- Posts
- 12
- Likes
- 0
The differences of the small hands is to match the printing of the sub dials (I was told )
the second number in the case reference is 1 for time only and 2 for chronograph, so this is a major problem. You should never see a Tri compax that is X1XXX
it would help to see inside case back to see if this is even a UG case?
anyhow, very strange
I can find examples of 21331 chronographs.
None so far with a 283 movement and the moon phase at 12.
The case back did look and feel as a perfect match. Steel I do know… other things especially related to UG not so much (yet)
I can find examples of 21331 chronographs.
None so far with a 283 movement and the moon phase at 12.
The case back did look and feel as a perfect match. Steel I do know… other things especially related to UG not so much (yet)
I owned a UG Tri-Compax Moon 222100-1 for awhile. An absolute gorgeous watch that was a total pain to get repaired and find parts for. I sold it off because it spent more time in service than it did on my wrist.
Within the repair/restore community I believe you will find UG chronographs to be highly regarded for their robust designs and constructions. Switch gear is always column wheel driven versus the cam drive of most vintage landerons and lemanias. With a few exceptions the complications available are on a different plane as compared to those offered by any other vintage manufacturers.
I'm a fan boy---these watches are still way underrated IMHO.
Parts of course are difficult to source as are most vintage parts, if you think UG is tough try finding a part for a vintage Patek and if you do bring a bank account with you because you'll need it!
I think most service issues are related to previous mis-service issues; once adjusted properly my UG chronographs seem to run pretty much without issue.