Hello guys,

I would like your opinion on this UG Medicompax I am interested in purchasing.

Is dial period correct? Is everything ok?

Also asking price is 6500 euro, what do you think about it?

Thank you.

 

That a fine medico ... I would still like to see it close up !

 

That looks like a really nice piece, and I assume it's a jumbo (37mm). @billving and I both have similar examples with engine-turned bezels and the other type of applied metal logo. That's a high price, but the condition is very fine. I think you will have to decide for yourself if you want to pay it.

 

Looks nice to me too, and yes 37mm.

Everything period correct?

What about price?

 

Interesting it is in Spanish

 

I saw another one in Spanish ( two if we include the Mr.Clymer one listed here on Omegaforum), but both around 2-3K.

Honestly, Bernardini's site apart, I have never seen a Medico for this price.

 

All of ours are in Spanish.

 

conditions are crazy good.

 

Perhaps a topic for a new thread..."UG dial inscriptions in languages other than French."
But would these cited examples in Spanish have been a special order?

 

I think the simplest explanation is that they made dials for various markets. You see the same thing with date wheels.

 

That applied U logo didnt appear until around 200XXXX serials on UG (early-mid 60s)
The case is a 1889XXX serial (mid-late 50s)
Another 1889XXX serial with the earlier shield logo as it should be: https://www.matthewbaininc.com/watch-details/1665
I would assume the dial was swapped at some point.

 

Is this based on polerouters?

 

I am inclined to agree with @CafeRacer but just to muddy the waters.

There is a Uni-Compax with serial 1'551'xxx with the applied U logo on page 205 of Sala.


There is a later example with serial 1'889'xxx with the earlier shield logo on page 208.


Are we in agreement that the dial in the first watch is from a later watch?

 

Yes.
Pattern seems to hold to the majority of chronos as well, where the applied U appears for the entire 1960s era.
Fairly easy to spot the "outliers" from this.

 

The applied U is also seen in late 50's chronos. The 227XX reference / range are late 50s early 60s ... Although the applied U maybe a little early for mid 50s, it is not wildly weird and within the realms of acceptable to see it on a 1.8 mill serial.

 

The earliest serial number on a 227xx that I can seem to find is in the 2.2m range, which I think is held to be ~1962. Could you point me to an example or reference for earlier ones please, if you have it?

 

No I can't as there is very little documented evidence. My statement is based on discussion and assumption with other UG collectors that have far more documentation that I have. 1962 was probably the last year of the 227xx references. It is difficult to put an accurate date or serial, but change happened at around that time which would have been around the 2.2 mil ...

considering dates of manufacture it is all to close to call !

 

If you can find a 2270X with a serial before 200XXXX and applied U logo on the dial and does not look completely suss, ill eat my hat...

227XXXX serial is early 63, from the date stampings inside 204612 and 20366 casebacks (marked by month/year).
(1963 ran serials from 227-231XXXX approximately).
Earliest serial i have recorded for any reference Polerouter with an applied U logo on the dial is 202XXXX, which should be 1960.

 

We should also consider that many medicos were in many cases, made to special order, so it is quite possible that the original watch may have started life as a uni-compax on a shop window and a change was requested at point of sale or later. That may explain the newer dial. Considering the fact that it is of the same era (less than five years apart), in my eyes I would find it quite acceptable.

To put it into context, it is not a 50's dial on a 40's watch but a very late 50's very early 60's dial on a late 50's case !

Any documentation (bill of sale, ownership records of other info on watch) may help substantiate it authenticity and the likelihood that it has not been played around with!

 

It still a dial from one reference, and a case from another reference, regardless of when it was switched.
We can speculate on the how/why, but unless theres some documentation to show, i guess it stays that way...