Community Stories

Universal Geneve Deco Numbers

Lucas
Posts
66
Likes
103
Mazoue Mazoue
I don't agree that the texture of the dial is too new. When viewed closely there are bubbles under the surface and brown foxing to the surface where corrosion under the surface is breaking through.

I'm less concerned by the imprecision of the numerals. They have been drawn in an almost comical style and the fact that some numbers brush the line, some are proud of the line and the 12 was clearly intended to cross the line, does not look out of place to me.

I also wonder whether we should be judging all UG watches produced during the same period with the same exacting standards. This dial could have been produced in very small numbers or even be a one-off. It could have been produced by a different team or by an entirely different process to say a tri-compax dial from the same period.

Finally, when the conclusion edges towards a dial being being a very well done redial produced using the correct cliche then I am minded to think that in all probability that it is original.


First of all, let's not just assume original cliches where used because that simply cannot be said with certainty.

Secondly, my concern is with a multitude of small factors that, cumulatively, create the doubt.

Imprecision to a minor degree is tolerable. Some calendar dials are absurd and often multiple imperfections are seen but these imperfections are quite consistent and none of the sort I am concerned with in this watch.

Furthermore the Art Deco style of these UG numerals is just not Universal.
 
Lucas
Posts
66
Likes
103
Florent Florent
525540-f410cce85d7df6840cec0b2e303b88cd.jpg.jpg 525546-718c7ed3d92a8ca446d3d9dbbc0b5cb7.jpg.jpg


Look at the space between G and E (of 1st pic) and the overall quality of lettering is good but not great.

Ofc I understand if my doubt is hard to digest for many of you, but hey sometimes it's more of a gut feeling than a binary one.

Anyway, sorry buyer if we are tearing into to your piece, off all respect and props to you, but thats the purpose of this forum!
 
Rman
Posts
2,434
Likes
9,843
Surprised no one has mentioned the subdial inking and lack of emphasis of 12, 3, 6, 9 markers...
 
bgrisso
Posts
3,257
Likes
7,731
Lucas Lucas
Look at the space between G and E (of 1st pic) and the overall quality of lettering is good but not great.

Ofc I understand if my doubt is hard to digest for many of you, but hey sometimes it's more of a gut feeling than a binary one.

Anyway, sorry buyer if we are tearing into to your piece, off all respect and props to you, but thats the purpose of this forum!

I think you are making good points, but that last line is a little tough to read from someone that would not share SAS dial with forum.
 
LouS
Posts
6,713
Likes
18,562
rolokr rolokr
Were is Lou"s opinion ? Dre ?

Since I am being asked, I think Lucas' argument is persuasive. I tend towards redial.
 
bgrisso
Posts
3,257
Likes
7,731
Florent Florent
I do not like the Universal Geneve font 👎

Florent do you mean you don't like the UG font on the example posted by 10H10, or the font on the piece generally being discussed? The comparison you posted is the one under discussion, plus an example from Lucas, but you responded/quoted to the one from 10H10, so it get's confusing....
 
10H10
Posts
464
Likes
1,165
Concerning the polemical dial, everything said, I think that it is genuine because, after all, who would refinish with such a good quality a relatively low value watch (for the moment) ? Businesswise, it doesn't make sense, the concentric circles of the seconds subdial and the edge of it are perfect and it is almost impossible imho to refinish it like that...
But actually I don't know the price the watch was sold... I would have paid 600€ max...😕
Edited:
 
aap
Posts
3,091
Likes
23,789
10H10 10H10
My dial fonts ?
Florent Florent
525540-f410cce85d7df6840cec0b2e303b88cd.jpg.jpg 525546-718c7ed3d92a8ca446d3d9dbbc0b5cb7.jpg.jpg

I assume @Florent is referring to this:
Screen Shot 2018-03-11 at 10.26.42 AM.png

to which, I couldn't agree more. The UG print is too sloppy for me. I think that's one thing UG rarely messed up, regardless of era.
 
Mazoue
Posts
1,169
Likes
2,986
10H10 10H10
Concerning the polemical dial, everything said, I think that it is genuine because, after all, who would refinish with such a good quality a relatively low value watch (for the moment) ? Businesswise, it doesn't make sense, the concentric circles of the seconds subdial and the edge of it are perfect and it is almost impossible imho to refinish it like that...
But actually I don't know the price the watch was sold... I would have paid 600€ max...😕

I think your "would it have been worth it?" point is very valid when considering the likelihood of a redial.

However I would have thought that the current asking price is almost irrelevant. Surely, even those that believe that this might be a redial don't believe that it was done recently? I can't see how the ageing of the dial surface is consistent with that.
 
Lucas
Posts
66
Likes
103
bgrisso bgrisso
I think you are making good points, but that last line is a little tough to read from someone that would not share SAS dial with forum.

What an imbecile comment to make.
 
bgrisso
Posts
3,257
Likes
7,731
Lucas Lucas
What an imbecile comment to make.

Why? I'm just pointing out the obvious without resorting to personal attacks.
 
Mazoue
Posts
1,169
Likes
2,986
Lucas Lucas
What an imbecile comment to make.

I have to disagree, I do not believe it was an imbecilic comment. @bgrisso was just stating an opinion and it is one that I can sympathise with.

The new owner of the art deco font watch had posted it on the forum and had effectively, although not explicitly, invited comments on the watch. As you point out, that is one of the purposes of the forum. However, your decision not to share images of your SAS dial seems at odds with this stance.

What did you hope to gain by declaring that you own an example of the same dial but then not share images? Why disclose that you own the dial if you were not prepared to show others? It certainly did nothing to help me investigate the authenticity of my dial and, in fact, probably only undermined its credibility.
 
LouS
Posts
6,713
Likes
18,562
Guys, point made, move on.
 
10H10
Posts
464
Likes
1,165
Lucas Lucas
What an imbecile comment to make.
Come on ! Universal Genève is a Gentleman's brand !... Or move on to Rolexes... 👍
 
Lucas
Posts
66
Likes
103
Back to the watch then, what is the general consensus?
 
Mazoue
Posts
1,169
Likes
2,986
I'm not sure there is a consensus. I think if we were to take a vote, then I suspect that those that believe it is probably a redial might just have it. However I don't think there is anyone on either side of the argument who is absolutely certain.

You made some interesting observations regarding minor printing anomalies however there are plenty of others who think that such minor imperfections are to be expected on a watch that is almost 80 years old and also question why anyone would have set out to create such a complicated redial on a watch that would not have been worth a significant amount until more recent times.

I'm not sure the debate can go much further without additional evidence.
 
69 More Posts...
Sign up or log in to reply...

Similar threads

gophishin

Vintage Universal Geneve Microtor Calatrava

gophishin Private Watch Sales
Larry S
Larry S
Posts
2
Views
4K
Syrte

1940s 35mm Tissot with “deco” numbers-250 euros

Syrte Private Watch Sales
Syrte
Syrte
Posts
14
Views
3K
Scarecrow Boat

Universal Geneve Ferrovie dello Stato Mk1

Scarecrow Boat Private Watch Sales
krogerfoot
krogerfoot
Posts
7
Views
5K
Scarecrow Boat

Universal Geneve FS Ferrovie dello Stato Mk 2

Scarecrow Boat Private Watch Sales
flw
flw
Posts
2
Views
5K
bgrisso

Universal Geneve - Art Deco numbers - serviced

bgrisso Private Watch Sales
bgrisso
bgrisso
Posts
4
Views
3K
bgrisso

Universal Geneve Deco Time Only

bgrisso Private Watch Sales
bgrisso
bgrisso
Posts
4
Views
2K