Forums Latest Members

Ug gold markers with black centers? Original?

  1. billving May 1, 2018

    Posts
    559
    Likes
    324
    Has anyone seen these before? I’m not sure if they’re original. Also are the set too close, a little reminiscent of the placement on Florent’s a couple of weeks back.

    C4A665F1-8EE5-4B0F-AB81-862A6F598326.jpeg
     
  2. BenBagbag May 1, 2018

    Posts
    2,820
    Likes
    8,983
    Everything is too close in that picture. Try zooming out.
     
  3. billving May 1, 2018

    Posts
    559
    Likes
    324
    It was an attempt to show the markers by the owners. Hang on.
     
  4. billving May 1, 2018

    Posts
    559
    Likes
    324
    Hers another angle I was sent. 3CA687AE-CF30-4CEA-A6A1-B0F6D49C6955.jpeg
     
    10H10 likes this.
  5. bgrisso May 1, 2018

    Posts
    3,125
    Likes
    6,882
    I'm not sure? Here's my similar looking, but no black on the markers....
     
    P1000643.JPG
    Dre, aap and BenBagbag like this.
  6. billving May 1, 2018

    Posts
    559
    Likes
    324
    Yes. I see. Similar style marker but with black. Also, as I noted, a little closer set to the 20-25-40-etc than yours.

    I would think they’re original since something else would be there or show evidence of having been there.
     
    10H10 likes this.
  7. Diabolik May 2, 2018

    Posts
    1,372
    Likes
    2,660
    Dial looks like a factory 60s re-issue or possibly a redial. Gut feeling is that the markers are not Original to dial or black paint is added on.

    Not sure why one would want replace batons or paint them (they could have been already painted) as it would involve a lot of work.

    I am a little puzzled, but not convinced ... Better high res images please and serial and reference ....
     
    10H10 likes this.
  8. Tony C. Ωf Jury member May 2, 2018

    Posts
    7,384
    Likes
    24,199
    I would assume that any vintage watch with black inserts in either the hands or markers, but not both, is likely not to be original. They should match.
     
    10H10 likes this.
  9. billving May 2, 2018

    Posts
    559
    Likes
    324
    You know, I was so fixated on the markers themselves that I didn’t even think about hands and markers not matching.
     
  10. billving May 2, 2018

    Posts
    559
    Likes
    324
    D84E0D45-618B-441F-B551-899110C03E61.jpeg 0EFE052A-083E-42DC-9420-04347EB52FDD.jpeg 539A09AD-30FD-4AF2-B164-2C93088FEDE1.jpeg Here are the others that I have.
     
    10H10 likes this.
  11. Florent May 2, 2018

    Posts
    887
    Likes
    2,543
    I saw that watch too. Dial looks ok to me !

    The seller lives in my city if you need help ;)
     
    10H10 likes this.
  12. Dre May 2, 2018

    Posts
    1,927
    Likes
    22,622
    Interesting, never seen those black insert on the markers in any UG watches. Hope you wouldn't mind me sharing the caseback numbers below just for an archive of the reference,

    Screen Shot 2018-05-02 at 9.30.53 pm.png
     
    10H10 likes this.
  13. Larry S Color Commentator for the Hyperbole. May 2, 2018

    Posts
    12,526
    Likes
    49,719
    Bill .. I’d walk away from this one. Too many questions about the dial.
     
    10H10 likes this.
  14. billving May 2, 2018

    Posts
    559
    Likes
    324
    OK I guess, once he published them on line I assume their public
     
    10H10 likes this.
  15. Florent May 2, 2018

    Posts
    887
    Likes
    2,543
    Dial it self looks orignal... But the indices are likely remplacement! Just as the crown...
     
    10H10 likes this.
  16. chronoboy64 May 2, 2018

    Posts
    1,441
    Likes
    11,944
    +1
     
    10H10 likes this.
  17. Lucas May 2, 2018

    Posts
    66
    Likes
    95
    -1
     
  18. rolokr May 2, 2018

    Posts
    1,195
    Likes
    1,918
    Dial markers don't seem correct, is there any examples of a dial like this in Sala's book ?
     
    10H10 likes this.