Another pleasing one, and quite unusual - 33mm without crown.
Somehow I can't post the frontal picture, but even like this the dial is quite stunning:

More pics avail here -
http://i.ebayimg.com/t/Longines-sel...00/s/ODAwWDgwMA==/z/AY0AAOSwXshWrmJ8/$_57.JPG

If anyone likes it, go for it -- I'm not in buying mode...
Best regards,
S

 

Redial - and not a very good one either.

 

You seem to be in a charitable mood.

 

Really? Darn, I couldn't get close ups on my screen, guess it was too good to be true.

 

Got a nice pour of 1966 Graham's Vintage Port in me. I've got that warm & fuzzy feeling.

 

There's a joke or two somewhere for that, but I can't come up with the perfect delivery so I'll opt out. I was thinking of something very Monty Python-esque......

 

I'm sure you have a few more of those in store. Thankful delivery occasionally comes to mind.

 

Shame though. Looks nice. I wonder what the original design of the dial was...
Here's the frontal pic. I also wonder whether the crown can be genuine. It seems to have the correct design but is not marked...

 

Thanks much as my computer somehow would not access it. I wonder what gives it away as a redial.
As for the crown, I don't know if they had to be signed in the 1950s.

 

Never seen such a design so far but I would say it's probably the fact that it looks so clean and "new" for a watch that is almost 70 years old. Looked up the movement a bit and I only found more classic looking designs. Standard ones for the 50s era. This one kind of doesn't strike me as having a vintage vibe. But I, for one, couldn't tell if it is a redial or it isn't. Maybe @ulackfocus is wrong! (oh snap!).

Maybe the dial is from a different watch ?

 

The fact it looks so new and shiny maybe indeed a give away in contrast with the signs of oxydation on the applied indexes... And the unique look of that gold colored frise around the dial may well be a give away too.

 

As you can see, some of the markers suffer from heavy oxidation. It's weird that the dial is untouched. It should have had some paint wear off, at least in some places. I know the movement is a really good one. But it all depends on what someone is looking at a watch. I bet it'll sell at some point...

 

Gee, I'm sooooo glad an "expert" like dx009 is questioning me.

It's a redial, plain and simple. You won't find an original Longines dial on a 12.68 that has SWISS MADE so high and so separated. Anyone could spot that, so do me a favor @dx009 - keep your pseudo-expertise off the forum and leave the analysis of vintage watches to the veterans who actually have years, and hundreds or even thousands of watches, under their belt. WUS is for the wannabes, we ain't got no time for that here.

@Syrte - if you see a post by dx009, disregard it. Most of us find him to be ruining the signal to noise ratio here, and he's going to be called out more & more as he posts inaccurate data and foolish opinions.

 

Jesus man. You need to lighten up, it was a joke. Stop taking things so seriously.

 

A joke.... rrrrrriiiiiiggggghhhhhttttttt. In that case, stop joking.

 

The thing about jokes is that they are:

a) meant to be funny
b) should not require for you to explain that they are jokes

 

Jeez, aren't you guys taking it too harsh on dx009? He did state: "... I, for one, couldn't tell if it is a redial or it isn't."

Sure, he formed some conjectures. They might be taken less seriously than other opinions. They might even be wrong. But he wasn't coming from a bad place. And I don't think he meant anything by his statement to you , ulackfocus. It was just a light jab. What is up with this blunt hostilely? Is there something under the water, here?

 

It's no problem. No harm done. I was, pretty much, agreeing with him in my previous posts, but when someone doesn't like you, they do it to the end, regardless of what you do or say.

 

I got bronchitis and aint nobody got time for this thread

 

He always makes conjectures. Several members have called him out, not just me. With the amount of experienced collectors here, it's akin to him walking into a room with Einstein, Newton, Pythagorus, Turing, and Witten and telling them he's gonna show them how to do math, but then proceeding to screw up algebra. An even bigger problem is he's posting in threads where n00bs are asking for help and they mistake his erroneous conjecture for a solid evaluation.