic, and very attractive. If the new owner is here, please drop me a PM, I'd like to buy that "redialed" salmon UG
With the amount of aging and wear on the dial I would be surprised if had been re done. The font looks nice to me and specific to the watch.
The Omega crown is exhilarating! But guys, you are looking at a 5/6X pic of a 34,5mm watch from 80 years ago. These printings were manually imprinted on a dial, if there's a little bit more ink on the buffer you can have these results. I don't think in real life you'll see any difference. For me, this dial is totally legit and I am now more than yesterday sad to have made a low bid on it
Based on the UG 40s dials I've seen, slight spillage is not uncommon and perhaps acceptable to UG QC then. For eg, in the piece below, the 10 and 8 printing slightly encroaches into the running second subdial.
I'm going to have to agree with the doubters here. While it is not unheard of to have a clean dial in a watch this old, I suspect that if not a total redial then the dial has been cleaned (This explains the minute register) and retouched. That said, she sure is a beauty.
I used to own this watch. This was considered a redial by a few folks (justifiably) until a few examples were found with the same exact printing issue. So, I guess it is not impossible that the printing issue of the hash marks is also ok, just haven't encountered that before. But then again, how many times have we said that with UG only to be proven otherwise down the road.
I agree with Larry, why the subsecond dial looks pretty strong, and the subminute dial washed out ? The dial has been cleaned and or touched up like Larry states.