On seeing the magnified image, the serial number doesn't look right at all . I am at odds with the whole thing now. It is very weird. I would hazard at saying that it has been added. Space between sets of numbers are too big and never in my life have I seen a font like that one !
If Diabolik doesn’t like it, I don’t like it!
Surprised hodinkee has put his name on this one as he is a reputable voice and authority on horological matters and would expect him to have eyes like an hawk ...
Another one just popped up on eBay with UP endlinks and what looks to be a JB Champion bracelet - but the bracelet doesn't seem to be nearly as misaligned / jammed into the endlinks as the previous example:
The seller says the watch was purchased from the original owner and is untouched. What are people's thoughts on this bracelet and the UP endlinks? Still incorrect for a Sub?
Another one just popped up on eBay with UP endlinks and what looks to be a JB Champion bracelet - but the bracelet doesn't seem to be nearly as misaligned / jammed into the endlinks as the previous example:
The seller says the watch was purchased from the original owner and is untouched. What are people's thoughts on this bracelet and the UP endlinks? Still incorrect for a Sub?
I was looking at this on the bay. Black bakelite is probably not as sought after; but still its bakelite. Bracelet endlinks are incorrect as @Mazoue has pointed out.
But the dial looks good, and for the price; i thought it isnt that bad a deal. if you could lower it for under 10-15% less; i think it might be a good price.
I had the same thought, but knowing that the endlinks are incorrect I now question the description that this watch is “untouched” and purchased from the original order. I’m now wondering if anything else was done to the watch...probably not but if it was truly untouched then it should have the proper endlinks, right?
I’d prefer the minute hand to have retained that vibrant orange color, but the bezel looks nice, the lume has aged to a nice color, and the case looks sharp.
Is that fat U crown correct? I’ve only ever seen the very thin U crown before.
I’m not a UG “knower”, just an admirer- but like any piece acquired from any owner, original nor not, we don’t actually know what they did during the 50 years they owned it, and most of the time the original owners (who were usually not “watch collectors” but just an owner of a nice watch) have no clue what was changed during a service, nor if it was “correct”- so why would they even disclose it.
Bracelets also sometimes get added at the point of sale from a dealer, or ordered at the time of delivery from a catalog if it came on a strap and the purchaser decided they wanted the bracelet as an afterthought. It is up the the salesman to know if the bracelet they are ordering is the correct one for a reference or if it’s just one that had the same lug width and looks close. Then there is also the variable that the original bracelet broke and the owner ordered another one later from the dealer and just got what they had avaialble- again, why disclose that 40+ years later- it was the bracelet he had. Lots of ifs in the chain of 50+ years of custody and none equals deceit on the part of either the original owner or the current seller.
sure, I get that, but the description in the listing is trying to pass this off as essentially a barnfind piece that has survived looking just as it did when the first owner purchased it:
“On offer is an untouched UG Polerouter Sub model 869120/02. If condition and originality is your thing, this watch ticks all the boxes. The watch was bought from the owner who had kept it in storage for many years and the condition shows.”
“A beautiful survivor in amazing condition and originality which was worn sparingly during its life.”
And if the crown is a later replacement one as @CafeRacer says, then this statement is misleading:
“the original, and rare fat U, which were mostly changed during service to the thin U crowns”
